Those Silly Iranians And Their Nuclear Bombs…

Surely Hopechange Man can talk them out of that whole call to wipe Israel off the map thing, right?
Obama suddenly realized:
Reporting from Washington — Little more than a year after U.S. spy agencies concluded that Iran had halted work on a nuclear …

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Better to be respected, than loved.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

It amazes how Liberals forget history.

Did talking with Hitler work? “We have peace in our time…” Oops! Hitler invaded Poland and eventually the rest of Europe. Millions died.

We fought WWII and millions were freed.

We talked with the U.S.S.R and they just embarrassed us. U.S.S.R. imprisoned and murdered millions.

Then…along came Reagan and he brought them to their knees, not with diplomacy, but economic pressure and sound principles and Communism feel all over Europe. Millions freed!

G.H. Bush did not talk to Hussein. He warned him. Hussein did not listen. Bush forced him out of Kuwait and adverted whatever plans Hussein had for the region. We freed a nation.

G.W. Bush did not talk to Afghanistan. He did not talk to Iraq. We all know they tried. He warned them. They did not talk to us. We fought two wars. Millions freed! Again.

Huh… is there a trend…ya’ betcha. Just and properly used force frees millions. Naïve, weak diplomacy kills and suppresses.

Liberals pick up a history book! Learn something before you kill millions again!

http://frankilinslocke.blogspot.com/

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Larry, I guess I measure success not on the amount or type of effort made towards it, but in the result. Whether Pres Obama’s charmed with the right language, or reached out an open hand, or danced a River Dance….it doesn’t matter. I believe the status quo remains-as he and his admin have publicly said repeatedly now: Iran is making nuclear bombs. Until that changes, he has failed. The idea that he needs more time or that he’s just started doesn’t wash with me. He’s had YEARS to plan to be President. He had months of transition time to prepare to implement the plan, and he’s now had months to actually implement it. When is it enough time vs having taken too long?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@openid.aol.com/runnswim:

I think that Obama’s done quite well vis a vis Iran, in the short time he’s been in office. He’s given “aid and comfort,” — not to the Mullahs and Ahmadinejad, but rather to the large and growing group of moderate forces in Iran.

Oh? You mean like these guys:

Or did you mean these “moderates”:

Iranians have not really been exposed to any western films in their cinemas. The Mullahs’ film board forbids the display of women’s uncovered hair and all the other “corruption” Western filmmakers spread. For Iranians, therefore, viewing Michael Moore’s film was a tremendously novel experience.

After 25 years of living in a virtual concentration camp, Iranians have become exceedingly socio-politically savvy. Moore’s anti-American propaganda did not attract anywhere near as many viewers as the Mullahs had hoped for. Tehran’s despots had hoped the film would challenge the Iranian people’s favourable notion of President Bush and promote John Kerry.

But Iranians are too smart.

A group of 12 university students, for example, composed of both men and women who had seen the film, collectively wrote me and signed an e-mail which said: “Wow, this guy complains that Bush lied once. What would this windbag do if he lived here where our president lies to us once an hour?”

Another comment was: “This guy gets to publicly accuse Bush of lying and becomes famous and adored worldwide. We, here, complain about some decrepit and inconsequential government lackey and we not only go to prison but some of us get death sentences. He ought to thank his lucky stars he lives in a country where he’s allowed and even encouraged to be this obnoxious…”

Someone else quipped: “If he thinks that the U.S. is so bad, he’s welcome to trade places with us…since he’s so forgiving of brutal Middle Eastern dictators!”

Another young man said: “They are showing this film to erase from our minds the idea of America being the great liberator; maybe Americans themselves don’t appreciate what they have but we sure do!”

Another comment was: “Outside such pathetic ideological schemes, Moore’s fixation to reprimand and castigate his own society is so great that he is BLIND to the fact that our ancient land and society cannot be regarded and dealt with in the same fashion; therefore he has fallen pray to the Mullahs for whom he is nothing more than a tool to discard when his mission for them is completed.”

Larry writes:

We already know that the Bush-Cheney policies toward Iran were an abject failure. Complete, utter failure.

What the hell…..?

