Obama’s Iran Trap

Good post, Larry. Thanks for this viewpoint. I dislike Obama thoroughly, but I would yield to your opinion on this. It’s better for now for him to maintain his silence rather than to mouth off and make things worse.

“Better to remain silent and have people think that you’re a fool, than to open your mouth and prove them right.”

“For now, Barack, keep doing what you are doing. Speak softly on this and do the real work behind the scenes.”

Are you sure he is doing the latter or is he concerned Ahamdinejad would get evidence of that and use it against him when they have high tea?

What happened to taking a stand on principal vs what’s politically expedient? “Oh, don’t say anything, the Mullah’s will blame the USA!”. Guess what? They’re already blaming us.

Funny though, it’s advocated that the USA should sit down and say nothing, yet we should somehow drop cell phones and blackberries to every Iranian under 30. What are you going to put on them? “Property of Canada”?

But I guess when the Mullah’s armies are mowing the protestors down and Mousavi goes dissappearing into the night and the Mullah’s consolidate power, we can proudly say as Americans that our country decided to do jack shit because we have a bad reputation among the hate-America-firsters in the world.

Yes, cell phones, Twitter and Youtube will do more to topple the Ayatollahs than Barack can ever do. How do you turn the youth in Iran onto the Ayatollahs once they have had Youtube and the Internet? I don’t think it is possible. The genie is out of the bottle. In the end the Ayatollahs can no more stop the change that is coming in Iran than Pat Robertson could stop it here. Human nature is universal.

I’m talking about doing things that will actually make a difference for the people of Iran. Making us feel good for our bullshit “stands on principal” are meaningless to someone facing the barrel of an AK-47.

If our moralizing from a distance would actually disarm the IRGC then I’d go for it. But that does not work.

Sorry, it’s going to take more than posting a video at YouTube to overthrow a government.

One the Mullah’s guards go to town on the protestors then what? Sanction Iran? Been there, done that. Upload another message to Twitter? Oh no! Not another round of sanctions by the UN! That’ll show the mullah’s who’s boss /snark

“Better to remain silent and have people think that you’re a fool, than to open your mouth and prove them right.”

Seems Obama does the latter quite a bit.

I think this is an issue of shades of gray. While you don’t want an American President doing a “tear down this” country, I think Obama’s approach has not been good enough.

First he made a terrible mistake initially saying there was no difference between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad. Mousavi took exception to that and it showed Obama had no concept of history or the implications of what he said. On the surface there are some substantive differences between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad. But more important is that this is not about Mousavi and if this continues Mousavi could be the Boris Yeltsin or Gorbachev who were taken over by the actual events and popular sentiment.

Second, Obama just gave another classic teleprompter speech in Cairo where he layed down his Muslim creds. He could have gone a bit further than his tepid written statement. He could have given a statement over the air and making that concern about the rights of the people protesting more emotional than a bland statement.

Frankly I think he is completely overwhelmed by these events and is unresponsive to that 3:00 AM call as Hillary predicted.

The Soviet Empire fell without a shot being fired.

But I do think Obama could be doing a bit more with his pulpit than he has. It is almost as if he wants Ahmadinejad to prevail. He said the U.S. does not meddle in other country’s affairs. Tell that to Israel.

I think Obama could be a bit more emotional and do something televised in support of the safety and concern for the protestors rather than a bland written statement.

So what is your plan? Spell it out.

My thoughts exactly.

Frankly I think he is completely overwhelmed by these events and is unresponsive to that 3:00 AM call as Hillary predicted.

No argument from me on that! That’s why I supported HRC all along.

I’m just agreeing with Larry that maybe Obama should just stay out of it altogether for now. I do see your points, though. Strong leadership would be appreciated, but don’t look to BO for that.

Larry, you make valid points but I have a different perspective. If Obama can go around the world and bash America, then he should be able to make a pointed statement in support of standing up for human rights and freedom. Making a pointed statement does not constitute getting deeply involved. Plus, I believe the Iranian regime is going to find a way to blame the US for what’s going on regardless of what Obama says! I also think that the “gum flapping and marches in America” does make a difference and help lift the spirits of those who are protesting in Iran. It is always good to know when you have someone supporting you. I am also not ready to concede that Obama is doing real work behind the scenes.

Hell, to keep it real with you, the protesters in Iran are empowering me and I believe other Americans. I also think that this is a major concern of Obama and his adminstration. Didn’t we just go thru a primary in which the winner was SELECTED and wasn’t there many stories of voter fraud by ACORN during the election. The media shoved these stories and many very concerned Americans (such as myself) just let it go and whined about it. What did the Iranians do—-they defiantly protested! The brave protesters in Iran, I believe can possibly begin a firestorm of difeiant protest against the corrupt government and fraud in this country. This is exactly what the Administration DO NOT want!

In my opinion, His timid response is not coincidental or not because he is working vigorously behind the scenes.

However, I TOTALLY agree that McCain should sit down and be quiet. How can he sit up here and speak on supporting the protesters who want fairness and justice when McCain did not challenge the voter fraud allegations and concerns regarding Obama that happened right here in the US when he was a presidential candidate………how is he going to criticize Obama for not speaking tough enough about a situation going on in another country!??

In Obama’s case the less said the better in this particular situation.

But I’ve been watching our government at work for quite some time. I think it is naive to think the US government had no hand in this given our history in that region. A new administration doesn’t mean some of the same old policies aren’t being followed.

That said, I hope the Iranian people get the freedom they want.

I see no reason why the international community shouldn’t declare the regime in Tehran as illegitimate until free, fair and monitored elections take place. Merely symbolic? perhaps, but as illegitimate they should be deprived from chairing committees at the UN or other international bodies, as well as other sanctions as appropriate.

Didn’t we just go thru a primary in which the winner was SELECTED and wasn’t there many stories of voter fraud by ACORN during the election.

Yes, so how do we become the moral compass for fair elections around the world when we can’t take care of our own business? We need to be eating our own dog food before we go advertising around the world how good it tastes.

I would say speak forcefully _and_ work behind the scenes. Ultimately it will have come from the people of Iran, but I think they deserve all the moral and vocal support the US can muster.

It just seems contridictory. Speaking out forcefully empowers the anti-Americanism of the IRGC but yet “covert” ops will not empower the IRGC because somehow they’re too stupid to figure out the US working the back door. The IRGC is going to blame us for meddling no matter what. I’d rather have our government speaking forcefully and decisively for Iran independance from the Mullahs rather than playing this wishy washy game of “don’t speak to loud or you’ll upset the Mullahs”.

Or the other contrictory message is that somehow the Mullah’s will treat the opposition nicer if the US shuts up and stands down. I see no reason for that to be the case. The Mullah’s will be ruthless no matter what we do.

Mr. Johnson, do you think the US is angling to replace Khamenei with Montazeri? This would make a lot more sense than replacing Ahmedinejad with Mousavi.

Sadly, you are so correct!

” All our gun flapping and marching in protest in the United States may make us feel better but it is meaningless in Tehran”. Yes, Larry, you are right. If we can’t do good for the Iranian people, we can’t make it worst.

“Speak Forecefully?” What the hell does that mean? A severe scolding perhaps? You do not make threats you are not prepared to execute.

You are obviously very young and very inexperienced. What is really going to make a difference is the fracturing of the chain of command within the IRGC. You are behaving like a passenger on the Titanic who wants to write a stern letter to the White Star line. That approach gets you nothing.

