In regards to Obama on Iran: The problem is that his explaination of how serious a threat Iran is comes after the original statement. I believe Iran is a serious threat in any respect, even compared to what the USSR posed, it may not be quite at the same level but even on that scale it is a serious threat. His clarification of the comment came out after the fact and while it does illustrate that he is a good politician it doesn't erase the mistake, at least for me it doesn't. So we may have to agree to disagree on this one as you've said. I've tended to trust a politician's first position and ignore their second, third, etc....it seems far more accurate to what they actually do in office. The same is true of McCain's "the economy is strong" statement, so it's a principle I apply equally. Although in fairness I agreed with McCain's slipup, I just think it was a very stupid thing to say in the situation.
On the definition I think one of us has a logical wire crossed =P My definition includes yours (ie preconditions as demands/concessions), showing that the word is used the way you say it is would be consistent with both definitions and thus isn't really helpful. You seem to be thinking of this in terms of a multiple definition, but I've been thinking of it as more of debate over the scope of the single definition.
On the issue of how the preliminary talks are viewed I don't think a reasonable comparison would be parking the car when going to the mall, one is decidedly more trivial to my view....Although on second thought perhaps a few more specifics are needed here. While I would probably be willing to agree that a preliminary meeting to decide the location, number/type of attendees, etc...of a meeting is procedural I honestly cannot consider a meeting where any actual negotiations take place to be so trivial as to be understood implicitly. The problem I have is this...what is the goal of those lower level meetings? And if they have a goal how can they be considered trivial? Are they to hammer out an agreement in principle? These are things that to me fall well beyond simply a technical definition of a precondition and should logically be included in a reasoned definition.
The problem is that something has to be accomplished in these meetings(right?) in order for them to be escalated to the presidential level, and if that is the case I would say I fundamentally believe they are preconditions and thus would substantiate my point. On the other hand if we assume they are as trivial as you say (ie parking the car) then we are in a situation where they carry no importance and I would have a very serious, and I believe legitimate, problem with the president negotiating with a country like Iran with only a trivial preliminary meeting.
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
