Obama would meet with Castro

Obama would meet with Castro

By: Mike Allen Source Politico

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) said at the CNN debate in Austin that he would be willing to meet immediately with Cuba’s new leader, Raul Castro. But Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) said she would not.

In fact, Obama broadly extended his policy of being willing to meet with dictators without preconditions, while Clinton holds the more traditional position that a U.S. president should hold such negotiations only after extensive groundwork has been done.

“Not just in Cuba, but I think this principle applies generally,” Obama said. “I recall what John F. Kennedy once said: We should never negotiate out of fear, but we should never fear to negotiate.

“And this moment, this opportunity when Fidel Castro has finally stepped down, I think is one that we should try to take advantage of.”

Clinton said: “I agree absolutely that we should be willing to have diplomatic negotiations and processes with anyone. … But there has been this difference between us over when and whether the president should offer a meeting without preconditions with those with whom we do not have diplomatic relations. And it should be part of a process. But I don’t think it should be offered in the beginning, because I think that undermines the capacity for us to actually take the measure of someone like Raul Castro.”

Then Clinton offered her own Kennedy paraphrase: “As President Kennedy said, he wouldn’t be afraid to negotiate, but he would expect there to be a lot of preparatory work done to find out exactly what he would get out of it.”

The moderator had barely begun the next question when the Republican National Committee blasted out a sheet of Obama’s quotes over the years that was headed “Obama’s Stance On Cuba Is Completely Inconsistent & Incoherent.”

And the Clinton campaign issued: “Obama flip-flop on Cuba.”

Wonder how many other flip flops there will be.

Advertisements

4 Comments

  1. The sad thing is that if you ask much of the world today, do you see a problem with speaking to a Castro or Kim Jong-il or Ahmadinejad or Mugabe, they simply would not know what is the problem with that is. Go ahead, ask someone you know who’s not really clued up on these things, if by some surprised they can we shouldn’t entertain these dictators, then ask them why, i’m sure they’ll flounder.

    They don’t get that these vermin would use such a meeting to demonstrate implied support from an America, you simply cannot educate the masses on such things. It’s like you have to take them there to Cuba and N. Korea, make them suffer through all this and when they see the painful consequences of entertaining their tyrants, turn back time and bring them back to this world and then they’ll get it.

    It’s simply not possible, hence when Obama says it, on the surface of it, it sounds good, a nice warm, fuzzy, harmless sentiment and when Hillary rightly baulks at it, she is seen as being mean and nasty, go figure.

    You are as usual very insightful MK. It is such a pity that we are going to be sold down the river for what? a man that has little experience, charming on the outside, ability like Hitler had to stir the masses, I don’t think the people realize what is at stake,& how much it is going to cost them.

  2. This is one of the reasons that I support Obama is because he wants to being change to our foreign policy stances we can see have not worked under Bush.

    All these years and we would not talk to Castro and the Cuban people even suffered more. It’s a shame… How has our policy towards Cuba been constructive at all after 50 years? It shows it just has been a failure…

    MK…

    You are right we should have not have talked to the Soviets but nuked them! We should have talked first instead creating fear and could have avoided the whole arms race thing. Oh, wait the industry military complex would not have had the chance to grow bigger.

    Funny you just mentioned the dictators we ignore but not the ones we blindly support and require them to make no changes like Musharraf and Abdul Aziz. Why do we either support brutal dictators or isolate them? This not about entertaining dictators but working with them to establish trust, trade, and in the future being change to their country.

    Angie…

    See you are repeating the right’s taking point of comparing Obama’s speech giving ability to Hitler. LOL Guess everyone can’t mangle the English tongue like Bush. You are a being a good follower.

    Imho, he has the effect that Hitler had when crowds will behave like they have been reported to behave. I have already shared the results on another post.

    I am not a big Bush fan, but again I think it is amusing that so many make fun of Bush mangling the english tongue, when so many of us do. He is educated btw, they make him out to be an illiterate.

    I follow those I trust and there are not many that I trust at the present moment in politics. The only one any of us can follow that is true and lasting is our Lord Jesus Christ. I understand that you are an agnostic. I am not. I am a believer which in this present climate again makes me an uneducated ‘bigot hater and all manner of accusations from many on the left. It is not popular to have my views, but you did notice the name of my blog, right?

  3. “You are right we should have not have talked to the Soviets but nuked them!”

    Who said anything about nuking them, it’s like saying if i don’t speak to you, i must be out to slit your throat.

    “We should have talked first instead creating fear and could have avoided the whole arms race thing.”

    We’re doing a lot of talking to Iran and they’re going ahead anyway and forcing an arms race in that region, same with N. Korea.

    “…working with them to establish trust, trade…”

    If you work with and establish trust with scumbags, you’re validating and supporting them and their regimes. If that was true the west should never have imposed sanctions on South Africa for Apartheid, they should have talked, established trust and trade.

    None the less i don’t expect you to understand any of this, and i’m not in the habit of wasting my time with leftists, so go and vote for Obama, then you folks can establish trust, trade and all that and lets see if you can bring world peace.

  4. MK…

    Good job on cherry picking my comment and ignoring the main points. Why can the U.S. deal with some scumbags and not others? The U.S. policy toward Cuba has been a totally failure but yet somehow an alternative approach would be worse? Guess you didn’t have any answers…

    “i don’t expect you to understand any of this…”

    I understand history and current world events very well but thank you. It was a nice way of you saying I am ignorant. I glad you think you are intellectuality better in regards to this conversation.

    “We’re doing a lot of talking to Iran and they’re going ahead anyway and forcing an arms race in that region.”

    Ummm.. Wrong! The U.S. is the one making billion dollar arms deals in the region and Iran does not compare to us in that regard. Our own CIA said Iran stopped their nuke program in what was it? 2006? We invaded the nation that borders them. Who is stirring up trouble in the region? Oh, I guess I won’t understand…

    Why did you feel the need to call me a leftist when know nothing about me? People that feel the need to label everything and everyone know their arguments are weak.


Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s