In my opinion, His timid response is not coincidental or not because he is working vigorously behind the scenes.

I think Yeah Right has got to the heart of the matter. If you believe, as I do, that Obama is a sociopath and a frontman for the folks who bought the 2008 election. then what’s he’s doing makes perfect sense.

He has shown himself to be self-righteously adamant about everyone else’s rights when there is nothing to lose and utterly feckless when there is anything at stake.

For him to tacitly support an oppressive anti-democratic regime is absolutely in character. It would only surprise me if he were to actively support anything or anyone that doesn’t directly benefit him.

Interesting post and some wisdom shed on your part too, Mr. Johnson; however, where it would have been wise to refrain from mere rhetoric on Obama’s part initially, given the actual events unfolding, it may be fair to say Obama missed an opportunity demonstrate some quick thinking on his own two feet, where he could have reached out to China and Russia in an appeal to squeeze Iran from both sides.

You know I think there is a lot of garbage out there on Obama and his past…Im not really sure who has it and who will ever release it.
It would have been nice if the media would have researched Obama like they did the Clintons in the 90s, then the Bushs, and then Hillary, Palin, McCain in the last election.

Now the media is wondering why we know nothing and why Obama is not transparent like he promised.

Who said anything about making threats? I didn’t say that we should nuke them if they didn’t relinquish their government.

Perhaps you are right about me, but I knew the build up to the Iraq war was bullshit just based on common fucking sense. He was contained within a no fly zone for 10 years under harsh UN sanctions, yet he was on the verge of taking over the world?

How about if Obama showed as much passion for Iranians trying to rid themselves of the Mullah’s as he did when he was “outraged” over the killing of an abortion doctor.

Thanks, Larry.

I agree that the U.S. government should keep its mouth shut and not say or do anything publicly.

The minute Obama or anyone else in the administration does anything the U.S. becomes the problem, which I think the current regime desperately hopes for to divert attention from their current situation.

Right now the regime has only the BBC and CNN to rail against so they are trying to pretend they are arms of Britain and the U.S.

They’ll have to be satisfied with that unless the U.S. makes a misstep and becomes involved in some way.

BTW – I live near the Iranian station in Tarzana CA that beams into Iran.

The other day they proudly showed off a pen that records video picture and sound and has a cap that comes off to plug into a USB port. They said they were sending tens of thousands to Iran.
I’ve never seen that device sold here, and I think they’d need help getting them into Iran and I don’t know who is financing this station which has been running for awhile here.

To all the good folks behind this wherever you are: Thanks and good luck.

Obama did not make a mistake by saying the truth there is no difference between these to men, unfortunately some forces in the USA do not want to hear or even investigate that.

Why do we have to meddle at all? This is a sovereign state for god sakes, they have their government, their rules and traditions just as we have ours. Why do we always feels our way of life is the best and we need to impose it on everyone else?

These protesters are causing havoc in the street and yet on FOX they are saying the government is intimidating the people by using tear gas, and firing shots in the air to disperse the crowds oh please.

So exactly what should be done let 1000 youth come marching down the street, burning, and destroying whatever is in sight, encouraging others to do the same and we expect the Iranian government to do nothing? Where in the world do we honestly feel rowdy protest go unchecked by any government?

Obama is right to hold his hand but unfortunately there are forces out there that are feeding this flame, and once again these unseen forces are going to put the USA in the middle of this mess.

What the lightbringer cannot say something inspiring to both parties and get them to do the right thing? With all his ignorance of history, he should be right there chastising and disowning America and egging the protesters and the regime on to do the right thing — where did his idealism 0bots rave about go? He can’t say that he has ushered in a new American era and at the same time embrace American troubled history (wrt to Iran in the current context) defensively to support his inaction. After all he is above all that, he is GOD! He is a Muslim Messiah too when he wants to be. All that is not helping him now?!

“Yeah Right” (above) is right. He is afraid that we may learn a thing or two from Iranian protesters and stop him from stealing the next election.

I would like to ask a question exactly why is it that Americans so eagerly want someone to overthrow this Iranian government?

What about all the other people that supported and voter for Ahamdinejad do their votes not count in the eyes of America, or did he not get any votes at all?

What about all the Iranians that want their Muslim traditions and rules as they are, those that build their family around that kind of life style, are we now going to tell them they are wrong?

Millions of people live in Iran, yet we are going on what is said on twitter and Utube is that the yardstick we are going to use to say yep its time for a change in Iran?

Exactly what is it that we would like them to change?

SJ: we would like to change a government that is irrational and constantly issues stupid threats that could destroy the whole world.

Pay attention, or get out of the game.

hokma: it seems the U. S. government does not meddle in its own affairs. Had someone been minding the store, the economy would not be in the tank right now.

Last night I watched a special on NatGO call CIA CONFIDENTIAL I found it very interesting to see how the CIA ran things after 9/11 in the follow up to the war and during , It took a strong and decisive leader, right or wrong. I have no idea how Obama would handle anything? i.e Iran and Korea?

As the days have gone by since all this started, I did begin to get very worried for the protestors. I agree wholeheartedly with their attempt to be non-violent. To go after the Basij or the IRGC forces with weapons would be disastrous unless they had been trained and organized and well supplied. But then, it would be an obvious revolution funded and organized by group, most likely from out of the country.

We, in the West, cannot possible grasp how miserable their lives will be made when and if they are hunted down and punished for protesting too much.

This HAS to be a protest by people who are fed up with the brutality of the “dictator,” using their word. It’s what we all had hoped would have happened after Dessert Storm. It’s just very, very hard to accomplish a spontaneous uprising and be successful, when those in power have the weapons.

You’re absolutely right, the best “weapon” demonstrators everywhere have had recently is world opinion on their side. And they’ve gotten that best through video and real-time accounts that are available now as never before. The picture of the little naked girl running down the road crying during Vietnam or of the man on his knees being assassinated, the lone man facing down the cannon of a tank on Tianamen Square–the video of Neda and the photos that showed the great numbers of protestors: these will work little by little to weaken the dictators, which is why they work so hard to keep communication under control.

Study whatever images you can find of the lives of people in North Korea; they also need to be supplied with cell phones and cameras and computers.

It won’t happen as fast as we would like, I am very sad to say. But I will disagree on one thing: the protests and rallies outside Iran have shown how many, many people in many countries are upset with Ahmadinejad and Khamenei’s methods. Their “face,” as the Japanese students I once had would say, has been humiliated in some regard. That little rooster Ahmadinejad cannot strut so proudly claiming his “stable” country without others, even in Russian and China, and North Korea, and Venezuela, smirking a little or a lot, just as the students of Columbia laughed when he claimed there were no homosexuals in Iran.

The technology will enable the people to find ways to organize and keep the protest going. It is absolutely the best we can do.

I dislike Obama but have felt that his comments, other than the one about Mousavi being no different than Ahmadinejad, were fine. There was not more he could say without bringing back memories of our support of the Shah and our interference.

It just really, really galled me to have to hear any words of reproach coming from his hypocritical mouth in defense of fair elections and freedom of speech in the context of an election that was quite possible a selection.

Obama wants the Mullahs wants nutjob 13th Imam Ahmedinejad, he needs them to take out Israel and GE is going to built the peaceful nuclear plants which will help build bombs to do that, GE owns MSNBC which fawns over Obama, GE is getting the bulk of bogus cap and trade contracts. The Palestinians also do not want the freedom protesters of Iran to succeed, because they need President Whackjob, so they’ve been sabotaging the protesters.
Netanyahu is supporting the freedom protesters. Obama’s made deals with Ahm/Mullahs and Saudis , his goal is to keep Israel the focus and help maintain status quo totalitarian regimes.

