James Baker: ‘Talking to an enemy is not, in my view, appeasement.’
James Baker: ‘Talking to an enemy is not, in my view, appeasement.’
In an October, 2006 appearance on Fox News, James A. Baker, Secretary of State during the first Bush administration, emphatically challenged the notion that talking to adversaries constitutes “appeasement”:
BAKER: You don’t just talk to your friends, you talk to your enemies as well. Diplomacy involves talking to your enemies. You don’t reward your enemies necessarily by talking to them if you are tough and you know what you are doing. You don’t appease them. Talking to an enemy is not in my view appeasement.
Watch it:
While Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) recently said it is “naive and irresponsible” to talk to U.S. adversaries such as Iran, two months before Baker’s Fox appearance, McCain said Baker is “the smartest guy I know.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
44 Responses to “James Baker: ‘Talking to an enemy is not, in my view, appeasement.’”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Talking to an enemy is not in my view appeasement.
Unless you ship them weapons as a result…
May 20th, 2008 at 7:38 pmToo late to correct the error of your ways, Mr. Baker, for helping to put our current appeaser in the President’s office. Unless you are trying to keep McBush’s third term from happening.
May 20th, 2008 at 7:43 pm“Baker is “the smartest guy I know.”
McSame, hopefully, has a limited number of acquaintances. Given he knows King George the Dumb and Dick (not because his name is Richar) Cheney but you would think there would be one or two others with an IQ bigger than their shoe size.
May 20th, 2008 at 7:44 pmNaaaaah.
BushitCo is more into bullying, intimidating, harassing and that’s just its allies!
May 20th, 2008 at 7:50 pmBaker to McCain….Watch out there, Senator,…your stepping in a TRAP.
May 20th, 2008 at 7:52 pmTotally Off topic, but the KY results coming in, and yes, Clinton’s way ahead, but look at the by party counts:
Hillary Clinton 221,330 57%
Barack Obama 152,645 39%
Uncommitted 7,328 2%
= 366,647
Versus
John McCain ….68,525 74%
Everybody else..23, 104
= 91,629
Exactly 4 X 1 ratio… Hurry November!
May 20th, 2008 at 7:54 pmHillary Clinton 221,330 57%
Barack Obama 152,645 39%
Worst. Headline. Ever. In a Louisville paper:
Clinton Creaming Obama in KY
May 20th, 2008 at 8:03 pm#7: Oops, Ryan Alessi / Lexington Herald-Leader
May 20th, 2008 at 8:06 pmIt’s hard to not respect Baker and even Gates. It must suck to be one of the smart men serving idiots like Bush/Cheney.
May 20th, 2008 at 8:10 pmRUCerious Says:
“…look at the by party counts: Exactly 4 X 1 ratio… Hurry November”
AMEN, Brother.
Do you suppose a sweep is out of the picture?
May 20th, 2008 at 8:30 pmOf course he does, that’s why Papa Bush hired him, they’re all Nazi lovers.
May 20th, 2008 at 8:34 pmI am somewhat surprised at the margin Hillary appears to be winning by in Ky. This goes to show how weak Obama will be in the GE, IF, repeat, {IF} he is the nominee. I have tried to calculate how the 270 Electoral College Votes needed to win The White House in Nov., and not counting WV and Ky, Hillary has 309 pretty well assured. I find Obama with less than 200, giving him every benefit of doubt. I can only see, at this time, the Dems win with Hillary and lose with Obama as their nominee.
May 20th, 2008 at 8:41 pmOT:
May 20th, 2008 at 8:43 pmObama needs less than 100 super delegates/delegates to reach the 2026 mark to win the nomination according to the rules as of now. Anyone know what happens when he reaches this? We know the Clinton’s are trying to change the rules for their benefit…. to now add FL and Mich.
Sure lylepink, but Obama won’t be running against Hillary and today he got 4 times more votes than McCain did.
May 20th, 2008 at 8:48 pmCould someone please throw TPW a bone on this one. They continue to struggle with the “no comments” comment. Come on help the freak out.
May 20th, 2008 at 8:58 pmOK, TP, explain why my comment is “awaiting moderation”!!
May 20th, 2008 at 8:59 pmAnd, explain why my complaint is also “awaiting moderation”!!
I’m going to try to post my comment again.
lylepink, your a*a*lysis is based on some questionable premises: 1) that a Democratic Primary is comparable to a general election, 2) that the Democratic Party would win Kentucky or West Virginia or similar states under either Obama or Clinton in the general election, 3) that John McCain is going to be able to hold together the Republican voters, 4) that John McCain is not going to look like an absolute fool during the debates and the campaign in general
May 20th, 2008 at 9:01 pmTP, you’ve got to fix your moderation template if I can’t use the word “psychoa*alysis” without the “psycho” and the “*” substitution for “n” .
