Comments on: Greg Barker http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/10/30/greg-barker/ Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:49:55 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Lateef X http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/10/30/greg-barker/comment-page-1/#comment-19456 Lateef X Fri, 02 Nov 2007 15:25:54 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/10/30/greg-barker/#comment-19456 What you're talking about in this article is clearly contingent on a war with Iran or for that matter, a lack thereof. On October 30th, Senator Chuck Hagel’s letter to President George Bush leaked. In the straightforward letter, Hagel insists that the time has come to engage Iran in a one-on-one conversation to address the sour relationship between the two countries. It seems like his point his fairly obvious - he wants to stop beating around the bush and initiate direct dialogue with Iran’s government in order to prevent a seemingly inevitable ‘clash of civilizations.’ You can read the ENTIRE letter here, you can also download the original: http://www.gummyprint.com/blog/hagel-to-bush-begin-unilateral-and-unconditional-talks-with-iran/ What you’re talking about in this article is clearly contingent on a war with Iran or for that matter, a lack thereof.

On October 30th, Senator Chuck Hagel’s letter to President George Bush leaked. In the straightforward letter, Hagel insists that the time has come to engage Iran in a one-on-one conversation to address the sour relationship between the two countries. It seems like his point his fairly obvious – he wants to stop beating around the bush and initiate direct dialogue with Iran’s government in order to prevent a seemingly inevitable ‘clash of civilizations.’

You can read the ENTIRE letter here, you can also download the original: http://www.gummyprint.com/blog/hagel-to-bush-begin-unilateral-and-unconditional-talks-with-iran/

]]> By: Marycatherine Barton http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/10/30/greg-barker/comment-page-1/#comment-18401 Marycatherine Barton Wed, 31 Oct 2007 17:46:11 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/10/30/greg-barker/#comment-18401 From what I can tell, Zogby based its poll on only calling 1,059 people, and the 52% answered yes when then queried whether we should 'strike' Iran if that would take out a nuclear site, or words to that effect. That doesn't mean that 52% of Americans want to go to war with Iran. I mean, what kind of educational materials did these poll answers have to help them decide their answers. Ill informed, stressed, hurried -- this isn't a fair way to decide whether to go to war, to put it mildly! From what I can tell, Zogby based its poll on only calling 1,059 people, and the 52% answered yes when then queried whether we should ’strike’ Iran if that would take out a nuclear site, or words to that effect. That doesn’t mean that 52% of Americans want to go to war with Iran. I mean, what kind of educational materials did these poll answers have to help them decide their answers. Ill informed, stressed, hurried — this isn’t a fair way to decide whether to go to war, to put it mildly!

]]> By: Joe http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/10/30/greg-barker/comment-page-1/#comment-18380 Joe Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:20:26 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/10/30/greg-barker/#comment-18380 Good Interview, but nothing really new as the drumbeat for war with Iran continues on. With Putin leaning on the Iranians side of the fence I wonder just how far the Bushites will go with this escalation?? Are they insane enough to do it?? Good Interview, but nothing really new as the drumbeat for war with Iran continues on. With Putin leaning on the Iranians side of the fence I wonder just how far the Bushites will go with this escalation?? Are they insane enough to do it??

]]>