Double-standard on "The US does not talk to Terrorists"

[Thorgrim]

From Buchanan:

At Tehran and Yalta, FDR ceded Eastern Europe to the Great Terrorist he called "Uncle Joe." Truman at Potsdam affirmed the grant to Stalin. Three years after Soviet tanks crushed the Hungarian Revolution, Eisenhower invited the "Butcher of Budapest" to Camp David and had him escorted on a 10-day U.S. tour.

In 1972, Nixon went to Peking to shake hands with the greatest terrorist of the century, Mao Tse-tung, even as Mao's Gang of Four, including his wife, carried out the Chinese pogrom known as the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution.

Moammar Gadhafi is responsible for the air massacre of Americans over Lockerbie. Yet, Bush let Gadhafi out of the sanctions box for giving up his nuclear program and making restitution to the families of the victims on Pan Am Flight 103.

Which brings me to the point: America is a world power with a broader interest in the Middle East than Israel's, and if we are to protect those interests and play the role history has assigned us, we cannot allow any nation to exercise veto power over whom we talk to.

It is preposterous that, at the behest of Israel, we do not talk to a Palestinian Authority led by Hamas after an election in which Bush himself demanded Hamas be included. And while Syria and Iran have been distant and hostile, neither appears to want war with the United States, and neither has attacked us in at least 10 years.

If we can talk to Gadhafi, who has the blood of Americans on his hands, why can't we talk to Bashar al-Assad and Ahmadinejad? Neither of them has slaughtered hundreds of Americans in a terror attack.

^^^

Excellent point IMO, we selectively use our "principle"

It is one thing to have a principle that we don't negotiate with those who have hijacked an air plane or those who have taken hostages...but to refuse dealing with a democracy who fairly elected a government, while having dealt with other terrorists governments in the past?

[motivez]

We have a long history of dealing with people that are later considered terrorists, installing puppet regimes that carry out atrocities in their nations, etc..

Robertson has been making some good points lately, even if he has been batshit insane in other instances, his logic about a lot of what going on in the middle east is dead on IMO. Most people who disagree tend to disagree because they've had a certain viewpoint shoved down their throats for years by the media.

[kinggovernor]

Iran and Syria likes to fight America