Obama throws Israel under the Bus

[Plane]

Reagan negotiated with the Evil Empire.

I remember that!

Gorbachov ) Lets treat each other as equals!

Reagan)    No!










http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reykjav%C3%ADk_Summit

[sirs]

*snicker*     

[BT]

*snicker*     

What were Reagan and Gorby doing in Iceland?

[sirs]

Probably not dictating under what circumstances, each's others border was going to be limited to....nor discussing the foundations of each country's religion as a precondition to recognizing the other's right to exist

[Plane]

*snicker*     

What were Reagan and Gorby doing in Iceland?

They were negotiateing Reagan style.

[BT]

*snicker*     

What were Reagan and Gorby doing in Iceland?

They were negotiateing Reagan style.

Yes they were negotiating. What came out of those negotiations?

[BT]

Probably not dictating under what circumstances, each's others border was going to be limited to....nor discussing the foundations of each country's religion as a precondition to recognizing the other's right to exist

No id don't believe that was on the agenda. Your point?

[sirs]

If you missed the pretty transparent point, I can't help yas

[Plane]

*snicker*     

What were Reagan and Gorby doing in Iceland?

They were negotiateing Reagan style.

Yes they were negotiating. What came out of those negotiations?

Gorbachov offered sweeping arms controll , but what could he offer that was better than the collapse of the USSR?

President Reagan said "no" to exactly what president Carter ,... or Nixon... would have asked for.

[BT]

*snicker*     

What were Reagan and Gorby doing in Iceland?

They were negotiateing Reagan style.

Yes they were negotiating. What came out of those negotiations?

Gorbachov offered sweeping arms controll , but what could he offer that was better than the collapse of the USSR?

President Reagan said "no" to exactly what president Carter ,... or Nixon... would have asked for.

According to your link:
Result

Despite the unexpected proximity to the potential elimination of all nuclear weapons, the meeting adjourned with no agreement; however, both sides discovered the extent of the concessions the other side was willing to make.[3] Human rights became a subject of productive discussion for the first time. An agreement by Gorbachev to on-site inspections, a continuing American demand which had not been achieved in the Partial Test Ban Treaty of 1963 or the ABM and SALT I pacts of 1972, constituted a significant step forward, and foreshadowed Russian openness to such testing in future talks.

Despite its apparent failure, participants and observers have referred to the summit as an enormous breakthrough which eventually facilitated the INF Treaty (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty), signed in Washington on December 8, 1987.

None of which would have happened if Reagan had refused to negotiate with the Evil Empire.

[Plane]

According to your link:
Result

Despite the unexpected proximity to the potential elimination of all nuclear weapons, the meeting adjourned with no agreement; ......................None of which would have happened if Reagan had refused to negotiate with the Evil Empire.

So it was not useless , OK , but Reagan refused to throw the rope to the drowning USSR that Gorbachev was asking for, the demise of the Soviet Union accomplished more and better than any agreements before or since.

  So Gorbachov did not get what he needed, a rescue from Reagan.

 

[BT]

According to your link:
Result

Despite the unexpected proximity to the potential elimination of all nuclear weapons, the meeting adjourned with no agreement; ......................None of which would have happened if Reagan had refused to negotiate with the Evil Empire.

So it was not useless , OK , but Reagan refused to throw the rope to the drowning USSR that Gorbachev was asking for, the demise of the Soviet Union accomplished more and better than any agreements before or since.

  So Gorbachov did not get what he needed, a rescue from Reagan.

In negotiations one side usually gets more of what it wants than the other. Perhaps Reykjavik was the antidote to Yalta.

[Plane]

Negotiations don't have to be even, but both sides should have something to offer, elese
"negotiation" is the wrong word to use.

What do Palestinians have to offer?

[BT]

Negotiations don't have to be even, but both sides should have something to offer, elese
"negotiation" is the wrong word to use.

What do Palestinians have to offer?

Peace

[sirs]

I think what Bt is so struggling to convey, is that despite the fact that U.S. and USSR were largely opponents, largely evil in each other's eyes, they still managed to sit down and negotiate......something

Some major problems in trying to compare that apples to the Middle East orange. 
- As Plane has demonstrated, Regan did not back down to what Russia wanted
- Neither the U.S. nor Russia were not acknowledging the others existence.  They both knew and accepted the other's right to exist (both being able to take each other out with a plethora of nukes)
- they weren't connected by a border

I could go on, but the point is that yea, they did negotiate, but as so many have been demonstrating here that messers Bt & Xo keep ignoring is that the truth of the matter is in this 2 party state like "outcome", one of the states has as one of its leading Governing charters, the destruction of the other state.  And as Xo nicely demonstrated, it was a plurality of Palestinians that voted in that sect

There is no negotiations when 1 of the 2 parties wants your destruction.  And no, you can't get away with well, its the Jewish state of Israel that won't be recognized.  The other state would......and what other state would that be??, since the Israel is the only state here in question, and it is a Jewish state