Obama also stopped all funding for former Iranian democracy programs, zeroed it out.

He’s quiet and wishing the Mullahs would put down the protesters without any visible abuses, but he wants them put down nevertheless.

Obama? Democracy? LOLOLOL Just as the world is waking up to the evils of communism and totalitarianism, Obama is just warming up to destroy the USA WITH communism and totalitarianism. Even PUTIN is warning Obama of the evils of Marxism!

Is that right exactly how many government in the world do American feel they need to change, because there are many that don’t share the ideals of what America feels the world should be like?

This attitude also places Americans in the very lofty position of believing that the destruction of the world will not come from the hands of an American President, and that is something we don’t know do we?

The people who support him don’t count when they turn their eyes from the torture and illegal imprisonment without clear charges and without the right for council or visits from family. Or when they support home invasions, the beating of women whose hair falls out from their scarves, etc.

The people who support foisting their individual spiritual beleifs upon those who don’t hold the same beliefs has never counted. Remember that our own country was first settled by many people who resisted having to worship a certain way.

Suppose a really fundamentalist minister in America were running the country telling you who you could date or how you could date, what job you’re entitled to, what you can say or not say. Maybe you would like his opinions and want to follow them, but does that mean you should then be able to jail and torture people who believe differently?

Did you not hear the protesters asking for freedom?

God help us if you do think it’s o.k. to thrust people into a position of living a life according to someone else’s spiritual beliefs.

the U.S. doesnt meddle? then why did he send baiden to lebanon 2 weeks ago for their elections. hes a hypocrate and a crook. the ONE smells more like #2 everyday.

the U.S. doesnt meddle? then why did he send biden to lebanon 2 weeks ago for their elections. hes a hypocrate and a crook. the ONE smells more like #2 everyday.

“Obama did not make a mistake by saying the truth there is no difference between these to men”

Baloney. Mousavi is not a holocaust denier.

“Why do we have to meddle at all?”

In a global economy political isolationism is not realistic. Also, every country meddles in every one else’s affairs. FDR had the same reasoning concerning Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan until Pearl Harbor.

“This is a sovereign state for god sakes”

and one that is a major threat to regional and world peace as well as the biggest supporter of terrorism. Give them a nuclear weapon and does it have to be spelled out?

“Where in the world do we honestly feel rowdy protest go unchecked by any government?”

There is a difference between a rowdy protest (all are) and riots. Iran is treating them as criminals, beating them mercelssly, and even criminally shooting them dead – including a 16 year old girl. There is a difference between crowd control human rights abuse which is what we are seeing.

(I don’t know why my fingers refuse to type “possibly” when I mean it instead of “possible.”)

“What about all the other people that supported and voter for Ahamdinejad do their votes not count”

well apparently according to the ruling counsel of mullahs there were 50 areas where there were significant voting irregularities. In fact it as reported there were more votes for Ahmadinejad than actual population.

SJ,

Apparently you do not know or understand ME or Persian history.

Obama did not make a mistake by saying the truth there is no difference between these to men

IF Obama were a REAL leader he would address Citizens rights/respect and leave his damn ad hominem attacks out of it.

No matter what happens – Mousavi WILL NOT forget that stupid remark. While he may smile and speak politely publicly there is a saying in the ME and Central Asia that paraphrased goes something like this:

Smile and be polite, but hide the big knife behind your back

Somehow, and someway that juvenile stupid comment will come back to haunt our government.

To think that Obama is working behind the scenes to support the protesters in Iran is rediculous to say the least. Do people forget just who Obama is?

Obama is the guy who toasted (yet denies toasting) Rashid Khalid, (LA Times has and suppressed a copy of said toast during the elections to this day)anyone remember who Khalid is?

Khalid is the radical friend, former Hamas leader spokerperson and Israel hater, babysitter and constant dinner buddy of Obama in his Chicago days before moving on to NYC and Columbia U!

Khalid is also the person who arranged a lecture, with who else but friend Ahmadinejad!

So to say Obama is working behind the scenes, look at Obama’s record in Kenya alone where he got involved and his murdering Cousin who lost an election was given the title Prime Minister!

For Obama to speak out stating simply “we will not recognize any results in Iran until full disclosure of the election results are made available to the people of Iran and hope the world community will join us and the position of the USA” is not simply what countries do, but morally what they should do!

But Obama will never speak out and highly doubtful he is assisting the protesters when he sits on his friend and buddy Khalid’s side of the fence!

I despise Obama worse than Bush, but I agree with being cautious about the *appearance* of meddling. Iran, of all countries, is VERY sensitive about that, since we blatantly meddled in 1953.

Now, I still believe that his REASONS for being so careful are not the ones I just outlined. I think he is a wishy-washy schmoozer, who has zero spine, and wouldn’t know a moral compass if it hit him in the nuts, so saying little to support the protesters suits him just fine for selfish reasons.

But the fact remains that he is doing the right thing, regardless of whether his *motivations* for doing so are contemptible. I thinks he’s doing it because he’s a self-serving coward afraid of ever taking a stand on anything, not because he is wise in this matter, but it’s STILL the best course, even if he’s on it for all the wrong reasons.

We simply want to change the way individuals are treated when they challenge the status quo. Rather than living in fear of being thrown in Section 209 of the Evian prison when they disagree about how they wish to be governed, people should have an opportunity to be heard and have their ideas put to a fair vote.

Yes, by merely existing, Obama could be given credit for all sorts of things, especially if you’re a fan of “make believe”. Just like Chauncey Gardener, Obama is simply a “Being There” president. It may be a good thing to keep him occupied with other matters like Whithouse parties and burger runs, than let him do anything else, because every important matter that he has fiddled with is turning into a dissaster. Give him his smokes and waffles if it makes him happy, but please, keep him over at the kiddies table.

I think that this worry over “appearance of meddling” is irrelevant because the mullahs will say we are meddling anyway. Marg bar Amreeka is something people say when you sneeze over there. Its not going anywhere.

But fine, do nothing, say nothing. Call their thugs Supreme Leader. Bow to their kings. It seems to be trendy – the mellow former superpower that has nothing better to discuss than Obamas ice cream preferences.

That said, can we get the kids on skateboards out of the white house? It doesnt belong there at any time, but I find it especially grotesque when Iranian girls are being butchered live on Youtube.

The French president has criticized the election in Iran. Mild-mannered David Broder even wrote in the WP that the election was fraudulent. And Iran is now admitting to some degree of fraud. The demonstrations are already happening and people are being killed and injured by strong-armed tactics. The repressive regime is already accusing Westerners of interference and has shut down means of communication and newsgathering.

I gather the POTUS’ caution is from fear of jeopardizing future relations with the current regime, who will likely prevail. But if he thinks for one minute he can persuade Iran to give up its nuclear program, sponsorship of terrorism and hateful rhetoric, he should think again.

SO, what does the POTUS really have to lose by making a stronger, more principled statement in support of true democracy, freedom of political expression and assembly?

I have no doubt Mousavi may represent a mere incremental improvement over Ahmadinejad anyway. So what? This could be the start of something big.

Bottom line for me: The POTUS is fond of giving sermons around the world. Why not a sermonette about the situation in Iran? Doesn’t his position as “leader of the free world” give him some license in this matter?

