>> ^Farhad2000:
Wait.
When was the last time anyone listened to anything the UN said?
See Israel/Palestine resolutions of the last ohhh 60 fucking years.

Or as Yes Minister calls it, Diplomacy.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Appalling-Cynicism-Or-Diplomacy-as-the-British-call-it 1:16 and beyond.

There is little the western world can do to change the prevailing attitude in the Muslim world that the holocaust is not real. It's ingrained in their culture, and our opinions on the matter are about as welcome to them as their opinions would be to our own religious right. This is something that can only be changed from within.

I believe diplomacy and respect is the way to encourage this, not by fear and the threat of violence.

>> ^chilaxe:
"You are telling me that all these little wars we have seen could not be solved with diplomacy?"
Yeah, maybe smarter politicians would help. I encourage my friends to consider a career in public service.


Nothing is more frustrating than public service! Ask Al Franken.

"You are telling me that all these little wars we have seen could not be solved with diplomacy?"

Yeah, maybe smarter politicians would help. I encourage my friends to consider a career in public service.

>> ^chilaxe:
Nordlich, it's easy to tear down the trials of others, saying the military conflicts of the last 60 years weren't up to your personal standards, but these conflicts have been quite serious for the millions of folks involved, both on the front lines and in staff positions.


I know that, and it is exactly the reaction I was expecting. You are telling me that all these little wars we have seen could not be solved with diplomacy?

Why must we resort to violence at every turn? Why should we so readily react that way?

Roughly 7 Million Years of Evolution and the Hominini Tribe has not evolved out of violence.

>> ^xxovercastxx:
Not such a big deal, really. I think it was an understandable reaction to the question the translator gave her.

Not really. Having been to conferences in Ottawa, the house of commons, senate, and senate committee meetings where the occasional slipup happen with translations(we are bilingual up here but that doesn't stop multi-language translations with dignitaries). You suck it up, and if you think that the question is wrong you ask for a clarification. You don't fly off the handle, if you do, you're showing that you're not in control of the situation. It's bad for diplomacy, and it's bad for public image. And it shows that you're not fit to be in that position.

It's pretty obvious that she has some serious power control issues, and if someone even considers crossing into her area or implying anothers' opinion it's very verboten.

quid pro quo?? nah, imho the dprk just pulled a quid pro crow...

with hillary eating a bit, because of her recent 'candid' remarks about north korean diplomacy being akin to 'attention-starved children' ... and then kim jong il has her husband come and seal the deal to release the journalists - lol

i fully understand the premise of the show is staged confrontational moments, much like most popular (and ultimatly trashy) current TV shows are. I'm just trying to say that some people will react badly to such techniques, as documented in the above video.

That said, of course the kid had hoped to make a name for himself, but once backed into a corner there was always going to only be one outcome.

Asking for a yes or no is ok. Asking for someone to belittle someone else is asking for them to be a prick. To be fair to GR, the guy should have said the names first time, then stopped at "im not willing to belittle these people" and left the show when GR decided to try the meat-head school of diplomacy.

There were many, many, better ways to deal with the situation from both sides. Sad thing is, it documents how badly things can go when both sides feel threatened. GR is highly aware that the situation has gone awol and the cameras are still running, what i'd like to have known is what would have happened if they switched the cameras off and GR was given the chance to act in a non hot-headed "good tv ratings" way.

There are serious questions of sovereignty here; and questions of equal applications of principle.

What about Pakistan, North Korea, and yes Israel. From a military and diplomatic point of view, nukes help them; but their freedom of movement has not increased overwhelmingly over the international community and their neighbors.

It seems to me that Hitchens' problem with Iran getting nukes is that western ability to interfere in Iranian initiatives would be hampered. If the US can go into sovereign nations and influence their politics through diplomacy, sabotage, intimidation, and outright force; why can't other nations?

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Did you even watch the video?
Is this a rhetorical question? Yes, I saw the whole video. And no, I still don't understand how Isreal asking to be acknowledged as a Jewish State by the Arab world could possibly be anything except a the most basic, logical, reasonable request in the history of diplomacy. It is the equivalent of asking, "We request that you admit Jews are human and deserve to live."


But it is since a good portion of Israelis are not jewish

Did you even watch the video?

Is this a rhetorical question? Yes, I saw the whole video. And no, I still don't understand how Isreal asking to be acknowledged as a Jewish State by the Arab world could possibly be anything except a the most basic, logical, reasonable request in the history of diplomacy. It is the equivalent of asking, "We request that you admit Jews are human and deserve to live."

No - I deal in full truths. You simply don't like them. The reality is that acknowledging Isreal as a Jewish state does have implications and inherent problems for Palestinians. But the creation of a Palestinain state causes tons of problems for Isreal too so it isn't all one-sided. That's diplomacy. You give up something to get something.

The Palestinians want a state. That's reasonable. Isreal wants the Arab world to acknowledge it's right to exist. That's also reasonable. Both sides agreeing to this basic right of existence would be a great beginning. Initially it's going to be tough on both sides. They're both going to need to compromise. Isreal is at least starting the process and saying, "Here's what we want..." Now the Palenstinians need to step up and say, "OK you can exist, but we need these territories..." or make some sort of counter offer. That's how diplomacy works.

Quite frankly, the fact that the simple "we want to exist" request is the one that is being so flatly rejected is a real head-shaker to me. If Arab's can't even do that, then this is all pointless. There’s no reason they can’t just say, “We will acknowledge Israel as an official Jewish state, but we need “X, Y, Z” concessions in order to function as a Palestinian state.” What’s so hard about that?

Cowboy diplomacy is over!

M'eh. The Iranian election was as predictable as the sunrise. The extremists who are in charge wanted "The Shrimp" re-elected and that's exactly what happened. Aslan can talk about diplomacy all he wants, but it is meaningless. Diplomacy with Iran has very little to do with whichever bozo gets the gig after their so-called 'elections'.

Proof positive in the pudding... Isreal. Netenyahu pretty much spiked any chance of a treaty with just ONE simple, reasonable little phrase... "Recognize Isreal as a Jewish state..." The hubub in the circles of 'diplomacy' is that such a pre-condition makes any hope of an agreement absolutely and unequivocally impossible. The only solution that will be accepted by the political world of the Middle East is the annihilation of Isreal as a state and the expulsion of all Jews from the region.

Now – how do you engage in ‘diplomacy’ with a position that is so extreme? Obama can make all the pointless speeches he wants, and a few eggheads like this guy might think he’s brilliant. They are all missing the point completely, which is sadly not atypical when this topic comes up. The point is that militant Islamists are the ones in charge and there is no possible way to successfully negotiate with a pack of half-insane, religious extremists whose only desired outcome is annihilation.

Holy shit, I thought Obama was cool because of his baddass name and not being Bush, but he seems kind of awesome at Diplomacy! Dunno about that domestic/economic stuff though...