On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 21:30:43 -0600 Robert Naiman <[email protected]> wrote:
> As first proposed by the US. It was the idea of a US official. The > involvement of Brazil and Turkey came later, in 2010 - at the request > of the US. That's not the way Ahmadi tells it. But diplomacy is an un-transparent business, and I certainly don't remember even as many of the details as I knew, back then. The US version and yours are not at all implausible of course. Negotiations between countries very unequal in power usually eventuate in a lopsided deal; and if the negotiations break down, the weaker can always be blamed -- particularly if the stronger has a vast propaganda apparatus at its disposal, and well-meaning advocates of diplomacy who at the end will wag their disappointed heads and obligingly invoke Plan B). So negotiations between the US and Iran would have posed no threat to the former's attempts to recover the imperial whip hand -- which (surely we agree?) is what drives US policy on this matter. Right? -- -- Michael J. Smith [email protected] http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org http://fakesprogress.blogspot.com http://cars-suck.org _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