SJ, if you don’t see the difference between these two competitors, you never will. being a liberal is a fine thing but don’t be naive. larry has his views which are formed by years of experience both good and bad. he has a world view and contacts that most would envy. we are lucky to get his views. what he has said is that obama needs to be working behind the scenes. let’s hope hillary is doing just that but with the inexperienced, timid president, i just don’t know.

right on tek!

Oh please who cares if Mousavi forgets Obama remarks or not, Obama is not asking for his help at the moment is he?

As far as I see its Iran that wants Obama’s support or approval to validate their nonsense. Obama is correct stay away from these nuts the both of them, let them handle their own mess. Obama is no clean up boy, just like so many of you wanted Bush after 9/11 to jump into a fight.

Bush did and in the end what, some of the same people that pushed the fight jumped shipped turned around and called Bush the worse names, saying he was wrong to go to war, yet it was the same thirst after 9/11 calling for the President to take some kind of action, no some are getting restless again wanting another kind of involvement in the ME.

We are our worse enemies, we love to dictate how others should live having no regard for their traditions or culture we always feel whatever is American is correct, yet our country is in a mess, values out the window but we beat our chest and pretend we know what is best for the entire world.

Well time to come off our soap box the world is waking up no one seems to care what we think anymore, our track record is shaky and we really need to fix home first before we can start to tell others look at us, maybe some of you have not noticed but the USA is slowly sinking into the crapper so wake up and clean around our back doors first before we want to fix others.

I see the difference quiet clearly, what I am also seeing is that once again some American and willing to overlook the past just to put another nut in place, guess the lessons of Saddam have not taught America much.

Since both candidates are no different on the Iranian nuke issue what difference will it make?

No one will argue that BO is very politically tone deaf in many ways. Historically Mr. Johnson is spot on.

The British in the mid 20th century got all kinds of blow back and when the Americans stepped in ignoring the British experience, we went from a neutral trading partner to the focus of Iran’s internal strife. Then came Carter who, it could be argued set Iranian public sentiment in motion against us by his speech at the Shah’s birthday.

I can only imagine where we would be in relations with Iran if we had not allowed ourselves to become domestic political pawns for the Mullahs.

Mr. Johnson is correct in that we should not present Iran an attack surface to use for Iranian internal political redirection.
That said, how does one go about connecting with the majority of the population who’s parents were used as cannon fodder during the Iraq Iran war and are under 30 years old? The IPod generation is not an exclusively American phenomenon.

It is VERY disturbing to see people protesting and being injured or killed for it but this is NOT new in Iran. If you can recall when Diner Jacket was running the first time there were protests and although not as visible just as deadly.

yup.

Flippantly equating the two men at the center of the election dispute IS meddling. So, given this demonstrated willingness to meddle, BO could have said something more diplomatic like, ‘Regardless of whether the complaints of the protesters have any merit, any government that opens fire on unarmed civilians not only undermines its legitimacy but also invites international intervention. (This reminds me of his whole U.S. Apology Tour: Muslims, we will no longer meddle in your country’s affairs. Israel, if you want to stop the war against the Jews, stop the settlements on the West Bank.)

I agree that Obama is probably using the correct tact for Iran at the moment.

That doesn’t men I believe Obama. He hasn’t given America any credibility to the rest of the world and he hasn’t become the transparent man in his own personal history. His administration still appears to be the proverbial deer in the headlights. His approval ratings are still coursing downwards towards a level more commensurate with his actual performance.

That being said, this one is tick for the balance of karma.

This is the thorn in the whole Obama mystique and credibility story.

He didn’t win the nomination at the DNC fairly. What makes his administration any different if it’s found that Amandinejad didn’t win the election fairly?

Nothing.

small quibble here: he did not equate the 2 men, he equated their nuclear policies.

“It’s important to understand that although there is amazing ferment taking place in Iran, that the difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi in terms of their actual policies may not be as great as has been advertised,” the president told CNBC. “Either way, we were going to be dealing with an Iranian regime that has historically been hostile to the United States, that has caused some problems in the neighborhood and is pursuing nuclear weapons. And so we’ve got long-term interests in having them not weaponize nuclear power and stop funding organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas. And that would be true whoever came out on top in this election.”
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/06/president-obama-not-much-difference-between-ahmadinejad-and-mousavi.html

That happens to be true.

In fact, further info has come out:
“International Atomic Energy Agency documents obtained by Ha’aretz newspaper indicate that Iran began its secret nuclear program during Mousavi’s previous tenure as prime minister when “Tehran decided in 1987 to purchase the centrifuges it is using to enrich uranium,” which were purchased on the black market
through Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan’s smuggling ring.”
(same article, has a link)

“Either way, we were going to be dealing with an Iranian regime that has historically been hostile to the United States, that has caused some problems in the neighborhood and is pursuing nuclear weapons.”

BO obviously sees both men as problematic leaders in the region, which includes their desire to develop nuclear weapons.

My point was that BO’s intervention on which leader is preferable in Iran belies a claim to non-intervention when it comes to denouncing violence against the Iranian people.

The world (not just people like MCcain) looks up to America to lead. Instead European countries have come out with bolder statements than obama. Caution is wise but not at the cost of giving up our values. Right now obama apears like a weak coward.

The world (not just people like MCcain) looks up to America to lead. Instead European countries have come out with bolder statements than obama. Caution is wise but not at the cost of giving up our values. Right now obama appears like a weak coward.

BINGO. (And he knows he stole the nomination; his illegitimacy eats away at him, like droplets of acid, drip, drip, drip. He watches frantically as the poll numbers slide decisively into the “Strongly Disapprove” zone, impotent to stop the bleeding of once blindly obedient minions, now predictably and permanently ‘on to him…’)

hmm, I know he has made statements in support of the protesters; I guess I don’t equate that 100% with support for Mousavi, especially in light of the statements above.
btw, reading that Khamenei has lung cancer and his son may be attempting to influence election in favor of Ahmedinejad, of whom he is a supporter, in order to assist with himself being named his father’s successor. US government would certainly know if Khamenei were anywhere near death: beginning to think we are backing Montazeri. opinion?

… like a passenger on the Titanic who wants to write a stern letter to the White Star line. That approach gets you nothing.

The same maybe said for my experience in writing my congressional representitives…

Mr. Johnson what is the average age of the “NCO core” within the IRCG?

and is there any way to, as you put it, “fracture” the The Basij Resistance Force?

The last time that the government of Iran took action against its own people who were protesting rather violently, it led to massive international outrage over the government’s actions. Of course, that was back in 1978 when the young people were protesting the Shah and his autocratic actions that did little for the average Iranian. There were plenty of reports of people being gassed and shot by the authorities against the protestors. Of course, that was when Iran was a US ALLY, and not an enemy.
Thousands of Iranians were routinely rounded up and tortured by the Shah’s (US- and Israeli-trained) SAVAK for more than a decade while the US stood by and said nothing against the Shah.
And, as so typical of right-wingers, Pakistan already has the bomb, and so does Israel. In fact, Israel has, for the past thirty years or so, denied the IAEA any access to facilities that are considered suspect by the international community while denying that Israel’s even done any nuclear research. Unlike Iran (which, at least, claims a peaceful nuclear program), Israel refuses to admit or deny its nuclear program. Why do we allow Israel to get away with something that we deny Iran? Hell, we held Saddam Hussein to a higher standard than we do Israel (then invaded Iraq after falsely claiming that Saddam was covering his tracks).

