I have yet to hear a good rebuttal from the neoconservatives of the following point that Pat Buchanan makes: if Nixon can sit down and negotiate with a monster like Chairman Mao (who had the death of millions on his hands, and, indirectly in Vietnam, the death of tens of thousands of Americans) and Reagan can negotatiate with leaders of what he rightly called the Evil Empire, what is intrinsically treasonous about negotiating with Iran? How is Iran so much more dangerous than Communist China or the USSR, and are we really supposed to believe that Mao Tse Tung was somehow so much more reasonable and friendly towards us than Hassan Rouhani?
“if Nixon can sit down and negotiate with a monster like Chairman Mao (who had the death of millions on his hands, and, indirectly in Vietnam, the death of tens of thousands of Americans) and Reagan can negotatiate with leaders of what he rightly called the Evil Empire, what is intrinsically treasonous about negotiating with Iran?”
______________________________________________________________
Mao needed a deal to defend against Soviets, couldn’t compete economically nor military on their own.
Gorbachev DESPERATELY needed a deal to save the USSR
But the Iranians don’t need us, any kind of arms control, nor Obama’s agreement... they’re used to the sanctions and seem to have adapted well enough. That’s why we are on our knees, BEGGING them, while they refuse to negotiate in good faith.
I would almost always talk to our enemies... just NOT NOW, current US leadership isn’t up to the task. Our side is simply parroting the Iranian position and attempting to stuff it down everybody else’s throats- the US effectively has NOBODY at the table!
Don’t want Obama striking the kind of weak, damaging, unenforceable, temporary 10-year agreement he’s attempting to do... entirely bypassing Congress, ignoring the pleas of our allies, etc.
That’s NOT how it’s supposed to be done in this country, plus Obama’s top adviser is an Iranian-born sympathizer who appears to hate American and all it stands for. Maybe that’s why everybody else already left.
WHY doesn’t any of that bother Pat Buchanan?
Because they killed 200 of our marines. End of story.
” ... if Nixon can sit down and negotiate with a monster like Chairman Mao ...”
Nixon’s gambit with China was part of a larger strategy to weaken the Soviet Union. Would a successful conclusion to negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program (whatever that might mean) weaken Russia? Only if it were credible and lowered world oil prices. But, I don’t believe an “agreement” with Iran would have credibility in Israel, Saudi Arabia, or in the world oil market.
But I thought that all conservatives, "neo" or "palaeo," considered the talks with Mao and the USSR to be a betrayal of conservative principals.
IMHO the "reasonableness" of these talks has only been adopted lately by "palaeos" because they hate Israel and sympathize with its enemies.