"So I would like to ask the Mormon side of you a question ;). Do mormons believe in the second coming of Christ? And if so does it follow our understanding with the tribulation and all that?

Also, another question, not mormon related. I was reading through Isiah and When God is talking he would use the word perhaps like he didnt know whether Isreal would turn from its wicked ways or not. What was the purpose for using such uncertainty? Was He really so unsure or was he just trying to make a point?"

I can always count on you for thoughtful questions!

     First, on the question of Mormon eschatology (the study of the "last things").  According to their 10th Article of Faith, they put themselves on the record as believing the following:

We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.

But the details as to how this second advent will be completed remains to be seen.  I am aware that Mormons reject the notion of a rapture of the church and an official 7-year tribulation as is seen in millennialist circles in Christian orthodoxy.  Mormons do believe themselves to be part of the "kinship" of Israel and are (for most of them) allegedly descendants of the tribe of Manasseh or Ephraim.  This is due to the continuity Mormons have attempted to construct between ancient Israel and the population found in North America that is allegedly the subject of the Book of Mormon.  There is also some indication from the Doctrine & Covenants that this is their eschatology:

12. Q. What are we to understand by the sounding of the trumpets, mentioned in the 8th chapter of Revelation?
  A. We are to understand that as God made the world in six days, and on the seventh day he finished his work, and sanctified it, and also formed man out of the dust of the earth, even so, in the beginning of the seventh thousand years will the Lord God sanctify the earth, and complete the salvation of man, and judge all things, and shall redeem all things, except that which he hath not put into his power, when he shall have sealed all things, unto the end of all things; and the sounding of the trumpets of the seven angels are the preparing and finishing of his work, in the beginning of the seventh thousand years—the preparing of the way before the time of his coming.

13 Q. When are the things to be accomplished, which are written in the 9th chapter of Revelation? A. They are to be accomplished after the opening of the seventh seal, before the coming of Christ (77:12-13).

      Secondly, let's deal with your question about Isaiah's references to God's "uncertainty." It's important to recall that the Bible was written by men and women who encountered the living God and attempted to recast their stories into narrative form so as to record those events of history and to afford the people of Israel an explanation of how God works in their lives (Exodus 34:27). The accounts recorded in Isaiah (and the other books of the Prophets and the Pentateuch) are done by prophets who are storytellers and not professional biographers.  When they want to convey the drama of a certain situation (say, that God is wrestling with the sin of a nation) then the storyteller may express these concepts by putting them on the lips of God.  The Bible isn't a piece of dictation in every case (ipsissima verba), it's based on what theologians call the ipsissima vox - that the very words of God are not necessarily given but are faithfully either paraphrased or encapsulated in those passages so that we hear the "voice" of God through those writings.  This also pertains to those passages where God is said to "repent" of His decisions too:

An alternative route has been taken up by some contemporary Christian philosophers of religion. these thinkers believe that God truly is ignorant of things to come and so one can affirm a doctrine of universal ipsissima verba for the Bible in those cases.  This view is known as open theism.  Open theism redefines the omniscience of God (His being "all-knowing") as limited to the past and present.  The rationale is that the future contains states of affairs that do not exist and so would not constitute knowledge for anyone to access (as long as one denies divine timelessness and embraces the idea that God is Himself in time).  The problem with open theism is that it must think that certain statements that we consider to be true cannot in fact be true!  Take the following for example:

If I win the lottery, then I will upgrade the vehicles that I own.

Now for me, this statement is true.  However, open theists have to deny statements like these as true since they seek to ground such statements in concrete states of affairs that presently exist.  But I can think of no reason to think that these conditional statements are not true - it is certainly true for me and that spells trouble to the open theist's paradigm. And given that the traditional definition of omniscience is that one is omniscient if and only if that being believes all true propositions and does not believe the false ones, then such conditional statements must be known by God.  But the implication here is that if such statements are known by God, then things such as

If I create Judas Iscariot and place him in the circle of Jesus' disciples, then he will betray Jesus

would be true! So God, in effect, would know the future through a series of such conditional propositions as these (if by no other means).  A colleague of mine (who, sadly, has left Vegas here to pursue research for Notre Dame University - Dr. Alan Rhoda) is a budding philosopher in the field who has devoted some time defending open theism in professional journals.  He attempts to take up this challenge and respond to the criticism briefly noted here (you can see an example of his work by clicking here).