Henry Kissinger: High Level Negotiations with Iran

[RiquinhoNojento]

Why he is not in jail?

[vlad1915]

another jewish war criminal, he fled before they gassed him

[CytherLynx]

shhhh people, i can't hear satan speak.

[kornboy3]

suck face 

[irishgeal1]

look in all there evil eyes and there false smiling faces, this has got to be one of the sickest bunch to get together on a public forum, but then agin, cnn= cia= kissingers attack dog.

[justicepartyuk]

Attack on Iran will lead Americ & Russia to world war 3 in Iraq. click justice party UK. to find greatest news.

[NatanelYaHu]

Did you see the looks of sheer bordem come over the other poeples faces. I Though some of them where going to die. Old retared man. But still dangerous.

[johnnywires3]

this is the malaka who destroyed cyprus.and was the reason to split the island.this is the pezevengi that is the reason for many deaths on that island.if there is a hell i hope he gets the vip room there with a pork chop up his arse and in his gob.god i hope he dies soon.gamo tin ratsa tou.

[johnnywires3]

kissinger, what he did to cyprus is unforgivable many cypriots losing their lives for this pricks policies.madeline albright fled the nazis and was taken care at the age of 9 by a serbian family only for her to come years later and bomb them and take kosovo a very imprtant place for serbs and give it to albanians.if there is a hell these people will go there when they die and i hope that is soon.

[twisted45]

i see two bilderberg CFR and trilateral commission on that stage

[mymojorisin]

The American Media is a lap dog for the American Oligarchy that rules with an iron fist. Henry Kissinger is a member of that Oligarchy. He is a War Criminal and as history has shown he screwed up the Vietnam War (See the Trial of Henry Kissinger) and caused the death of millions all over the world. He should not be trusted for anything.

[mashaallah58]

نو روز را به تمامی دست اندر کاران گرامی عقاب ایران بدین وسیله تبریک میگویم.

[Aleowiciuos]

People still listen to this war criminal?

[Reqrezentin]

@Aleowiciuos

He's one of the most intelligent foreign policy makers of our times.

[johnnywires3]

@Reqrezentin you must be fucking joking.the guy should be hung for war crimes.

[ZDWmiamicane]

I didn't vote for President Obama but I hope he does a good job. We should all want our leaders to do a good job; if we vote for them or not. If Bush surrounded himself with smart me like Dr. Henry Alfred Kissinger; he would have been more successful as a leader.

[burlearth]

The preconditions that Condi et al. wanted was that Iran cease any nuclear activity before they talk which is a totally stupid stance to take & a non-starter for negotiations with any nation never mind Iran. The Bush admin are not diplomats, they aren't even politicians but they are stupid & criminal.

[JNStMarks]

He endorses McCain...Vote Obama a true constitutionalists who wants American independence, jobs here, not over seas, no more NAFTA, North American Union, or New World Order. Be scared, be very scared of this UN take over....Vote OBAMA! Free this country from the suppression of being the worlds military state.

[ZomgZintos]

Obama a constitutionalist? LOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOL­LOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOL­LOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOL­LOLLOL

[Pher0cious]

@ZomgZintos

obama has never even read the constitution lawlawlawlawl

[StevieLeeRachel]

"i'm in favour of negotiating with Iran" why dont u just get the president of iran 2 come 2 talk 2 hte american peopel with a translator? or why don't you just check out his website. See his perspective. Then bring him over once we understand and talk things over LIVE on TV to the american public. have an honest debate. FUCK CNN.

[eatfastnoodle]

Talk probably won't produce any real result in the near term. Because there is fundamental divergence of national interest, and both sides are still thinking they can get a better deal from the other side. There is no way any agreement can be reached before both sides realize they HAVE TO compromise for their OWN interest. (The great rapprochement between China and US happened because both sides needed to make strategic amendment for their own interests, so far, the same condition doesn't exist

[eatfastnoodle]

between US and Iran. Although I detest the conservative's ludicrous assumption that not talking to the other side is somehow some kind of punishment. It's so friggin high school. This international politics for crying out loud,it's not petty popularity contests among cheerleaders. Those "patriots" and their constituency really don't belong to the adult world.

