Rice on Nuclear Iran: "It's Time"

Had to switch to CNN - FOX cut off the Question and Answer (!) can you imagine? For what? Another Natalee Holliway non-news item? Sick

Rice also stressed that the nuclear program wasn't the only bone of contention between Washington and Tehran. She voiced strong opposition to Iran's sponsorship of terrorism in the Palestinian territories and elsewhere. "

Nobody is confused about the nature of this regime,'' she said, adding that "We are not negotiating the terms of terrorism.'' Ms. Rice also ruled out a "grand bargain" that would restore diplomatic relations, but said that resolving the nuclear fight could potentially lead to a "change in the relationship." WSJ Access

If you wish to see the full video of her statement on the latest development of US talks with Iran click below.

Comments

[Francis W. Porretto]

Apparently, today's diplomatic offer by President Bush has come to naught. But given the many statements from Ahmadinejad and other mullah mouthpieces about Iran's "right" to nukes, perhaps we shouldn't have expected anything else.

[MarcH]

"It's time"

With all due respect Madame Secretary, it has been time for at least 20 years. You should hold the talks in Paris, or better yet in Munich. Bush is supposed to be a good poker player, but it looks to me like he's being played.

I made the following comment 30 minutes before the SoS's press conference in Atlas' post "Iran Rapes and Tortures Dissident Women":

It makes me sad to write this, but the fact that President Bush does not back these protesters to the hilt is a sad statement on the serious shortcomings of his policies regarding the interlocked problems of Iranian WMDs and WoT/”radical Islam”.

Strong support for these freedom-fighters could answer the question of whether it is possible to solve the crisis of Iranian WMD through regime change. It would also show to the Muslim world that the US does support true expressions of Muslim democracy and freedom (a lot more effective and morally consistent than a dozen Ramadan dinners with a guest list of fellow travelers or holding hands with Saudi potentates).

Instead, we get this “Diplomats: U.S. Ready to Join Iran Talks … In recent weeks, Bush administration officials repeatedly have insisted there were no plans for one-on-one talks with Iran over its nuclear program, while holding open the possibility of such meetings on Iraq, where Tehran has substantial influence with that country's Shiites. Any U.S. decision to talk directly with Tehran, even as part of a multilateral set of negotiations, reflects pressure by its allies and partners. Government officials from Germany have publicly urged the Americans to engage Tehran directly, and Moscow and Beijing also are believed to support such a move”. (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/3917054.html)

In the first State Of The Union message after 9-11, President Bush explained the focus of his foreign policy: “We'll be deliberate, yet time is not on our side. I will not wait on events, while dangers gather. I will not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons”. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-11.html).

That was more than four years ago. It’s now the endgame.

To quote PM Blair (channeling Gandalf, per Bigarmwoman) : “I know out there, there's a guy getting on with his life, perfectly happily, minding his own business, saying to you, the political leaders of this country, "Why me, and why us, and why America?" And the only answer is because destiny put you in this place in history in this moment in time, and the task is yours to do (http://www.bigarmwoman.com/archives/000217.html)”.

I pray that President Bush shows the same strength and wisdom in this matter that he displayed when he led us in the aftermath of 9-11.