Is this "The Onion" website?

Finally, something the Iranians can understand.

We didn't initiate the meeting so we're not really changing from our prior statements concerning absolutely stopping all Ur enrichment before diplomatic talks can start. We're really talking about Iraq. And we're really just a third party. And only at ambassador level.

Then, if they meet at minister/secretary level, it will be on (sort of) neutral ground and talks will be low key and might lead, in sort of a circular way to what we really want to talk about.

All makes perfect sense to me. It's undeniably obvious that the US administration has in no way back-tracked or surrendered ground that they previously said they never would. No, no.

Hu-effing-rah! Hope we all can actually get something productive out of this.

Where's this realism coming from?

Hopefully Shooter will make a pitstop at The Hague on the way home.

Once upon a time the Bush administration launched charm offensives. This here, this isn’t even a listening tour. Dr. Rice is being sent down there to cavort with evildoers. My main concern: is her chastity safe?

For God's sake Condi - wear a freaking burkha, and don't piss them off!

Yes, Rice is the perfect diplomat for this job, because she did such an excellent job in nurturing the nascent peace talks between Syria and Israel. Didn't we have a discussion about that last week?

Hmmm....skepticism and wishful thinking? I don't like to make assertions, but I think it is safe to say that Ms. Rice was the worst NSA Director ever. Thus, she could only do better as Secretary of State, even though she still seems to be trapped in Cold War paradigms.

That being said, I can't say I am very hopeful. First, the Bush Administration's record of screwing up everything possible makes me doubt that the coming meetings will be any exception. Secondly, given that they are coming against the backdrop of the endless 'Axis of Evil" rants must mean that things in Iraq are even a lot worse that we realize.

If these meetings are 'Plan B' we are truly in dire straits!

James M.

If you read the study, it clearly states that recent immigration (of which a high percentage is obviously illegal) has depressed the wages of prior immigrants (before 1990) by a whopping 17-20%. So this study reinforces the argument that people competing at the lower levels of the labor market (who by now happen to be overwhelmingly non-"native born") are hurt a lot by illegal immigration. This study documents a shift in the composition of different levels of the labor force, but that's about all it does. Since more than a third of the labor force in California isn't native born, I'm trying to figure out what we're supposed to draw from this if we aren't flaming nativists who don't give a damn about wages or working conditions among the "foreign-born" other than that unbridled immigration depresses a large sector of the work force's wages to an alarming degree.

(From the Kansas City Star report on this: "Ironically, the biggest losers as a group due to immigration into California after 1990 are immigrants who arrived before 1990, Peri said. Without the newer influx of immigrants, he said, the earlier immigrants' wages would have been 17 to 20 percent higher in 2004.")

Yes, Condi's going to confuse them into submission. With stuff about Hitler and the UN and the Marshall Plan and Woodrow Wilson and the Rumsfeld Doctrine and... what were we talking about?

what were we talking about?

Uh, birth pangs?

...I think it is safe to say that Ms. Rice was the worst NSA Director ever. Thus, she could only do better as Secretary of State....

James M., that is a non-sequitur, unfortunately.

However, since she has always proven to be devoid of original thought there are one or two hopes. She may actually be listening to state department career diplomats who know of which they speak, and/or, without acknowledging same, the administration may be realizing their options are pretty narrow and narrowing, and the ISG plan is actually one of the best ways forward/back/out/sideways/up/down (you pick).

Excuse me for being cynical, but this appears to be a fig leaf for the naked aggression and war crimes that The Decider and Shooter Cheney are hell bent (literally) to commit against Iran.

Impeachment of both is still the only right and sure solution to our problems. It might help the stock market, as well.

You would think that she would be a good SecState, wouldn't you? But, she's worse in this job than the one she failed at before.

Steve Clemons points out that this is occurring while Vice is out of town. Can't wait for him to return & find Scooter guilty & peace on the way. (One can hope.)

Clearly this is a well-conceived ploy to keep the Iranians off-guard and wondering about our real intentions. Then when they let their guard down far enough we will bomb them.

Sun Tzu would approve.

And I said, at one point, that this was a historical memo, that it was -- it was not based on new threat information. And I said, "No one could have imagined them taking a plane, slamming it into the Pentagon" -- I'm paraphrasing now -- "into the World Trade Center, using planes as a missile." As I said to you in the private session, I probably should have said, "I could not have imagined," because within two days, people started to come to me and say, "Oh, but there were these reports in 1998 and 1999. The intelligence community did look at information about this."

