Feel free to ignore Iran, they will get their nukes and then you really can’t do anything. Good luck with it.

A brilliant man ones said “If you want to make peace, you don’t talk to your friends. You talk to your enemies.” Wonder when the pricks nowadays going to learn this.

There seems to be a pattern to human history. We’ve been around as a species for some two million years. And for 99% of that time we helped each other out, and were able, against all odds, to survive yet another day.

Some 10,000 years ago we decided to get “civilized,” by establishing small towns and villages, and by growing our own food. Suddenly, instead of hunting and gathering, we could store food. And just as suddenly, arose the urge to kill and steal, so that we could easily take what wasn’t ours. Ironically, with the advent of “civilization,” we stopped acting “civil” with one another.

For most of the last 2000 years, mostly everyone was pretty poor, except for a few royals here and there, and the population was pretty small.

In the last 200 years, with the advent of the Industrial Revolution, a great deal of wealth was created, particularly in the West, and the population shot way up, to over six billion today.

And finally, in the last 20 years, the phenomenon of globalization came about, in which the technology is now here to allow for a global economy, in which rich and poor nations can partner together to improve the lot of all people around the world, by giving them a place at the table, a stake in their future.

So the question arises: Which way will we go as a species? Will we in fact come together technologically, economically, and ideologically, to usher in an age of peace, prosperity, and freedom for all? Or will we instead allow our technology to be used for war, with the resulting death, destruction, and despair, that are part and parcel of the folly of war?

The answer is in our hands, and everything we know and love hangs in the balance.

However, as good as people are, their leaders don’t always have their best interests in mind. Many leaders are contantly balancing what is in their own personal best interest, and what is in the best interest of the people.

You bring up a good example. I don’t for a second believe that the Iranian leadership cares even a little bit about the welfare of the Palestinian people. It they did, this problem would have been solved equitably long ago. Insead, no matter what they say, the Iranian leaders use the Palestinian issue to stir up passions at home and abroad. It’s a handy cause to rally the troops. And if things begin to improve even slightly for Palestinians, there are leaders out there who will not hesitate to stir up trouble again, just so that they could once again have something to complain about, something which diverts attention away from problems back home, and which gives people someone to blame for their troubles.

This is a sad reality, but it is reality nontheless. Peace will come when the goodness of everyday people will be implanted in the hearts of leaders, who will truly become motivated to promote the welfare of their people, and of others around the world. The disconnect between goodhearted people and their leaders is a major obstacle to peace. Leaders around the world will have to learn how to get over themselves, and beyond their differences, in order to usher in an age of peace.

All that is true. But honestly, do you mean to tell me that for seven years there has been absolutely no opportunity to undertake some of the groundwork, and to meet some of the preconditions that you so rightly speak of?

Of course there was. But the reason we haven’t been talking to Iran, on a Presidential level, at least, is not that we didn’t have the opportunity to prepare adequately, but that we intentionally chose not to talk. In other words, the Bush administration, at least with respect to a specific set of adversaries, has come to conlusion that an unwillingness to talk gives them an advantage of sorts, perhaps keeps the enemy guessing, or shows to the world that we’re somehow above speaking to people we don’t care for.

And actually, there may be some logic in this type of approach. But on balance, I think it is misguided. So, go ahead and prepare. Go ahead and do some of the preliminary work with state department officials. But sooner than later, sit down with your enemy, and present your case focefully. Don’t mince words. But show that you are willing to talk, and that you are willing to cut a deal, but that you will not be pushed around, and that you will not be taken advantage of. If you do this, your adversary will not likely take advantage, or draw the wrong conclusions, but you may end up benefiting from worldwide support, and from the support of the citizenry of your enemy.