|
Feedback ForumNOW wants to hear from you! Send us your opinions, reactions and ideas about "Dialogue with Dictators?"Submissions for this question are no longer being accepted. Previously submitted comments appear below. Comments may have been edited for content or space. Poster: shane Comment: As of this day it is well documented America and UK. have not honored any type of contractual agreements with friend or antagonist. i.e. The native Americans, Mexico, African Americans, ( slave descendants ), Africa, Russia, Germany, Japan, Mormons, the list is endless, all have fallen to some sort of inequitable capitalistic subjugation favorable towards America after a so called non-conditional duologue. You can't honestly have dialogue with protagonist or resister under the aegis of hush hush intimidation, or bringing a history of cold war fraudulence and treachery to the round table. How would a President elect Barack Obama with unproven idealisms of change convince a negotiating autonomous party that America ( Paper Tiger ) is now attempting to represent itself as a Honorable contractor for a better tomorrow? Especially, if Obama is still surrounded by those who's ancestors propagated this countries paper tiger methodological identity without guilt of revision. Even more prevalent,the geneological make up of the ruling majority in these United States of North America is that of Warmongers. ... If you steal someones wallet the first step to amends is to give it back with a heartfelt apology. Peace and love is the enemy of the State. Denial is not a river. I digress. Poster: shane Comment: If I don't believe we should talk with dictators. You can't negotiate with people who do not intend to compromise or negotiate; but instead intend to genocide or wipe out your country or force a faith on you. Those kinds of things, in my opinion should be handled by our presidents and his designates. I think he is right not to give face to evil dictators. No wait I just described American History .... Thank you!. Poster: Virginia R. Mason Comment: I do not understand all this conversation (stirring the pot) on whether Iran is working on a nuclear bomb. Even if Iran does develop a bomb, whatever happened to Mutually Assured Destruction that served so well during the Cold War with Russia? Iran lives in a neighborhood where many nations have the bomb and naturally feels threatened, as would we. Why do we think it our prerogative to threaten action against them for what is essentially none of our business? This bad policy from every point of view, sure to stir up more animosity against us in the Shiite populations around the world and among Iranians themselves who so far seem not to have any say as to what their leadership says or does. Enough of this malicious and unnecessary sable rattling! A more legitimate concern is Iran's supplying of men and materiel to fellow-Shiites in the Iraqi war which threaten our troops. Poster: Ruth and Louis Foster Comment: Dialogue is an expression of national strength, purpose, and determination to solve problems rather than pretend that they don't exist. Of course, we must be willing to offer dialogue with dictators or anyone else who has cause against us. We can only refuse to talk if we know our position is weak or our cause is unjust. We must,however, be well prepared, well-informed and educated of the history, cultural, and religious motives which have created our disagreements. Poster: Gary L Warn Comment: Bush has and never did have a foreign policy! We need to sit down and talk with all leaders of the world and live in peace. IF possible? Talk is painless and we don't know unless we ask? Right. Gary Poster: frank Comment: Your interview with Admiral Fallon was my first real introduction to this remarkable man. I think that our next President, whoever he may be, would do well indeed to consider this man as an excellent nominee for the position of Secretary of Defense. His grasp of the problems facing us in the Middle East region, combined with his experience as a naval officer, make him ideally suited to the task. Poster: vinod Comment: Nothing wrong in talking to anyone,judge prosecutor talk to a murderer too.One should do everything in his/her power to work out differences,governments included.War must be the last option,not the first.War must be fought if it is the only option left but it should be avoided. Poster: Beverly Booth McCauley Comment: Yes, the diplomats and then the President, if appropriate at the time, should be open to and think first of consultation with diplomats and leaders of other nations and groups of nations. At lower levels as we have had exchanges in the arts and in other fields in the past, we could today exchange methods of conflict resolution by sending and receiving leaders in mediation from different cultures. I am thinking these people could be found in certain types of NGOs or from the many organizations promoting this field around the country. Poster: Kathy Anderson Comment: I was living in Iran at the time of the Revolution, so I know that Iranians aren't just a bunch of crazy Shiites. They are a people who learned from experience how devious and self-serving the American government can be, and who subsequently made their own choices, albeit with very mixed results. Many Iranian citizens would like to see a regime change, and I believe they will eventually be successful in that, without interference from the U.S. government. There is hardly a family anywhere in Iran that does not have relatives who live in the U.S., and in spite of everything, they admire Americans and would welcome closer ties with us. Our government has dialogue with every other repressive regime in the world, including North Korea, the worst sort of dictatorship. Iran's president may be a loose cannon, but he is an elected leader, not a dictator in the same sense. He answers to his superiors within the regime, and although he has security forces that he can use to combat political opposition, he must conduct elections and abide by their results. Are our leaders really prepared to take us into another war, simply because that little man has challenged them with his shocking statements? If we really want to influence what happens in Iran, we need to talk to their leaders like adults, not like children on the playground. If we really want to know what is going on in Iran, why wouldn't we want to gain closer access to its people? Poster: Mary Goolsby Comment: I was very pleased to hear from a military person who supports the idea of dialogue between disagreeing parties. The idea that being willing to listen and debate comes from weakness seems to be prevelant in our society. I believe a close look at history reveals the opposite to be true. The bravest people are the peacemakers. Poster: Kenneth Scotland Comment: If I have problem with my neighbors, I go talk to them. It may not immediately solve a situation, but at least a dialogue is started...and compromise might ensue. I cannot help but think nations should follow the same common sense approach that mere citizens the world over know instinctively as a way to mutual understanding. Poster: Karin Hertel Comment: Of course one has to talk to dictators. Communication is essential to getting closer to solutions. How else would they come about? It is arrogant and snobbish to not try to find peaceful ways of solving problems. Talking to them does not mean this gives stature to dictators. They have that already. Poster: Margaret Orr Comment: Dialogue is the only common-sense way to deal with a hot-tempered dictator-- words do not kill, but nuclear weapons and war would be a horrendous mistake. Poster: Frank Huber Comment: Yes, we should put muc more time, effort and resources into creating meaningful dialogue with leadership and politicos with whom we differ. We have been sold - on the back of the heinous actions of 9-11 - that only strength through military and economic might will prevail against those whom we fear. We need to become more reasonable and less domineering with those whom we would befriend. Obama needs to meet with those who need to know what the US stands for. Poster: Athena Comment: It takes the right leader to talk to a dictator.One who is authentic, speaks with a true voice,One who does not bow to the dictator but approaches him with respect,in consideration of the peopke he represents. Strength of character in a great leader will trump the self serving power of a dictator. Obama is the modern version of Mahatma Ghandi. Poster: Jolene Atkins Comment: I do not believe we should dialogue with dictators. You cannot negotiate with people who do not intend to compromise or negotiate; but instead intend to kill you and wipe out your country and/or make its people to submit to the dictator. Those kinds of things, in my opinion should be handled by our president and/or his delegates. I think he is right not to give face to evil dictators. Thank you. |
Who's Helping Our Wounded Vets?
Elizabeth Warren on the Economy
Nurses Needed
Electric Car Dreams
PBS Special Report: Health Care Reform
