Trust Him - the Cretin In Chief Really Doesn't Like You

Iran will be sending representatives to Annapolis, but there is no expectation that the U.S. will make any gains in relationships while the helm is held by an administration that continually attacks them. While we continue to have the military spew accusations about Iran sending insurgents and weapons to fight our presence in Iraq, news continues to persist that it is other, perceived friendlier, agencies acting there. No need to look for a change at the White House from accusations to facts.

Saudi Arabia and Libya, both considered allies by the United States in its fight against terrorism, were the source of about 60 percent of the foreign fighters who came to Iraq in the past year to serve as suicide bombers or to facilitate other attacks, according to senior American military officials.

(hat tip to Sideshow for the cite from Through the Looking Glass, and credit to NYTimes for article)

It has an anticipated effect, that when a nation is put in the position of enemy, it makes friendship highly unlikely.

Iran's ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency said Friday that his country could suspend uranium enrichment if the United States and Western Europe agreed to acknowledge that its nuclear program was peaceful.

But Ambassador Ali Asghar Soltanieh said there was a "serious confidence gap" between his country and the United States and Western Europe and that he saw little point in trying to "build confidence" with an American administration that had none in his country.

"We don't trust the United States," he told McClatchy Newspapers after the IAEA Board of Governors finished its latest round of talks on Iran's nuclear program. "We could suspend nuclear enrichment. We did it before for two and half years. But it wasn't enough then, and wouldn't be enough now. We will not suspend enrichment again because there is no end to what the United States will demand."

Diplomats said Soltanieh's remarks reflected what he'd been saying in private. "Iran is willing to deal," one said. "But they've made it clear there would have to be a quid pro quo, and they don't believe that's possible." The diplomats said they couldn't be quoted by name because of the sensitivity of the issue.
(snip)
Experts and diplomats say the Bush administration may have boxed itself in by taking the issue to the U.N. Security Council. Iran reacted by shutting off information about its nuclear activities two years ago, and the administration said it would seek harsher sanctions and refused to rule out military action. Russia and China, however — both with veto power on the Security Council — have been critical of further sanctions.

Once upon a time it was the role of the president of the United States to keep the people and the country safe from foreign aggression. Such lessons were missed in the education of the present occupier of the office. The United States' forces are misused and destroyed in the process of throwing away our lives, treasure and reputation to pursue the White House objectives in aggression by the dysfunctional members of this administration.

Iran is hardly to blame for reacting to our lies with rejection.

It will take a new face on U.S. action to bring normalcy back into our foreign relations scene. Taking out petty nuisance spite in the field of U.S. relationships abroad is never going to create the kind of atmosphere this country needs either to prosper or even to survive.