U.S. nuke summit with Iran accomplishes jack; Updated

posted at 5:48 pm on July 19, 2008 by Allahpundit

Actually, that’s not true. It achieved the very important breakthrough of them telling us to our face that they’re not going to suspend enrichment.

The presence of [Undersecretary of State William] Burns had led to hopes of compromise on a formula under which Iran would agree to stop expanding its enrichment activities…

But doubt was cast over the value of talks less then an hour after they started, when Keyvan Imani, a member of the Iranian delegation, appeared to indicate that Tehran was not prepared to budge on enrichment.

“Suspension — there is no chance for that,” he told reporters gathered in the courtyard of Geneva’s ornate City Hall, the venue of the negotiations.

There also appeared to be little progress inside the talks.

Just in case the point about suspension being off the table was unclear, another Iranian official reiterated it to Reuters, as did lead Iranian nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili, as have various other Iranian officials recently. The west’s reply, per EU negotiator Javier Solana: Let’s give them more time. Another two weeks, specifically, in the idle hope that they’ll respond to the incentives offer they conspicuously avoided responding to earlier this month because … it called for them to suspend enrichment. Does everyone grasp the absurdity here? Iran’s behaving as though enrichment is merely one of several issues the west is interested in as part of some comprehensive detente between the two sides, in which case the impasse on this point shouldn’t prevent the negotiations from going forward. But that’s idiotic; enrichment is all we’re interested in. Any “grand bargain” that’s in the offing is wholly contingent (let’s hope) on suspension of their nuclear program. Until they decide there’s some carrot we can offer them to get them to do that, there’s literally nothing to talk about. Yet here we go again with another meeting in two weeks, which gives Iran another little breather in building a weapon and gives us … what, exactly?

By way of companion reading, the left has been touting polls lately noting that Jews vastly prefer Obama to the GOP, especially on foreign policy. To which Politico replies: Not all do. Israel is quite possibly the only nation on earth right now where Maverick leads in the polls, and almost certainly the only one where he leads by anything like a 20-point margin. I wonder why.

Update: To be clear, the point here isn’t that the meeting is a failure because it failed to singlehandedly resolve the Iranian nuclear crisis. The point is that it accomplished absolutely nothing, not even a conciliatory rhetorical gesture by Iran. In the spirit of compromise, they could have simply declined comment when reporters asked them about suspending enrichment; instead they went out of their way, via three different officials, to reject the only U.S. demand, and per the blockquote they didn’t even wait until the meeting was over to do it. It’s a rhetorical middle finger.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

If it takes a semi-educated serio-comedic rant to educate you as to the dangers of an Islamic Nation, then God help you and yours. How can you NOT see the looming danger when our way of life is at stake? I guess I asked for that one. It is easy to see if you are blonde, dumb and blind all in the same sentence.

freevillage, I challenge you to explain how the United States would be better off under YOUR socialist set of circumstances than under the rule of law.

hillbillyjim on July 20, 2008 at 5:13 AM

It’s a rhetorical middle finger.

Then their fate is sealed.

Zorro on July 20, 2008 at 6:26 AM

But we all know Iran will not pose any such threat in the immediate future.

“We all” my ass. “We all” need to adjust “our” crystal balls just a little bit.

hillbillyjim on July 20, 2008 at 7:58 AM

freevillage, I challenge you to explain how the United States would be better off under YOUR socialist set of circumstances than under the rule of law.

.
.
.
.
(crickets chirping loudly)

hillbillyjim on July 20, 2008 at 8:10 AM

the worst part is the way the bush administration has bent over for Iran, and North Korea. after all these public pronouncements that we wouldn’t negotiate until they suspended enrichment, we caved, big time, and the iranians know it, and so does the rest of the world.

the bush doctrine is dead. anyone really think mccain would be any better? as stephen Hayes put it this is shameful

link

right4life on July 20, 2008 at 8:37 AM

Why haven’t we killed them yet?

Oh, right…we’re waiting for the thirty-year anniversary of the US Embassy hostage crisis. Thirty years of doing nothing will make it more poingant.

Nuke ‘em.

Black Adam on July 20, 2008 at 8:51 AM

What Iranian nuclear bombs?

freevillage on July 19, 2008 at 6:28 PM

Perhaps, the one that they are building.

Johan Klaus on July 20, 2008 at 8:59 AM

By the time we got our act together to start focusing on Iran, it got too close to the US Presidential election. Iran would like nothing more than to affect our election by kicking off this war in time to affect our decision.

Sekhmet on July 20, 2008 at 9:07 AM

How the hell do you persuade an insane person to NOT be crazy???

There comes a point where you quit f’n around… We’re there… (actually been there)

deedtrader on July 20, 2008 at 9:08 AM

Most people here have no idea how one should defer to Meteorology professors on the question of global warming. Most of you are simply nuts. I seriously would be afraid to bet my money that you don’t drink urine.

freevillage on July 20, 2008 at 2:23 AM
When you or your scientist explain the much warmer periods in previous centuries, I will take a look at man made global warming, even though it is getting cooler now.