May 20th, 2008 at 9:03 pmFlavor-2008, I am missing the allying part. Please explain
May 20th, 2008 at 9:06 pmFlavor-2008,
May 20th, 2008 at 9:11 pmWhat is their agenda?
Flavor-2008,
May 20th, 2008 at 9:14 pmDoesn’t this make you wonder?
http://questionscritiques.free.fr/ edito/ Independent/ Robert_Fisk/ Bush_Baker.jpg
lylepink
It appears the more Obama becomes known, the more popular he becomes. The loses in the south are and have been expected as we know there are a bunch of uneducated weird racists in that region. Those states carry republican so they do not matter.
I know for a fact these people in Portland OR, 75,000 of them, majority from the white race did not stand in line for 2 hours because they had nothing to do.
Hillary is not playing a fair game - is changing the rules, lying, using the race card, smearing… I have not seen that from Obama and could be one of the reasons he is way ahead.
May 20th, 2008 at 9:17 pmWhen McCain wasn’t so concerned with being aligned with Bush, he thought Baker was a smart guy (forget that Baker participated in getting Bush into the white house) - now that McCain has given up all traces of integrity and ethics, not to mention consistency and honesty, he has parroted Bush, and daily proves that McCain in the white house will be another term of Bush.
May 20th, 2008 at 9:17 pmFlavor-2008 Says:
————————————————————
dbadass,
My point is why is Think Progress holding James Baker in high regard?
——–
May 20th, 2008 at 9:20 pmI am not sure I saw high regard so much as hypocrisy and absurdity.
I guess we know who just dropped off the Christmas card list.
PEACE
May 20th, 2008 at 9:36 pmSo Flavor-2008 is “concern”. I thought 2008 was a$$hole.
May 20th, 2008 at 9:36 pmNah, They’ll just send the “Happy Holidays” card. It is sort of like the horsehead in the bed. A message must be sent
May 20th, 2008 at 9:38 pmRonald Reagan gave advanced weaponry to the Ayatollah and Chimpy’s grandpa-pa admired and did business with the Nazis whose rapacity his grandson affects to warn us about. Baker is the consigliere of the Bush crime family and even he understands that a conversation needs to happen before the birds are flown. The planet is not a smoking sphere of charcoal in large part because a special little phone exists in the Oval office and whatever it’s counterpart in the Kremlin. ‘Nuff said.
May 20th, 2008 at 10:30 pmCome on Flav, That’s just beyond weak
May 20th, 2008 at 10:44 pmhad enough: I am talking about Ky., WV, Ohio, and Pa.. These are states Dems must win in November to take back The White House. Check past elections and you will find, for the most part, how these states vote in the GE pretty well goes with the winner, and to lose even one of them could mean the Dems would lose. You have to spend a little time to figure it out but it is easy to understand, once you get into reasons given for voting and it usually boils down to the “Economy”.
May 20th, 2008 at 10:55 pmlylepink. people like you keep trying to win the last election, it’s like fighting the last war. This election will be different than any in recent history because it isn’t only old white people who will go out to vote. The only way Republicans can win will be to steal it and they’re trying to do that.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:08 pmDon’t couch it- you’re right, “in your view” or not.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:14 pmSo now Trajan thinks that quoting someone is equivalent to “support”? It demonstrates “high regard” to simply quote someone, according to Twajie?
Sheesh. No wonder he’s got no visitors to his lame site.
May 20th, 2008 at 11:43 pmFlavor-2008 Says:
marlow,
May 20th, 2008 at 11:46 pmYou admit that Bakeris a criminal. SO Think Progress supports criminals!
Wow.
Shayne: History is a great teacher. For instance, no Dem has been elected POTUS without winning WV since 1916. Look at 2000, Gore would have won if he had carried WV. These are only little odd things that most folks do not even think about, yet how true they are is not in dispute. I went back to June 2007 and found my estimate on the EC map and found only two states [out of 22 going Dem] I had not predicted either way was Ky. and WV. now they go Dem only if Hillary is the nominee. The Caucus states are easy to predict in the GE because they usually go “D” or “R”, and not many could be considered “Swing States”.
May 21st, 2008 at 12:27 amlylepink,
Once Obama is nominated and the debates begin, the contest will be a cake walk for Obama. Especially if the debates do not have a MSM moderator as I heard mentioned.
