- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| AP: White House Wants to Meet One-on-One with Iran; xyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyxyx | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 21 2012, 07:10 PM (611 Views) | |
| kbp | Oct 21 2012, 10:03 PM Post #16 |
|
Considering his"lead from behind" approach in foriegn affairs, I'd have to go along with LTC ...except the timing ties it into the debate somehow, IMO. |
![]() |
|
| Toast | Oct 21 2012, 10:18 PM Post #17 |
|
and then there is this: Secret Message from US to Iran thru Swiss Envoy
|
![]() |
|
| Mason | Oct 21 2012, 10:29 PM Post #18 |
|
Parts unknown
|
. That's pretty close to what Obama has said. Obama has said no Country can tell another if it can or can't have Nuclear Weapons. And he wants us to disband and dismantle ours. This may be a the WH trying to get the Romney camp to comment and entice them into a position. Obama can get the NYT's to disavow (or correct a story) whereas Romney can not. . |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Oct 21 2012, 10:57 PM Post #19 |
|
It appears the nameless source from the "administration" told the story and the named source from the "administration" denied it ...covered on both ends. Then the story grew to include the secret Swiss messenger, responses from Iran, and input from Israel. What can they gain? Will it change how Romney would address what Barry has not done for our only real ally in the mideast? How he could argue the embarge is failing? |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Oct 21 2012, 11:53 PM Post #20 |
|
A topic that is repeated often in articlesabout tomorrows debate: ...Iran's nuclear program has also been a subject of contention, with Mr. Romney saying the Obama administration has not been tough enough on Tehran and not supportive enough of Israel. Mr. Obama has accused Mr. Romney of politicizing the attack in Libya, and said he has put in place tough sanctions on Iran while building U.S. security cooperation with Israel. The president has also highlighted anti-terrorism successes, including the raid that killed Osama bin Laden. Iranian news: ..."Yet, if by negotiations you mean the talks between Iran and the Group 5+1 (the five permanent UN Security Council members plus Germany), these negotiations are underway now and according to the latest talks (between the two sides' chief negotiators), these negotiations will be held in November or (better to say) late in November," said the Iranian foreign minister. Barry in debate: The sanctions in place have brought Iran to within a month of negotiations, as all have read about recently, and our continued pressure through those sanctions will prevail in keeping security high for Israel... Just a thought or two. Maybe Romney called in a favor with the response from Israel. |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Oct 22 2012, 07:03 AM Post #21 |
|
I'm not convinced this was started by a leak from Barry's team. If it was, evidently the prompt response from both Iran and Israel forced them into Plan B - denial ...or something forced that. If it was not, the denial is out and to be taken as FACT now, meaning Barry can't cite progress from his sanctions for Iran. So a day before the debate we have the same old story as before ...which is that our ally, Israel, is not secure from nuclear weapons in the near future. ...unless you put faith in the intelligence Joey told us was absolutely on top of every detail about the progress of Iranian programs dealing with development of secret weapons in Iran …the same intelligence that was clueless what significance the 9/11 date had for the security in nations full of Islamic extremists, but know Since the WH jumps so quickly deny the NYT story, I'm leaning more to the idea that the story came from the right. It seems like a stretch for Barry to have gained any ground from this, but then it could have forced Mitt to be more cautious in his condemnation of the sanctions process we've seen. Tough call trying to keep up with WTH was going on in this claim / denial series of reports. It might be helpful if we knew the exact time of the NYT updates for comparison to the timing of denials from Iran & Israel. Edited by kbp, Oct 22 2012, 07:10 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| chatham | Oct 22 2012, 07:55 AM Post #22 |
|
This Iran story changes about as much as the Benghazi story changed. |
![]() |
|
| retiredLEO | Oct 22 2012, 08:19 AM Post #23 |
|
I have heard all sorts of theories leading up to the NYT story and the AP story. WND reported that there would be negotiations with Iran and Iran would agree to inspections and stop enriching uranium, if this helps Obama get re-elected. This measure would only be temporary, sometime after the elections, things would revert back to our current situation. This will all be done, because Romney is the last person that Iran wants to see in the Oval Office. I don't really think that Obama really cares whether Iran gets a nuke or not. |
![]() |
|
| retiredLEO | Oct 22 2012, 08:24 AM Post #24 |
|
Ready to come clean on Iran, Mr. President? While Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are preparing to trade barbs on foreign policy in the final presidential debate, a WND story about secret nuclear talks with Iran has gotten the world talking and may make its way onto the stage Monday night. Now sources close to the Romney campaign also report the governor’s inner circle has been briefed on the WND story and is taking it seriously as debate preparations continue. snip http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/ready-to-come-clean-on-iran-mr-president/ |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Oct 22 2012, 08:57 AM Post #25 |
|
WND is more likely to be plants from the right, maybe killing the headline before it can happen. IMO, the Libya exchange in the last debate - the ONLY foreign topic question - was a no-win for either side. Other than keeping the topic in the headlines, it did little for the polls. Maybe the Barry gained a little damage control from redirecting the topic to what "is" is. It's my guess that Romney's overall gain came from being what they call more "presidential" most of the time, and addressing the issues direct ...while Barry goes all over the place, like telling the college student asking about JOBS how better funding for education will pay off in a decade or two down the road. Romney has Barry beat on the domestic issues, mainly the economy. He has stressed how strentgh is an answer to gaining respect, while Barry bows to all, leading from behind. Since they are on complete opposite sides on how to address foreign issues, it will be interesting to see how Romney illustrates Barry's methods are failing ...without making it look like a childish argument. Romney has a good advantage with Barry's recent failures, even if his experience is limited in this topic. Edited by kbp, Oct 22 2012, 08:58 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Mason | Oct 22 2012, 09:39 AM Post #26 |
|
Parts unknown
|
. This is what we know: The New York Times holds nothing more sacred than an Obama Victory. We know this is the day before the final debate and days before the election. They would no more erroneously print a story harmful to Obama in this timeframe than print a picture of Michelle Obama in mid-sneeze on the Front Page. That tells me the White House had no problem going on the record as saying there would be plans for One-on-Ones with Iran. In my mind, the explanations are going to have to include why the WH was willing to tell this to the New York Times. . |
![]() |
|
| Mason | Oct 22 2012, 09:43 AM Post #27 |
|
Parts unknown
|
. Could be more evidence of a chaotic inner circle - or a President evading reality. Or another attempt to hide the real Obama? . |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Oct 22 2012, 01:40 PM Post #28 |
|
No tie to the debate if he is accurate. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · LIESTOPPERS UNDERGROUND · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2






7:21 PM Jul 10