Johan Klaus on July 20, 2008 at 9:08 AM

freevillage on July 20, 2008 at 2:23 AM

Wow. I don’t know what I did to deserve that response.

terryannonline on July 20, 2008 at 9:25 AM

I think this was a long term political move by the Bush admin to blow some holes in O!’s political aspirations. If we show them to be crazy people now it will make O!’s plans to have direct talks with the madman look like the crazy talk that it is.

JimK on July 20, 2008 at 10:02 AM

If we show them to be crazy people now it will make O!’s plans to have direct talks with the madman look like the crazy talk that it is.

JimK on July 20, 2008 at 10:02 AM

I think it does just the opposite. it validates what obama was saying because he’ll say “I’m just doing what the bush administration is doing”

right4life on July 20, 2008 at 10:04 AM

If we show them to be crazy people now it will make O!’s plans to have direct talks with the madman look like the crazy talk that it is.

JimK on July 20, 2008 at 10:02 AM

Anyone who doesn’t know the Iranians by now will never know them. I understand your point, but the left has always been particularly impervious to reason and reality. Rubbing their noses in the truth never causes a good reaction. It’s best to just ignore them and carry on.

progressoverpeace on July 20, 2008 at 10:17 AM

Most people here have no idea how one should defer to Meteorology professors on the question of global warming. Most of you are simply nuts. I seriously would be afraid to bet my money that you don’t drink urine.
freevillage on July 20, 2008 at 2:23 AM

Most weather forcasters are meteorologist. How accurate are they at make making long range weather predictions?

Johan Klaus on July 20, 2008 at 10:19 AM

freevillage on July 20, 2008 at 2:23 AM
Wow. I don’t know what I did to deserve that response.

terryannonline on July 20, 2008 at 9:25 AM

It is difficult to be logical with someone who is illogical.

Johan Klaus on July 20, 2008 at 10:27 AM

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1215331010688&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Caroline Glick sees the Burns presence as a chess move by Bush. Prepping the field for a U.S. counterpunch if Israel is attacked. I’m not sure if she is including a retalitory response by Iran following an Israeli pre-empt, or only an initiation by Iran.

a capella on July 20, 2008 at 10:39 AM

All this rhetoric feels like

THE CHINA SYNDROME

Monas on July 20, 2008 at 10:42 AM

This is not funny but true.

The film (China syndrome) illustrated the viewpoint that human depravity is of greater safety concern than flaws of technology.

Monas on July 20, 2008 at 10:52 AM

Monas on July 20, 2008 at 10:52 AM

What, exactly, is your point and what does that silly movie have to do with it?

Oldnuke on July 20, 2008 at 11:16 AM

Some of you have awesome VHS collections I see.

Nobody but HA trolls ever thought that talking to the Iranians would do any good. When Iran is a smoldering ruin, THEN I’ll have hope for change.

Until then the cultists who run the place are going to try and bring back the ancient Imam who’s hiding in a well so that he can end the world in style. These people are NOT crazy, they really truly believe this stuff.

Mojave Mark on July 20, 2008 at 11:41 AM

What’s yours?

Monas on July 20, 2008 at 11:43 AM

If there is a genuine belief that the Iranians may pose a serious threat to anyone in the region, their military installations should be bombed. But we all know Iran will not pose any such threat in the immediate future.

They just took over Lebanon through their proxy Hizb’allah. They have prevented Fatah from pushing Hamas into negotiations through their funding and training of Hamas, making the two state solution absolutely impossible. They tried to take over southern Iraq through Ja’ish al Mahdi, they’re running guns to the Taliban on the Afghan-Iran border and they’ve got 3600 centrifuges enriching uranium 24 hours a day right now. Immediate future? Where the HELL have you been for the last twenty years? In grade school?

The Iranians are attempting to aquire nuclear weapons and even if they wait a few years before they actually fire the nukes into Tel Aviv and Haifa, what do you think they’ll be doing in the meantime? Stabalizing the price of oil around $150 dollars a barrel to fund their terrorist proxies around the world as they have for the last twenty years? Maybe? Restarting the assassination and car bomb crews in Europe like in the Eighties? Think the Euro will hold out against a real intifada in the Paris slums? Or Berlin? Or London? Cause they’re all so good at standing up to Putin that I’m sure Iran won’t be a problem. Not on EU/US relations, no, never.

I appreciate your naivte freevillage. I thought that brand of hippy were all dead and gone forever from bad batches of LSD. It’s good to see a few survived long enough to pass on their genes. Still, you’d think their deaths would have taught you something about trusting strangers and people who’ve spent 30 years welching on every deal they ever agreed to and who use terrorists to execute their foriegn policy instead of a diplomatic corps. I guess not.

P.S. Don’t take the harsh response personally. I like that you hang out here.

The Apologist on July 20, 2008 at 12:01 PM

Monas on July 20, 2008 at 11:43 AM

I guess that was directed at me so; My point is I see no relation to the movie, the Wiki quote you posted and the thread. Just curious if you could tie it together.