Why is it Rush started op chaos sending his ilk to vote for Hillary so McCain might run against her instead of Obama? Does Hillary have a false edge because of these votes? Why do the republicans want to run against her?
Polls are taken by land line phones, where many of the Obama supporters use cell phones only. I question the reliability of the polls.
Yes, this election is about the economy and it was Bill Clinton, with Hillary in agreement until it became an election issue, that signed NAFTA which helped our jobs go over seas.
May 21st, 2008 at 12:57 amvideo removed, mirror?
May 21st, 2008 at 1:29 amhad enough: Early in January I discovered the Repub strategy to support Obama in their all out effort to stop Hillary at any cost/price, and this included giving money to the Obama campaign, voting for him in the X-Over states and changing their Registration to vote for him in the closed Primaries. Their reason for this was Hillary was the only Dem they thought/KNEW they could not beat in the GE. I Posted this info on several Blogs and how it has been highly successful. The Rush “Chaos” deal was a Joke after most of the damage was done and had very little effect. I am pretty sure the Repub vote for him was approximately 25% of Repubs that will go back and vote for McCain in November as they planned.
May 21st, 2008 at 3:05 am> For instance, no Dem has been elected POTUS without winning > WV since 1916.
also, for instance, no black has received the nomination for a major party in america since….well..uhm…
if you think history is such a perfect guide, you got any stock tips for us? oh, and while your at it, maybe you can explain how you know rush’s “operation choas” was a joke?
inside info perphaps?
hilary is done. buy a commemorative art plate of her and get over it.
May 21st, 2008 at 4:55 amA few things. One, there is a difference between dealing with Iran and Syria and dealing with groups like Hamas. Even Obama suggests he would not speak with the latter, and I think Hamas clearly fits into the Bush speech, which said, “Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along.” The more I read that, the more I think it was geared towards Jimmy Carter’s meeting with Hamas, though I cannot be sure.
However, even if we are talking about states - which Baker has always been for, looking at his history in politics and his work on the Iraq Study Group - I don’t think it’s a question of negotiating, but rather negotiating with(out) preconditions. The degree to which you deal with Syria and Iran can be seen through Bush/McCain, Clinton and Obama, as if on a spectrum. Bush doesn’t want to meet with the leadership, but they do hold contacts at a lower level; Clinton wants negotiations, but not without preconditions; and Obama answered affirmatively the question of whether he would meet those leaders without preconditions.
I say all this to make two points: one, if Bush’s remarks are aimed at Carter and Hamas, then there is no point in bringing in Baker, who I am most certain would oppose negotiating with Hamas. Two, even when talking about states, there is a difference between Baker’s position, which if you read the Iraq Study Group report indicates preconditions, versus Obama’s position. Right now, Baker is more in the Hillary Clinton area of the spectrum of views.
May 21st, 2008 at 5:25 amsome items hilary supporters should buy to cheer themselves up
500$ cornflake that resembles hilary:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ Kelloggs-Frosted-Flake-Look-Alike-HILLARY-CLINTON_W0QQitemZ180243020894QQihZ008QQcategoryZ1467QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
picture of hilary on harley (great for D#kes on B#kes)
http://cgi.ebay.com/ Hillary-Bill-Clinton-Painting-Art-Jim-Harrington-RARE_W0QQitemZ110250529345QQihZ001QQcategoryZ551QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
hilary clinton coffee mug:
May 21st, 2008 at 6:04 amhttp://cgi.ebay.com/ Hilary-Rodham-Clinton-Coffee-Mug_W0QQitemZ150248443157QQihZ005QQcategoryZ14899QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Chocolate Jesus: I think you are deliberately trying to distort what I am, and have been saying all along. Nothing in Politics is ” A SURE THING”. The information I came across in January has been proven to be amazingly ACCURATE. The Repubs felt Obama was the weakeast of the viable Dems, Hillary the strongest, and it is only “common sense” to want to run against the opponent who you consider the weakest. BTW, I agreed with them and still do.
May 21st, 2008 at 8:32 amScowcroft isn’t that smart or he doesn’t mind working to subvert our politcal system to Sun Myung Moon’s grand scheme front group, The Universal Peace Federation. Scowcroft and Bush 41 just spoke at a gathering of Moon’s “bring the Kingdom of Moon” front a couple weeks ago.
The media ignored this of course.
This will explain:
May 21st, 2008 at 1:56 pmhttp://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/5/6/6440/76200
http://thenonsequitur.com/?p=674
May 21st, 2008 at 9:18 pm