Did Obama send ACORN over to “help”? Maybe they went over using some of that stimulus money ACORN got.

I’ve seen a hell of a lot of tweets coming out of Iran and not one has asked what Obama is doing or where the US support is.

I may have missed one or two but I’ve read hundreds and I can tell you it does not appear to be high on their list of priorities.

What does that then say about all the fulminating going on here in the US?

Just wanted to clarify, I am not saying, BO has a conscience or that, if he did, he would experience pangs of regret for his theft. No; I am saying he knows people only ‘love’ him because they don’t ‘know’ him yet. And for BO, that is the kind of empty that can never been filled.

I’ve seen a hell of a lot of tweets coming out of Iran and not one has asked what Obama is doing or where the US support is.

I may have missed one or two but I’ve read hundreds and I can tell you it does not appear to be high on their list of priorities.

What does that then say about all the fulminating going on here in the US?

How about the US and it’s people just mind their own business for a change and quit it with the self importance. Anything any of you say or do has zero meaning to the Iranian protesters.

Instead of wild opinion head over to twitter and just read. The answer to the right response is there in green and white.

(sorry hit ‘Add Comment’ before I was finished)

like droplets of acid, drip, drip, drip

Alien?

Ash: Ripley, for God’s sake, this is the first time that we’ve encountered a species like this. It has to go back. All sorts of tests have to be made.
Ripley: Ash, are you kidding? This thing bled acid. Who knows what it’s gonna do when it’s dead?
Ash: I think it’s safe to assume it isn’t a zombie.

.

That’s so funny! I saw Alien, years ago, but I swear, I wasn’t thinking about the move when I wrote this. Actually, I recalled a scene in a Vincent Price movie…

Written like a complete idiot with no sense of history.
When exactly did the “European countries” last participate in the internal affairs of Iran? Hmm? Any guesses? 1953, when the UK took part in the overthrow of Mossadeq. (Even then, the UK’s role was less than that of the US since the UK had attempted to get US support in the Truman era, but HST refused to go along. Eisenhower, on the other hand, seemed more than willing to help by authorizing the CIA to go ahead with plans for the coup.) During the latter part of the 19th century, both the UK and Russia held large “spheres of influence” in Iran (on top of various territories that both powers annexed–much of the old Russian Central Asia was under Persian/Iranian influence and control, and large parts of modern Afghanistan and Pakistan–both under direct or nominal British control–were also part of Iran), and during WWII, the British and Russians installed Mohamed Reza Pahlavi as Shah after forcing his father to abdicate (he had refused to allow Iranian territory to be used by Allied troops for any reason).
The US, on the other hand, has been far more likely to intervene/interfere in the internal affairs of INDEPENDENT countries all over the world, unlike Britain and France which have limited the overwhelming majority of their interference in their colonial possessions (while largely holding a hands-off policy once those colonies became independent unless invited by those countries’ leaders).
With respect to Iran, these countries are also in a better position to criticize very vocally as they do conduct commercial business with Iran. The Iranian government is well aware of what could happen if it strikes out against those European leaders since the Iranian economy relies, very heavily, on that European investment. (Iran can’t really threaten the oil supply as easily since Europe has spent the last few decades since the great oil embargo of the 1970s developing alternate energy sources as well as finding new oil sources, such as the North Sea. European businesses, however, CAN hold up sending vital supplies if ordered to do so.*) Iranian leaders, however, can continue to use the “America = Great Satan” boogeyman because of America’s rather ill-advised actions towards not only Iran, but also the whole of the Middle East. And if Obama speaks out too harshly against Iran’s leaders (regardless of the vote’s legality or not), it would become a strong rallying point by the mullahs of how the US wants to continue “interfering” in Iran’s internal politics.

*It’s rather funny how so many “free-market capitalists” abhor any sort of government interference but they can be among the first to demand the government impose a boycott of a country which has a political system they dislike.

They can come out with bolder statements because they weren’t party to and backers of the same violence and repression that occurred in ’79 when the US organized a coup against a democratically elected government and installed a dictator in its place. This action brought about the Islamic Republic that these protesters and Mousavi are fighting to restore saying the ideals espoused then have been corrupted.

The United States must tread carefully due to its unique history in Iran and history is something all Americans should consider in this time before proclaiming ill informed opinion as gospel.

They can come out with bolder statements because they weren’t party to and backers of the same violence and repression that occurred in ‘79 when the US organized a coup against a democratically elected government and installed a dictator in its place. This action brought about the Islamic Republic that these protesters and Mousavi are fighting to restore saying the ideals espoused then have been corrupted.

The United States must tread carefully due to its unique history in Iran and history is something all Americans should consider in this time before proclaiming ill informed opinion as gospel.

Well, Ben, thanks for that. Let’s have the USA withdraw all support for the rest of the world, in compliance with your line of thinking, and the next time the rest of the world can just go to hell when there’s a missile attack or despot taking over. That will certainly advance humanity.

Let’s start with you, Ben. Remove yourself from an American generated website. It is of no value to you now.

the ONE smells more like #2 everyday.

Not bad, ted.

[...] Johnson over at noquarterusa.net has an interesting take on the issue and his blog is worth a read. Johnson writes,”If Iran [...]

torture and illegal imprisonment without clear charges

is this refering to Iran or Guantanamo?

ROFLMAO Obama’s not doing crap, except watching carefully so he can take credit it something great happens and look the other way if it doesn’t. The idea that this man is doing anything quietly or other wise is a joke. Personally i don’t care what he does, but let’s not act like he’s doing something when he is truely doing nothing except trying to make himself looke like Jesus or the 12th Imam with the least amount of work. And obama saying these two me are not different is less than profound, Rush limbaugh saidthe same thing first last week. So if we are giving out credit for stating the obvious…
Personally i think the IRanian leadership is ingenious, they have shown Obama to be full of hot air and arrogent as hell. Here you have people dying on the ground for their freedom of speach and Obama tries to take credit for it as he does nothing but try to stay on the good side of who ever wins so in the end he can take credit for yet not being accused of meddling in foreign affiars. personaly i have no problem with doing nothing, but I’m not blind to obama’smalignant narccism enough to call it courage either. either. Besides if the he really wants to do soemthing, he needs to be trying to figure out if we are going to have a nuclear 4th of July via North Korea who really is a threat, Instead of focusing so much on how he can take credit for this uprising or winning about FOX NEWS not liking him.

First, you’re naive if you don’t know that the regime will blame us whether we say something or not, so better to say something so the next time whether in Iran or elsewhere, disidents will know we stand with them and what we stand for. I still wonder what Obama stands for.
Second, give the Iranian people some credit for knowing we aren’t their enemy right now. Their own government is. But maybe just maybe they need to know we are their friend and that we stand with them and for liberty, even if we can only give it a voice and nothing more. For the average Iranian, blaming us or the Brits is an actual joke to them(see Chris Buckley’s article)
You don’t think Reagan’s “Tear Down this Wall” didn’t mean something or accomplish something.

Hey ben,

“…that occurred in ‘79 when the US organized a coup against a democratically elected government and installed a dictator in its place.”

I think you mean to say 1953 not 1979. There was no coup in ’79, that happened in 1953 when the US set up the shah. Carter let the Iranian Revolution overthrow the shah’s regime in ’79.

Check your notes.

Right now obama appears like a weak coward.