In so many words, "I would have done my job if someone had told me what to do."

Are we sure it's not Opposite Day?

FLIP FLOP ... FLIP FLOP ... FLIP FLOP ....

... not that that's a bad thing ... unless it's Kerry.

Cheney should leave town more often; Rice (or someone in the DoS appears nimble enough to take advantage of these small windows of opportunity.

..but Condoleezza Rice has agreed to attend a regional meeting set up by the Iraqi government..

From the same article:

The only reason to talk to us would be to extract a price, and that's not diplomacy, that's extortion," Rice told Der Spiegel, a German magazine, when asked last month about the international conference promoted by the Iraq Study Group.

Since the start of the year, in fact, Rice has rhetorically divided the region between "mainstream" actors, such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, and "extremists" such as Iran and Syria. She suggested that rather than draw out Iran and Syria through diplomacy, the United States would seek to isolate them unless they changed their behavior on their own.

"We do have a regional approach," Rice told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in January. "It is to work with those governments that share our view of where the Middle East should be going." She argued at the time that "the problem here is not a lack of engagement with Syrians but a lack of action by Syria. . . . If the government in Tehran wants to help stabilize the region -- as it now claims -- then it should end its support for violent extremists."

Actually, I'd rather Rice not attend this meeting. She might intentionally or unintentionally screw up the diplomatic process.

Kevin: It's a start.

Or it's a feint. What makes you think that just because Rice was pressured by events into sitting in on a meeting that they have any intention of engaging the issue?

Dr. Rice: "We do have a regional approach. It is to work with those governments that share our view of where the Middle East should be going."

Translation: We will blackmail Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Kuwait, etc. to make sure Iran & Syria are left hanging out to dry. This is more of a coverup to make her "Deciders" look good than an actual diplomatic mission.

Rather than letting the countries of the ME decide what is in their own common interests on their own, she is being sent to sabotage their efforts. Let's get real. What is good for Corporate USA is not the same as what is good for the Middle East or, I might add, the American people..

The only reason to talk to us would be to extract a price, and that's not diplomacy, that's extortion," Rice told Der Spiegel, a German magazine, when asked last month about the international conference promoted by the Iraq Study Group.

When you absolutely, positively need results... be sure to close your mind first for maximum benefit!

TO INFINITY, AND BEYOND!!!

Negotiations are best when the two sides can find some goals on which they at mutually agree.

Clearly Iran desires to be a nuclear power. And, it's most likely that both Iran and Syria want the democratic government of Iraq to fail. It's in their interest to send weapons and insurgents into Iraq. I don't see mutual agreement on the key issues.

At best, the negotiation will come to either:

-- Iran and Syria getting a bribe in exchange for cooperation, or

-- We (and Iraq) threatening Iran and Syria(militarily or economically) if they don't cooperate.

As I understand international law, Iraq is entitled to take military action against Iran and Syria if they are sending weapons and terrorists into Iraq. Further, I believe Iraq could properly invite their ally (us) to help them repel the aggresion from Iran and Syria. However, I don't expect the conference to go in that direction.

I see little hope that this conference will do any good.

Long time coming! Praise be.

A question for those who are optimistic about this conference. What do you expect (or hope) will come out of this negotiation?

"ex-liberal" wrote: What do you expect (or hope) will come out of this negotiation?

I hope you'll suffer a fit of apoplexy when you realize the United States will no longer sacrifice its blood and treasure advancing the strategic interests of the State of Israel at the cost of its own interests, and that the corrupt neocon agenda you so dishonetly support has been relegated to the ashheap of history by the incompetence of the Administration and supporters whose water you carry.

Next question?

"ex-liberal" wrote: What do you expect (or hope) will come out of this negotiation?

I hope you'll suffer a fit of apoplexy when you realize the United States will no longer sacrifice its blood and treasure advancing the strategic interests of the State of Israel at the cost of its own interests, and that the corrupt neocon agenda you so dishonetly support has been relegated to the ashheap of history by the incompetence of the Administration and supporters whose water you carry.

that's stupid.

We (and Iraq) threatening Iran and Syria

ex-, open the windows when using oil-based paints!

unless you were referring to our new al qaeda allies acting against iran via iraq, in which case, good point.

"that's stupid."

So is faux-liberal. Such idiocy doesn't merit a serious response.