[Anonologist]

When the USA and Israel leave empty chairs at the UN whenever a leader they don't like speaks, it is simply childish and doesn't help anything. In fact, the kind of behavior they exhibit shows they want conflict.

Kissinger has always been a criminal liar.

Obama is correct. He has his terms (which doesn't mean every leader must agree up front or be ignored) and he is quite capable.

Neonuts should stop giving orders to President Obama and expecting him to jump like Bush jr.

[Rooman33]

I agree that leaving when leaders they don't like speak seems childish. However, THIS video and THIS debate are about Kissinger and Obama's misquote of him.

We could debate prenegotiation, but it's hard to do with this character limit :(

The point is that Obama was wrong on Kissinger, and McCain and Kissinger DO SUPPORT talks with iran at the secretary of state level or lower (which is what the secretary of state position is for...)

[Anonologist]

I can only suggest that Mr. Kissinger take time off from representing criminals exploiting the American people and try to get an appointment with President Obama to discuss the issue. Sometime after Jan. 20 would be fine. ;)

[USMCJew]

fuck you

[tardfinger]

McCain mocked Obama for suggesting he would sit down and talk to Iran without precondition. Kissinger says he would sit down without precondition. When Obama says he will sit down with Iran he means his administration, not necessarily him personally. But this is mostly a game of semantics.

The question is, should we have diplomacy with Iran? Kissinger and Obama say yes. McCain says no - just sings "Bomb, bomb, bomb... bomb, bomb Iran. McCain is naive and dangerous - he only knows war!

[Rooman33]

That's just false. McCain explicitly said, in the debate that he supports diplomacy with Iran, just not at the presidential level without preconditions. Obama was not asked if he supported general diplomacy, he was asked if he supported his earlier stance that he, as PRESIDENT would meet with Iran without preconditions and he said in this debate, as he has said in other debates, that he would and Kissinger nor McCain support that stance. There's no backing out of this, Obama was wrong.

[Anonologist]

Obama is quite capable. McCain is an erratic mess.

Kissinger and McCain fibbed later about what you can hear Kissinger saying here and elsewhere.

Obama was very clear about what he meant and he is right. One of the problems is the lunkheaded view that "we can't talk to anyone who doesn't obey us." That's Bush idiocy. Time to move away from that useless stance. It does not serve us well in the world at all.

[Rooman33]

No. The McCain/ Kissinger stance is that the PRESIDENT ought not speak to the leader of Iran without preconditions. The PRESIDENT. Our secretary of state currently is already talking to Iran, and McCain and Kissinger both say they would encourage a continuation of that. This is what Kissinger is saying here. What Obama has said, and said in the first debate, was that HE, himself, as PRESIDENT, would meet without preconditions. That's dangerous and foolish. It legitimizes dangerous people.

[Rooman33]

No. No. No. This is emperically, factually, objectively false.  McCain said, Kissinger "said that there could be secretary-level and lower level meetings. I'VE ALWAYS ENCOURAGED THEM. The Iranians have met with Ambassador Crocker in Baghdad." We're already meeting with Iran at the administration level, and McCain has explicitly said he support this. Obama was asked in several debates if he, as PRESIDENT, would meet directly with Iran and others without preconditions, he said "Yes."

[Rooman33]

He said in this clip, "I PREFER WE DO IT AT THE SECRETARY OF STATE LEVEL." In case that wasn't clear enough for you:

youtube search: "Kissinger: I don't support PRESIDENTIAL negotiation with Iran without precondition"

Obama was WRONG. Kissinger does not support the PRESDENT meeting without prenegotiations. Both Kissinger AND McCain support meeting at lower levels without preconditions. There's not even a leg to stand on for the Obama camp here.

[Pwells1]

Obama never said anything about Presidential appointments. He made this clear in ALL THREE DEBATES. In case that wasn't clear enough for YOU.