I will venture out to say, at the risk of having my string cut, the appearence is real.

whining, not winning.

I wonder how many times a day bho the fraud is calling Hillary the American.

LOL its amazing how we act as if oh my look what is happening in Iran with their election and we have our own stories to tell over our last election, stories that are hidden and the questions go unanswered.

We have a president that we really know nothing about, we are not sure if he has a US birth certificate or not, we have no idea about his college life or what he did to get into the most prestigious college in the USA, but we are picky about who leads other countries.

We sit and cry fowl when we see the guards in Iran tossing tear gas, and locking up protester, yet our own police beat, tazer and abuse citizens at times when there is no cause to and this is show to the world on cable TV.

No wonder some in the world call us hypocrites but I guess some of you still wonder why.

Guantanamo is a terrible situation. In Iran, all citizens are subject to this type of situation if they misstep.

President Nicholas Sarkozy stated that he viewed the full-body burqa and niquab as a sign of the “debasement” of women and that it won’t be welcome in France.On June 22th, 2009

President Obama said in Cairo on June 4th, 2009.

“Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one’s religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.

Oh boy this is sure getting interesting as the days go by no wonder we have so many pushing the cause to help Iran. Islam is a part of America according to Obama.

Yea, I can see why it’s a real shame that people who are constantly oppressed are breaking things…lock ‘em up.

Are you serious? It’s called a DICTATORSHIP!

I also think that he is not just speaking to the dissidents of Iran in this situation. There are freedom fighters around the globe who have testified that they are inspired and strengthened by our statements of support for resistance. I know it’s complicated, and if Obama didn’t show weakness and ambivalence in so many other instances, it would be more convincing. Because he’s done it so many times, it just looks like weakness and political expediency again. That’s the problem with the Boy Who Cried Wolf syndrome. When it really matters, it’s lost its credibility.

Finally, the picture mentioned in news articles of Zahra Rahnavard, wife of Mir Hossein Mousavi, stomping on the American flag emerges. Also, UK flag and Israeli flag. This is from the current campaign.
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2009/06/20/irans-leading-lady-mujahida-to-the-last-drop-of-her-blood/

According to several prominent Western bloggers with direct ties to the protesters, Obama’s statement left the Iranians underwhelmed and angry.

THE MOST IMPORTANT repercussion of the US media’s propagandistic reporting is that the American public is denied the ability to understand events as they unfold. Take for instance The New York Times’ write-up of Khamenei’s sermon this past Friday in which he effectively declared war on the protesters. As Russell Berman pointed out in the Telos blog on Saturday, the Times’ write-up was misleadingly selective.
The Times did not mention that Khamenei ascribed world events to a Zionist conspiracy which he believes controls the US. It similarly failed to mention his long rant against the US for the FBI’s 1993 raid on David Koresh’s Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas.
Had the Times – and other major media outlets – properly reported Khamenei’s speech, they would have made clear to their readers that he is not a rational thinker. His view of world events is deeply distorted by his hatreds and prejudices and paranoia.
But then, if Times readers were permitted to know just how demented Khamenei’s views of the world are, they might come to the conclusion that Obama’s intense desire to sit down with him, and his constant pandering to Iran’s “supreme leader” are ill-advised and counterproductive. They might come to the conclusion that it is impossible to achieve a meeting of the minds with a man who calls Americans “morons” and leads his subordinate government officials in chants of “Death to America,” “Death to Britain” and “Death to Israel.”

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/

Weren’t we blamed already for whatever is happeing in Iran?

Hey, I remember that movie! Vincent Price had a vat of acid in his basement, and when people fell (or were pushed) into it, moments later a skeleton would float to the surface. It’s sort of like what Obama has done to our economy, and our country.

“remember our own country was settled by people who resisted having to worship in a certain way”.

Who was that Diana – Was that the native Indians?

Why do Americans always forget them & insert Mayflowerers etc?

Then USA “thrusted people into a position of living a life according
to someone else’s spiritual beliefs”.(christianity).

It wasn’t so long ago. I remember seeing very angry Navahos in the 70s still being denied their beliefs.

Examine one’s own history first before condemning others.

Let the iranians work it ut themselves.

Larry wrote:

So let’s give Barack Obama his due. Despite efforts by folks like John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Paul Wolfowitz to raise the rhetorical threat volume, Obama and his team are staying low-key.

I really think:

The last sentence should be changed to “Obama’s handlers have instructed him to stay low….go play golf and go out and buy an ice cream cone for a really great photo opt.”

[...] Obama’s Iran Trap [...]

[...] US can’t be seen as influencing the election, or meddling in their affairs. I get that point. And as Larry said here, he believes Obama is doing the right thing. I said before I’m sure Obama is listening to [...]

Sorry it was Christopher Hitchens on Slate

http://www.slate.com/id/2221020/

It’s going to be an interesting July 4th.

Iranian leaders, who advocate ‘death to Americans’ invited to the Whitehouse and North Korea threatening to fire missiles toward Hawaii.

Only in Oblahmaworld could this be happening.

I tend to agree with you, except that President Obama has NOT telegraphed to the American people that his administration is working diligently but quietly behind the scenes, and there’s no indication that they are doing so. The American people are capable of nuance, but we and the Iranians need to be given some subtle clues that the President’s heart is with the protesters.

Mousavi Was the Butcher of Beirut.

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/spytalk/2009/06/mousavi-celebrated-in-iranian.html

Mousavi, Celebrated in Iranian Protests, Was the Butcher of Beirut

He may yet turn out to be the avatar of Iranian democracy, but three decades ago Mir-Hossein Mousavi was waging a terrorist war on the United States that included bloody attacks on the U.S. embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Beirut.

Mousavi, prime minister for most of the 1980s, personally selected his point man for the Beirut terror campaign, Ali Akbar Mohtashemi-pur, and dispatched him to Damascus as Iran’s ambassador, according to former CIA and military officials.

The ambassador in turn hosted several meetings of the cell that would carry out the Beirut attacks, which were overheard by the National Security Agency.

“We had a tap on the Iranian ambassador to Lebanon,” retired Navy Admiral James “Ace” Lyons related by telephone Monday. In 1983 Lyons was deputy chief of Naval Operations, and deeply involved in the events in Lebanon.

“The Iranian ambassador received instructions from the foreign minister to have various groups target U.S. personnel in Lebanon, but in particular to carry out a ‘spectacular action’ against the Marines,” said Lyons.

“He was prime minister,” Lyons said of Mousavi, “so he didn’t get down to the details at the lowest levels. “But he was in a principal position and had to be aware of what was going on.”

Lyons, sometimes called “the father” of the Navy SEALs’ Red Cell counter-terror unit, also fingered Mousavi for the 1988 truck bombing of the U.S. Navy’s Fleet Center in Naples, Italy, that killed five persons, including the first Navy woman to die in a terrorist attack.

Bob Baer agrees that Mousawi, who has been celebrated in the West for sparking street demonstrations against the Teheran regime since he lost the elections, was directing the overall 1980s terror campaign.

But Baer, a former CIA Middle East field officer whose exploits were dramatized in the George Clooney movie “Syriana,” places Mousavi even closer to the Beirut bombings.

“He dealt directly with Imad Mughniyah,” who ran the Beirut terrorist campaign and was “the man largely held responsible for both attacks,” Baer wrote in TIME over the weekend.

“When Mousavi was Prime Minister, he oversaw an office that ran operatives abroad, from Lebanon to Kuwait to Iraq,” Baer continued.

