Daily Gut: The Willingness to Engage

AhmadinejadAP_450x300

So the U.S. and Iran just had what’s been called “significant” talks concerning Tehran’s nuclear plans. The goal for us, was two fold: to get Iran to “shift course,” and to prove President Bush was an idiot for not negotiating with a gentleman who denies the Holocaust and wants to wipe Israel off the map.

So how tough have we been so far?

Well, while administration officials said that gaining access to Iran’s uranium enrichment facility is super important, we sure as heck won’t walk away from the table if they refuse (which they haven’t). And let’s not go too fast on those sanctions either.

That’s just rude.

So essentially, we’ve not only met with Iran without preconditions, but also, without any measurable objectives. Meaning, we’re okay leaving the table with less than what we arrived with. Well, if you wanted to show a sharp break from the days of old, giving in is a sure bet.

Could you imagine using this logic in a playground? Imagine surrendering the reigns of leadership of a grade school, just so you can chat with the most weaponized, belligerent bully. “Look, we don’t like you threatening to kill the Jewish kids, or your continued work on your massive numchuk factory – but we’re pleased you’re here to listen. More punch? It’s the kind you like! Sharkleberry fin!”

The good news is – these talks only lasted one day. If they’d gone on any longer, we probably would have returned the Louisiana Purchase.

(Iran had it originally, right?)

Lastly, the state department warns against making a snap judgment – for we should “evaluate the willingness of Iran to engage on these issues.”

Which leads me to my final thought: how come no one ever questions our willingness to engage?

Tonight, we’ve got the great actor Robert Carlyle! Also Diana Falzone, Clayton Morris and Jonathan Hoenig. Other stuff, too!

COMMENTS

Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.