Obama supported HIGH RANKING OFFICIALS, ie SECRETARY OF STATE, meeting WITHOUT PRECONDITIONS. Obama said in the first debate that Kissinger agreed with this. He was right.

McCain always tried to misrepresent what Obama said. But Obama NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THE PRESIDENTIAL LEVEL. Jees. It's the McCainites that don't have a leg to stand on.

[Rooman33]

No, false. He was explicitly asked in the CNN youtube debate if HE would meet, without prenegotiations. He said, "I would." He didn't say "I would send in high level officials." He said, "I would." If these reply boxes would let us post links, I'd hyperlink you to the clip where he explicitly said that HE would talk with those rogue leaders without prenegotiations.

[kalidyne]

I didn't hear Dr. K say Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran either.

[MVX12]

kissinger should support obama

[Rooman33]

Neither Kissinger nor McCain ever lied. Kissinger said he doesn't support the idea of a PRESIDENT meeting with Iran without preconditions. He never once, in this clip or any other, said he supports the president doing this. McCain pointed this out and he was correct. McCain said he also supports negotiations at the sec. of state level and his record shows that he does. We're already negotiating at this level. Obama micharactarized Kissinger's position and this clip proves just that.

[louis4louis]

Kissenger probably doesnt know what YouTube is all about, that you can be caught red-faced if you start flip-floping. Times have changed old man. Why did he try to blatantly deny he ever said that, and there he sat comfortably expressing his agreement to high level deplomatic talks with Iran.

[Rooman33]

Neither Kissinger nor McCain ever lied. Kissinger said he doesn't support the idea of a PRESIDENT meeting with Iran without preconditions. He never once, in this clip or any other, said he supports the president doing this. McCain pointed this out and he was correct. McCain said he also supports negotiations at the sec. of state level and his record shows that he does. We're already negotiating at this level. Obama micharactarized Kissinger's position and this clip proves just that.

[finefilth]

notice the pyramids in the background

[bonoix]

Kissinger is a longtime partisan Republican and he can backtrack all he wants to try and make McCain sound credible, but the bottom line is Obama was and is right that you don't just close the door on countries you don't like and then think that somehow they are going to do the right thing and miraculously turn into allies as some point.

[brillur]

Yes, it is ambiguous, but the question to him was "high level right out of the box?" to which he responded "Initially, yes". To me, that sounds like no or minimal preconditions.

[SickofApathy]

Kissinger also never said anything about preconditions - "tell the other side what you have in mind and what the outcome you are trying to achieve" sounds more like an agenda for the meeting. Something like "preparation" for the meeting. Obama said he would meet with - After lower level talks and after preparation. McCain addressed almost the entire debate with broad stroke political rhetoric. Obama did a better job in drilling down to specifics, which McCain repeatedly ignored.

[panthdeblack]

While Kissinger did say "high level" he never said without preconditions. I think in another portion of the discussion he agreed to the "without preconditions" without saying the word. I think his intent was with preconditions even thought it was never explicityly stated. Him backing Mccain is nothing but a political move. He probably purposefully left room for misinterpretation for that very reason.

[GlenQuagmireGiggity]

Lol, McCain has major egg on his face now....Ahh yes, the internet saves the day. McCain lied, and Obama was right (kind of a recurring theme)

[joecroz]

Regardless of what Kissinger has said in public or to McCain, I think John McCain has made it obvious that he is not in favor of diplomatic meetings with hostile nations.

I'm sure he'll back track on this issue though, just as he has his entire political career. The man has made a career out of flip flopping and pandering.

[ValleyOfBowser]

There's the proof, Mccain supporters. Your candidate is a lying sack of shit. What now, bitches?

[Rooman33]

He says in this clip, "I prefer doing it at the secretary of state level." Kissinger has come out on CNN and FOX and said McCain was right, that he doesn't support the idea of a president meeting with Iran in his first term without preconditions. McCain was right, Obama was wrong.

