Any summit between Obama and Ahmadinejad would be a repeat of the Kennedy-Khrushchev Summit. Scott Johnson had a good piece on this in The Daily Standard:

The Kennedy-Khrushchev Conference for Dummies

If Obama goes in there without a firm and realistic agenda, Ahmadinejad is going to perceive him as weak and inexperienced and treat him as such - the same way that Khrushchev manhandled Kennedy in Vienna. Obama will then be forced to prove that he is strong and escalate the confrontation and provoke a greater crisis as Kennedy did or he will have to turn passive and become another Jimmy Carter. Given that he already seems committed on reducing the US presence in the region, I can't see him turning course and becoming another Kennedy, can you?

Only at postponing his impeachment hearing. The UN inspectors never returned to Iraq for the remainder of his Presidency, which was the stated reason for the attacks in the first place.

__________________
Has there ever been a presidential nominee with a wider gap between his estimation of himself and the sum total of his lifetime achievements?
Charles Krauthammer

History Lesson: Obama's Iraq Documentary

The Weekly Standard is a Neocon propaganda rag, and it's editorrs should be taken to task for their lies.

I don't even think he needs a meeting with Obama to come to that conclusion. He probably already has.

__________________
Has there ever been a presidential nominee with a wider gap between his estimation of himself and the sum total of his lifetime achievements?
Charles Krauthammer

History Lesson: Obama's Iraq Documentary

Ahmadinejad has talked about wiping Israel off the map... what are they supposed to do? Write it off as rhetoric? Israel can't afford to wait until it's clear that Iran has a nuclear weapon - if the US loses it's resolve to deal from a position of strength, Israel's choices are stark: either Iran desists in it's nuclear program or Israel has to act.

There is no way this is a one on one fight. Just as GHWBush got a coalition to deal with Saddam in Kuwait, Obama would need to (and is smart enough to) get backing from other sources to be there with any Iranian talks. This is in no way monolithic because the real issue is getting the Israelis to the table just as much as the Iranians. That is just one part of this, there are other factors too.

All the more reason not to reinforce the perception.

I thought Obama was in favour of unconditional one-on-one talks with Iran?

Any attack by Iran on Israel intending to destroy the nation is suicide, period.

Ahmadinijad's actual words were interpreted incorrectly.

Hate the game, not the player... judge the article on it's own merits.