-
Answered at 11:55 PM on Oct. 15, 2008 by:
Anonymous
could be..
-
Answered at 11:55 PM on Oct. 15, 2008 by:
Anonymous
it could be...
-
Answered at 11:58 PM on Oct. 15, 2008 by:
Anonymous
no it couldnt be. its not reality, there is always going to be controversy problems dissagreement and war. Its natural, unfortunately it is, but as human beings, we dont agree with everyone. its not reality.
-
Answered at 12:01 AM on Oct. 16, 2008 by:
alaskaice
I put this in a metaphor to my husband....... The situtation I see is Obama sitting a table with all the leaders of the world trying to promote peace. It's kinda like a bunch of two year old boys sitting around a table trying to negotiate who gets the biggest gun and who isn't. " You don't bomb me, I won't bomb you and we;ll all be happy..." The truth is it isn't a good idea.It isn't reality and why in God's green earth should be trust someone who PROMISES peace with countries that don't want us anywhere near them. Maybe if Obama gives them the bigger gun they will leave the US alone... NOT HAPPENING LOL
-
Answered at 12:05 AM on Oct. 16, 2008 by:
Anonymous
I agree! Maybe Obama will show them kindness and they will show it right back. May very well be a dream but hey, you never know!
-
Answered at 12:08 AM on Oct. 16, 2008 by:
ny.chica
Some republicans think he is right....
The ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee parted ways with his party's presidential nominee Wednesday by endorsing Democrat Barack Obama's approach to diplomacy.
In a lengthy speech at the National Defense University, Indiana Sen. Richard G. Lugar weighed the benefits of talking to foreign leaders, including U.S. enemies, against other actions, such as military force. The issue marks one of the sharpest divides between Obama and John McCain, who has called the Democratic nominee naive for suggesting that he would sit down with leaders such as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
-
Answered at 12:08 AM on Oct. 16, 2008 by:
ny.chica
Lugar, however, praised Obama, noting that isolation often does not resolve contentious issues.
"He correctly cautions against the implication that hostile nations must be dealt with almost exclusively through isolation or military force," Lugar said in a prepared remarks released before his speech. "In some cases, refusing to talk can even be dangerous."
Lugar, however, said McCain is right to warn that "there are times when diplomatic approaches to rogue regimes have little efficacy." But he cited North Korea, which was just removed from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terror, as a diplomatic success story and urged more contact with Syria and Iran.
-
Answered at 12:08 AM on Oct. 16, 2008 by:
ny.chica
This is not the first time Lugar and Obama have seen eye-to-eye on foreign policy issues. Lugar noted back in July that he was "pleased" to have worked with Obama on nuclear proliferation issues after an Obama ad ran mentioning Lugar by name.
Lugar also used his speech to underscore his concern that U.S. foreign policy has become too reactive.
"If most U.S. foreign policy attention is devoted to crises fomented by hostile regimes, we are ceding the initiative to our enemies and reducing our capacity to lead the world in ways that are more likely to affect our future," Lugar said.
-
Answered at 12:11 AM on Oct. 16, 2008 by:
autodidact
-
Answered at 12:21 AM on Oct. 16, 2008 by:
casperskitty
So, we should just follow McCain into battle? Instead of sitting with Obama in his peace talks? Obama hasn't promised peace. He has promised to work toward peace, which I believe is a respectable intention, no matter how impossible it may seem. People once thought it was impossible for us to go into space. What if they had never tried because it was "impossible?" Peace may not happen, but nothing will ever happen if we don't try.