[Barnicles10101]

Rooman33: Did you even watch the 1st Pres debate? Obama never stated that Kissinger said that he supported the idea of the president meeting with Iran without preconditions. All Obama said was Kissinger supported a meeting of the Administration without preconditions, and Obama went further and said that its up to the sitting presidents discretion to decide to meet the president of another nation if it means increased security to America. Obama was right, McCain was wrong.

[Rooman33]

Barnicles10101: Obama never explicitly said Kissinger supported the President neogotiating with Iran without preconditions. However, when McCain made mention of the fact that Obama was, however, misrepresenting Kissinger's stance, Obama did not concede the distinction. Obama was clearly misrepresenting Kissinger's point and Henry Kissinger has said as much since the debate. Message me if you would like a fuller dissection of the matter... or just look up any major network's factcheck.

[arkeif]

Obama did not say that the "President" should have talks. He said "we" should have talks. McCain responded with " the President". Kissinger did say talks at "high level". Someone is playing "word games". Obama gave some clarification. Though not a word for word quote, it seems he, Kissinger, and the other Sec's are of one accord...Based on watching the entire interview with the Secs.

[Rooman33]

Then you should rewatch the youtube debates and the last presidential debate. In the democratic youtube debate, Obama said that he as PRESIDENT, would meet with Iran without preconditions. The question in this last debate was if he stould by his stance. He said he did and that Kissinger agreed, and this is absolutely false. And McCain said he supported high-level talks, just not the president. Rewatch the debates before you post false propaganda ;)

[arkeif]

Thank's. My first statement is based on the Obama-MCain debate. I looked back at the Dem Debate and Obama does say the he have talks. But like I also wrote...Obama gave some clarification. Though not a word for word quote, it seems he, Kissinger, and the other Sec's are of one accord...Based on watching the ENTIRE interview with the Secs. I would need clarification on "pre-conditions", "preparation" and "high level" to diffuse the "word games". McCain needs to clarify "pre-conditions".

[Rooman33]

Fair enough. There is a level of gray on the matter. But, to be fair, Kissinger has never once said that the PRESIDENT should meet with Iran without preconditions, not once. Obama, in 2 or 3 debates, has said just that. In the debate with McCain, he was specifically asked if he still supported the PRESIDENT meeting with Iran and he said yes, and said that Kissinger said the same thing in this ^ event. Which isn't true, and McCain correctly pointed that out.

[calicoe99]

Kissinger said he believes "the best way to BEGIN a negotiation is to state what you believe". That is without preconditions, but rather to meet at a high level initially to state exactly what you need.

Some of you who are saying the reverse really need to learn how to listen.

[comicnerd635]

McCain just got knocked in the shitter. The lying bastard.

[oneempowered]

He also said "at a high level" and, at another place in the interview, said "someone in the state department," but he isn't for the president sitting down to negotiate with them, thereby legitimizing the rogue leaders. He also didn't say that Ahmadinejad would be the one to negotiate with.

[oneempowered]

The title is misleading. He said he's in favor of high-negotiations and WITH preconditions, not without. He said we should tell them ahead of time what we hope to accomplish with the meetings (no nukes whatsoever)- that's preconditions.

[DoctorOreos]

McCain is a Liar, I just watched the Interview, granted...I missed the live event, but watching the re-runs, OMG. Youtube has just proven McCain is a liar despite knowing Kissinger for 35 yrs,

[stylesd02]

HA HA another McCain lie. 35 years of friendship indeed!

[Insolvency]

liar "I give up"

[Insolvency]

lair "hehe"

[Insolvency]

Mccain is a ligher "HIGH LEVEL"

[billmusicdotnet]

Seriously,McCain is so full of it when he talks. Kissinger is in favor of negotiations, didn't say anything about having preconditions, says he wants it at a high level. 35 years of friendship, doesn't mean anything if you aren't listening.

[disprefer]

Surprise, Kissinger in favor of talks at the Secretary of State level with no preconditions. I am deeply worried that McCain will win this election and we'll have a President with no idea what's going on around him.