“This was the heyday of [Ayatollah] Khomeini’s theocratic vision, when Iran thought it really could export its revolution across the Middle East, providing money and arms to anyone who claimed he could upend the old order.”

Baer added: “Mousavi was not only swept up into this delusion but also actively pursued it.”

Retired Adm. Lyons maintained that he could have destroyed the terrorists at a hideout U.S. intelligence had pinpointed, but he was outmaneuvered by others in the cabinet of President Ronald Reagan.

“I was going to take them apart,” Lyons said, “but the secretary of defense,” Caspar Weinberger, “sabotaged it.”

She is why Obama must Man Up.

The story of Neda somehow reminded me of Henry Fonda’s farewell in the film version of “Grapes of Wrath” -

Maybe it’s like Casey says. A fella ain’t got a soul of his own, but only a piece of a big soul, the one big soul out there that belongs to everybody. And then it don’t matter. Then I’ll be all around in the dark. I’ll be everywhere…Wherever there’s a fight so hungry people can eat, I’ll be there. Wherever there’s a cop beating up a guy, I’ll be there. I’ll be in the way guys yell when they’re mad and I’ll be in the way kids laugh when they’re hungry and they know supper’s ready…And when our people eat the stuff they raise, and the houses they build, I’ll be there too.

That speech is the essence of the American liberal spirit. It’s truly a pity, Obama is voting Present instead of “I’ll Be There.”

I don’t agree to give Obama his due. His due is his failure to be strong.

Why does it have to be extreme on either side?

No, he should not be subserviant to Iran or Saud Leaders AND, he should not be name calling or on the War path either.

He should have stated clearly and concise support for freedom and elections and non violence as Iran goes through their process on verifying election results.

He did not. He deserves to have his numbers fall, because, consistently he shows he is not a leader. His carefully measured, not say anything, words, are that, empty rhetoric.

Sarkozy also seems to have taken more of a leadership role in world reaction than Obama.

“The extent of the fraud is proportional to the violent reaction,” Sarkozy said Tuesday. “It is a tragedy, but it is not negative to have a real-opinion movement that tries to break its chains.”

This what barack Hussein Obama said in his Cairo speech:

“But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere.”

“America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments – provided they govern with respect for all their people.”

“No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.”

Then look at what he has said or has not said concerning this event in Iran. Words should matter and in Obama’s case his timid approach is an indictment of his knack for self-serving empty words. He will regret this moment when his own words and lack of leadership come back to haunt him.

Oh and they know it. And now, his arrogance REALLY showing, that he is trying to take credit for Iranians protesting, that his “Cairo speech gave the Iranians back bone” and they are upset Obama isn’t getting credit for this?

OMG!!!

I agree with you 100%. It’s sad to see the neocons spouting off about how Obama should be acting like W. About how he should be “talking tough.” It’s like they just don’t learn from the lessons of the past. Like you say, we would only be making the US the target. Clearly Americans support the protesters but that doesn’t mean we need to make this about us. It’s not about us.

Or during the Reagan admin.

It’s amazing how short people’s memories are. They act like the Dubya policy of no diplomacy is the American way and always has been.

No.

We do speak with our enemies and we always have (until Dubya’s unfortunate Presidency) that’s what mature people do.

No. Reagan’s “Tear Down This Wall” didn’t accomplish anything. That’s a myth.

Read “Tear Down This Myth.”

I think if Obama started talking real tough about Iran he would be playing into the hardliners hands. By taking a more measured approach he will deflate the power of the hardliners in these countries (Iran, North Korea…) Hearing the President “talk tough” may be really thrilling for the hard heads here at home but it does nothing to further our long term goals.

Instead of “Cowboying Up,” Obama is looking forward to having the Mullahs’ representatives at his Fourth of July Party.

Awesome. I think this is exactly what he should be doing. Don’t you understand that terrorists are made and hardliners win support all around the world by demonizing America? Obama is going to make that much more difficult. Talk talk and bombs have got us nowhere. It’s time to try diplomacy.

I’m somewhat disappointed with some of Obama’s moves domestically (no single payer health care) but I am pretty impressed by his foreign policy moves.

correction: “talk talk” is meant to be “tough talk”

Doc99

Obama inviting the Mullahs to a July 4th event, is similar to Roosevelt inviting Mussolini to lunch. The current occupant of the WH is a cult leader. There is no way that I trust BO with our foreign policy. In a Harper’s Bazaar piece, they are calling Obama out for all his flat out lies.

Obama knows where his (Islamic) bread is buttered. So do all the jokers who elected him. “PRESENT”, just keep his mouth shut and go with the [islamic] flow until the winds change then he can tac and go another direction. The Islamo/Marxist didn’t study Alinsky for nothing.

That Obama is a closet Muslim or Marxist seem to be fixed ideas that just won’t go away, despite all evidence to the contrary. But that’s in the nature of fixed ideas: Both the beginning and ending point are the same unshakable conviction.

In my opinion, Obama’s statements on the troubles surrounding the Iranian election have been consistent and appropriate. He’s chosing his words about this volatile situation very carefully, exactly as he should be. If we’ve listened to him carefully, we should understand why.

There was a point in time when many believed that other nations were “meddling” with South Africa’s apartheid problem as well.

Exactly. Some are going to blame the US no matter what, so he might as well support the people over there who are fighting for their right to have a fair vote, something that Michigan and Florida voters would have liked to have.

I guess this issue hits too close to home for Obama.

Maybe he doesn’t want Ahmadinejad pointing out how Obama sent in his peope to shut down any revote in those states.

You clearly need an intervention from your koolaide overdose.

First..you were right about “talk, talk”, that’s what O likes to do most! (In an airconditioned press room vs the humidity of the rose garden…hey, start with checking the weather there!)

FRANCE has come out tougher than us! and Germany, and the UK…
Gee, maybe we should have had tea with Hitler? Never mind those folks in gas chambers–I mean, not very mature of us not to invite the Nazi’s for hot dogs as we celebrate freedom!

Did it ever occur to YOU that those folks ARE listening to us on Twitter? That they know what WE Americans are saying. They ask, what is Obama saying? What is he doing? Should we tell them that we’re inviting those murderers for hot dogs? Maybe a few little fire works?

How about this….if the regime DOES change and those young protesters win their freedom–will they remember the US as being more willing to hob-nob with the tyrannical regime than to have a little backbone and call them murderers? So, all of a sudden, those folks who are DYING with gunshot wounds in their hearts and faces are going to decide to turn around and get mad at the US for speaking up for them? DUH!!

No, Obama wants to cut back on our defense spending. He thinks his skills as an orator are going to save the world. What he really wants is to GET CREDIT for talking to IRAN and do things so radically different than every other president (including Clinton). It’s all about Barry.

Snap out of it.

I wouldn’t want YOU or BARRY having my back if I was getting shot at.

well, nony it is sure easy to impress you. of course we already knew that. obits are well! their thinking skills need refining. ok major overhaul!

Good post. Talk about strange bed-fellows?!

Biden said he would be tested!
Did he know N Korea and the Mullah’s were having a party when Barry won?

Maybe Biden meant he would be tested by the fly.

Yeah, let’s see those “hardliners” cower in the corner with those mad fly-killing skills of Barry. At least Barry didn’t show the fly mercy!

Wake up. Do you work for ABC, NBC or CBS?