Oldnuke on July 20, 2008 at 12:07 PM

MOJAVE MARK @ 11:41am: Nailed it right on. Crazy they are NOT. These “CRAZY” people have a distinct agenda. WORLD DOMINATION for ISLAM… No debate, no negotiations, no questions… This is the same group of leaders who called the TERRORISTS who took over our embassy in the 70s, “disgruntled college students, upset with AMERICA’S world politics”. Nothing is NEW, nothing has CHANGED. “CRAZY”, yeah, like a FOX…

pueblo1032 on July 20, 2008 at 1:26 PM

Oldnuke I am but a drop in the ocean of course.

The Apologist TKS for the comment. By the way how many computers do you have?

Monas on July 20, 2008 at 2:04 PM

The Iranians are attempting to aquire nuclear weapons and even if they wait a few years before they actually fire the nukes into Tel Aviv and Haifa, what do you think they’ll be doing in the meantime? Stabalizing the price of oil around $150 dollars a barrel to fund their terrorist proxies around the world as they have for the last twenty years? Maybe? Restarting the assassination and car bomb crews in Europe like in the Eighties? Think the Euro will hold out against a real intifada in the Paris slums? Or Berlin? Or London? Cause they’re all so good at standing up to Putin that I’m sure Iran won’t be a problem.

Oh, so it’s not about nukes anymore. I thought so.

freevillage on July 20, 2008 at 2:20 PM

Oh, so it’s not about nukes anymore. I thought so.
freevillage on July 20, 2008 at 2:20 PM

I must have missed it. Where did you say that?

a capella on July 20, 2008 at 3:01 PM

Compounding the points the Apologist made above about known Iranian behavior and intentions, worse still, they know these facts some of which are repeated below from Ralph Peters coulmn dated July 17th.

Nor is there any chance that the Israelis could handle Iran on their own (their recent air-force exercise was psychological warfare). As skilled as their pilots and planners may be, the Israelis lack the capacity to sustain a strategic offensive against Iran – or to deal with the inevitable mess they’d leave behind in the Persian Gulf. Israel’s aircraft could do serious damage to Iran’s nuke program, but the US military would face the potentially catastrophic aftermath.

Without compromising any secrets – the Iranians already know what we’d need to do – here are the basic requirements for smacking down Iran’s nuke program:

* Take out Iran’s air-defense and intelligence network to protect our attacking aircraft.

* Take down its national communications network to degrade its military reaction.

* Strike dozens of dispersed nuclear-related targets – some of them in hardened underground facilities, with others purposely placed in populated areas.

* Hit every anti-ship-missile installation along Iran’s Persian Gulf coast and the Straits of Hormuz. The reflexive Iranian response to an attack would be to launch sea-skimmer missiles against oil tankers and Western warships. The Iranians know that oil’s now the world’s Achilles heel.

* Destroy Iran’s naval capacity, including small craft, in the first 24 hours to prevent attacks on shipping (expect suicide attacks, too).

* Immediately take out all of Iran’s long-range and intermediate-range missiles – not just those that could strike Israel, but those that could hit Saudi, gulf-state or Iraqi oil refineries, pipelines, port facilities and oil fields . . . or our installations in the region.

* Hit the military’s key command centers in Tehran, as well as regional headquarters, with special attention to the Revolutionary Guards’ infrastructure.

* Expect three to six weeks of intense air and naval fighting, followed by months of skirmishing and asymmetrical warfare. And Iraq will heat back up, too.

Screw up the effort, and today’s oil prices will double or triple, with severe downstream shortages showing up in a matter of weeks – every oil tanker’s insurance will be canceled immediately, even if the Straits of Hormuz remain open (unlikely).

And we’ll be in the global doghouse.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07172008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/what_bomb_iran_really_takes_120263.htm

The Iranians have played us for 30 years. Geopolitical chess is their middle name. They will disappear only when the price of their existence is greater than their disappearance. So far that price has not been reached apparently.

patrick neid on July 20, 2008 at 3:06 PM

I must have missed it. Where did you say that?

I don’t know. Why?

What I meant to say was that we’re gonna see a round two of the ever changing rationale for the war.

freevillage on July 20, 2008 at 3:20 PM

Nuke Iran

pabarge on July 20, 2008 at 8:01 PM

freevillage: If your snark was an attempt to imply that Big Oil/corporations are behind our policy in order to enrich themselves and destroy the world in the process, then you are caught in a delusion of your and your fellow-travelers’ devising.

Oil drives the world’s economies, their ability to produce and trade. More world stability is achievable when commerce takes place freely, without the threat of blackmail and the imperialistic hegemony of tyrannies such as Iran.

So, yes, a factor in addressing Iran is indeed oil. Should Iran pursue its nuclear-weapons agenda to tyrannize the other countries of the ME into submission to its power and to subsidize its arsenal with petro-cash, then producing/protecting oil and its safe delivery is an important consideration.

Whoever controls such a vital resource for the world’s energy needs is in the catbird seat of power. So far in American history, we have not used our military muscle to impose a colonialist empire anywhere.

onlineanalyst on July 21, 2008 at 8:13 AM

Comment pages: 1 2