Sorry to be a heretic here, but if Reagan could strike a deal with the Soviets (and a lot of conservatives blasted him for it at the time, myself included ) .... I don’t see why we can’t strike a deal with Iran, especially if it puts our people in their facilities, monitoring them continuously.
It’s weird to me that a lot of conservatives today seem to hunger for war with Iran - and no other “solution” to the Iranian issue will satisfy them. How many wars did Reagan launch? He won the cold war, and he did it without starting any “hot” wars. In contrast, we have the George Bush example - invade Iraq. What, exactly did that get us?
Who is hungering for war with Iran?
This is the kind of weakness that starts wars.
The best way to avoid war is to look strong, that is how Reagan did it
That's a bit like saying it might be possible to strike a deal with the Nigerian banker who keeps asking for more small payments before releasing the $10 million you inherited that he's holding.
The fact is there is no will for peace with the Iranians mullah's, there never was any intent for peace with the Iranian mullahs, and any attempt to negotiate peace by the Iranian mullahs is a cynical deceptive effort on their part to extract more from the other side. If you don't believe it, then go ahead and keep exchanging emails with the Nigerian banker.
Iran has repeated many, many times that it desires to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Those are threats a terrorist state makes. In the past the US had a policy not to negotiate with terrorist states. Obama now has changed this.
Now it appears the US will help fund Iran.
Making a statement that “a lot of conservatives today seem to hunger for war with Iran - and no other “solution” to the Iranian issue will satisfy them.” is a stale liberal talking point just like “part of the problem conservatives have with Obama is that he is black”.
I know a lot of conservatives and none of them “hunger for war with Iran”, or “have a problem with Obama is because he is black”.
The conservatives I know detest war, but know a terrorist state like Iran, sworn to destroy Israel, should be dealt like the terrorist state it is. Sanctions are the only thing that has shown Iran can be slowed down. They also have a problem with Obama’s policies that are destroying the country from within, not the fact that he is 1/2 white and 1/2 black.
The big difference between Reagan and Bush (both Bushes, in fact) was that 1990 marked a major turning point in Republican foreign policy. From that point forward, the GOP probably put the Pentagon up for sale to foreign interests (mainly Saudi Arabia).
Say, looking over your posts in forum, you seem to be one of these insidiously subtle trolls...feeding the Viking kitties just enough catnip to keep the “zots” at bay.
John Kerry got rolled like a pudgy old drunk on a park bench. Knowing his history, he never met an enemy of the United States that he couldn’t find any agreement with. We are worse than “Jengis Kahn” according to him; didn’t you know that?
If you "hunger for war," take the Obama approach. As you said yourself, the Reagan approach kept the peace.