“IF”, a small word with a huge meaning. “If” the dog had not stopped to take a shit, the dog would have caught the rabbit. “If” Obama had spoken up when the rest of the world spoke the killings in Iraan may have been prevented. “May” is a small word with huge meaning— anyway you get the gist.The only thing Obama is consistent in is gauging the political atmosphere and Alinsky tactics.

Barack Obama’s first year budget allocates $527 billion–excluding war costs–for defense spending. That’s an 8% increase over the Bush administration’s $487.7 billion allocation for the previous year.

Obama has increased defense spending by $40 billion.

http://tominpaine.blogspot.com/2009/06/obama-start-revolution-without-me.html

OBAMA: START THE REVOLUTION WITHOUT ME.

Well, I think Larry makes some very good points. This “is” a dicey situation and whatever side comes out on top is who we have to deal with. However, Obama did make a stronger statement this morning. I was glad he did. If we don’t at least “suggest” that we are on the side of liberty then who are we? And who are we kidding?

On the other hand, Obama extended the invitation to Iranian officials to attend 4th of July festivites. An open hand, so to speak. I think you can make an argument that the role of the Prez and the role of a Senator is vastly different. And John McCain made a stirring speech on Iran in general and the young woman Neda who died “with her eyes wide open,” while demanding that others [the Obama administration] should reconsider approaching the Iranian situation “with their eyes shut tight.” Hillary and Biden also released statements encouraging the Administration to make a stronger statement.

Political theater, in my mind. These things rarely happen by accident. I think we’re dancing the dance, praying that our next partner is reasonable without screwing our own interests.

Gee, maybe we should have had tea with Hitler?

We did, at the 1938 Berlin Olympics.

The olympic team from England actually paid Hitler the courtesy of a formal Nazi salute in unison as they passed his reviewing stand. It was already abundantly clear by that point what a tyranical SOB Hitler was.

Perhaps extending a July 4th invite to representatives of the current Iranian government is a somewhat more pointed gesture. It’s the day we celebrate freeing ourselves from oppressive rule.

Yes..if we hold our ears up to his head we’ll hear…. crickets

He’s being vague enough and quiet enough to be able to claim a political victory we’ve imagined in our heads. That’s how he won the election.

“The end of an empire is messy” (wm Ayers). Not for Iran though, just for the USA.

“About how he should be “talking tough.””

I think you’re making this black and white. It’s not a simple choice between saying nothing vs. saying “we’re going to invade/nuke you if you don’t do X”.

Obama could have spoken up in support of the importance of free speech, fair elections, and public protests, and against the use of force and the shutting down of communications as a means of dealing with those protesters.

As usual, it took him a long time to say *any* thing, and he’s now in his usual process of trying out different types of statements.

Oops! I just said almost exactly this below. I totally agree with you. I think people are just trying to couch this situation in black/white terms in order to make BO look good.

You don’t have much understanding of the situation. If Obama speaks “forcefully” then Iran has evidence of US meddling, and the protesters become supporters of US policies, and thus delegitimized. I think I just made up a word there.

If the US uses covert resources to supply protesters with cell phones, etc, the Iranians will have a difficult time proving that these came from the US. If 100 people give 100 cell phones away saying that someone in Iran wants them given to protesters and wants to be anonymous because he fears government reprisal, how is the Iranian military going to disprove that?

SJ, do you support an Iranian government that wants to wipe Israel off the map, that wants to build a nuclear arsenal, that oppresses women and routinely abuses human rights?

Why do you keep posting things that make it sound like Iran is in the right?

If the US uses covert resources to supply protesters with cell phones, etc, the Iranians will have a difficult time proving that these came from the US.

You are as stupid as your name implies, Skanky. In case you weren’t aware, all cellphones have serial numbers. Any enterprising person can figure that out. A little arm-twisting here; a little there, and the makers will fork over the info to the Iranian government.

It is you who has little understanding of much of anything, moron. God, it’s no wonder we’re screwed with idiot-savants like you voting. Why don’t you shut your silly little piehole?

Administrator: Can my comment be rescued from the shredder?

Thanks

Ferd

Amost all nations have inbuilt security systems to guard against massive populist swings.

These are usually Senates .It is never one man one vote in these houses. Rhode Island gets 2 votes with 300,000 people ?California gets 2 with 50 million.

The British House of Lords was 100% hereditary very recently -even now political friends & donors can be appointed.

USA does not even have a central registry of voters & every state registers & counts differently.

I doubt whether there is one nation worldwide where one vote per person is actually an equal vote.Iran gives MALE expatriots & their MALE offspring voting rights. even though they may never have been to ran.

Lebanon pays to bring voters back .Kuwait did not give women a vote till the 21st century.

Mississippi had less than 20% of blacks registered in the 1960s -often because of intimidation.

Apples & oranges -every election.

Hey Ziggy,

THERE WERE NO OLYMPIC GAMES IN 1938 .

The 1936 Summer Olympics were held in Berlin, get your history straight, even if it’s only from Wikipedia.
It was not at all clear, in 1936, what Hitler’s intentions were or what they would ultimately be.

Please get your facts in order before trying to make a point.

The simple truth is that the Iranians have their future in their own hands. It is not up to the US or the Western world to tell them what to do, how to do it, or when to do it. The meddling of the West in the affairs of the ME has a long history of abject failure and long-term consequences.

Interesting article on the Twitter overload.
http://www.chartingstocks.net/2009/06/proof-israeli-effort-to-destabilize-iran-via-twitter/

It was not at all clear, in 1936, what Hitler’s intentions were or what they would ultimately be.

Actually, it was very clear what his intentions were as he ordered german troops to reoccupy the demilitarized zone in the Rhineland in 1936. I’m certain the French knew what was about to transpire.

FDR had the same reasoning concerning Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan until Pearl Harbor

If by this statement you are saying that FDR was not interested until Japan attacked Pearl Harbor is outright wrong. The Lend-Lease Act went into effect prior to Pearl Harbor and FDR actually sent ships to Britain prior to the law taking effect (thus actually violating American law at the time). FDR understood that if England went, we would be in a terrible fix. FDR, in addition, had to fight the American public’s disposition of the time, which was isolationist–no mean feat, that.

Carter let the Iranian Revolution overthrow the shah’s regime in ‘79.

Carter didn’t “let” anything happen. It was not his or ours to change. The Shah, himself, gave it up because the Iranian people had had enough of his dictatorship and there was little or nothing he could do to stop it, especially since he was so ill at the time. I am hoping something like that will occur this time, but with much different results. The bottom line is that despots are despots, no matter which extreme in ideology they embrace and when the people have had enough, they will make their desires known.

Right you are, I had my year wrong: The Berlin Olympics were 1936. But I still contend the point is valid. Official state persecution of the Jewish people in Germany was well underway by then: The previous year laws were passed denying Jews all voting rights, prohibiting them from holding any public office, firing them from all civil service jobs, restricting them from most professions, forbidding them to marry non-Jews, and forbidding Jewish children from playing on public playgrounds. It was also obvious that Germany was building an offensive war machine.

Did you ever consider that the U.S government could get cellphones made without serial numbers? Putz.

I love how somehow my screenname implie stupidity, while yours implies what, genius?

Have you ever considered that the US could probably hide whatever trail the serial numbers might provide? Or that there are probably other ways to help the protesters that could be done covertly? I was just continuing the example Larry used.

And yeah, it’s so much better to have small-minded people who insult anyone who disagrees with them voting. Excellent point.