To compliment Mata’s point on Bush diplomacy, Curt had posted on how Bush’s approach in dealing with Iran seems to have been the approach you’ve been encouraging for Obama to follow; namely, exploiting the anti-Tehran/Mullah sentiments of the Iranian youth (“emboldening” the Iranian moderates to change the course of their country’s foreign policy, as you put it).:

So Bush decides, against Cheney’s wishes mind you, to promote regime change in a more covert way:

Current and former intelligence officials say the approval of the covert action means the Bush administration, for the time being, has decided not to pursue a military option against Iran.

“Vice President Cheney helped to lead the side favoring a military strike,” said former CIA official Riedel, “but I think they have come to the conclusion that a military strike has more downsides than upsides.”

Larry:

We had no military credibility against Iran, on account of what they saw happening in Iraq, and that’s why they are on the verge of having a functioning nuke.

Maybe if we weren’t so fixated on body counts, behaving like “Iraq is a quagmire”, “Iraq is a failure”, with U.S. Congressmen proclaiming “the war is lost”, “U.S. soldiers are terrorizing women and children”, and comparing Guantanamo to Soviet Gulags?

The reality- not the perception- is, that Iraq is al-Qaeda’s Vietnam. Not the U.S.’s.

And the bogus nature of the 2007 NIE aside, if we accept the assessment on face value that Iran dropped its nuclear ambitions in 2003 (or at least one of its programs), lessee…..what else happened in 2003?…….?……..? What happened in 2003 that could have prompted Iran into rethinking its attempts at developing its nuclear programs? Hmmmm….

Paul Mirengoff tells us why, if this NIE is true, its a vindication for the Bush Administration policies:

If Iran actually has abandoned its program to build nuclear weapons, that’s
great news for the Bush administration and just about everyone else. And rather
than a blow to Bush policy, this news (if true) should be viewed in the first
instance as vindication of the administration — both its use of force in 2003
against a neighbor of Iran’s that was thought to possess WMD and its insistence
that a nuclear Iran is unacceptable. Even former CIA man and Bush administration
critic Paul Pillar (my college roommate) told the Post that there’s good reason
to see matters this way.

And why it should be taken with a grain of salt:

The real problem for the administration and the nation is that one can have
little confidence in the accuracy of the NIE’s current assessments. Our
intelligence community appears to have been wrong in its key assessments of
Iraq’s WMD capability and intentions during the run-up period to both Gulf Wars.
And, if the intelligence community is correct about Iran now, then it was wrong
in its 2005 assessment of Iran’s nuclear program, an assessment in which it
placed high confidence.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

It’s almost getting boring picking on the idiot Obama isn’t it? Its like kicking a 2 year old. Obama and the entire the left for that matter are the type of people who walk into a strangers yard who own a rabid pitbull that’s barking and foaming at the mouth, who when the owner tells them, “awwww he just wants to play” they’d stick their hand out to get it ripped off… and then act surprised about it…

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Larry W: It will be harder and harder for Iran to keep defying the rest of the world, when it is forces within their own country which are becoming more sympathetic to the policies of the USA than they are sympathetic with the self destructive policies of their own country.

Congratulations for finally arriving to a more cogent view of Iran, Larry. You may want to adjust your timeline as this anger towards their own self-destruction was happening while Bush was still POTUS. Bush made it his policy to encourage the Iranian moderates…. despite most liberal media and Congress members suggesting daily that Bush would invade Iran in his second term.

Nothing could be further from the truth. First, as evidenced by his 2006 speech before the UN, prior to Ahmadinejad’s great Satan speech..

The president said Tehran must heed a U.N. Security Council resolution calling on Iran to suspend its program to make nuclear fuel. “Iran must abandon its nuclear weapon ambitions,” Bush said.

Iran says its program is for peaceful purposes, while Bush says Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons.

Although his remarks on Iran were pointed, Bush said he was working to find a diplomatic solution to the crisis.

His warning to Iran came in a sweeping overview of the Middle East in which the president called for a “world beyond terror.”

“We must seek stability through a free and just Middle East, where the extremists are marginalized by millions of citizens in control of their own destinies,” he said.

“America has made its choice,” Bush told the assembly. “We will stand with the moderates and reformers.

Bush also sought to reassure citizens of countries in the Middle East that the U.S. is not at war with Islam.

“This propaganda is false and its purpose is to confuse you and justify acts of terror,” he said.

In fact, a secret war against Iran has been waged covertly for quite some time by aiding regime change elements from within the country. Some of these “regime change plotters” were just arrested in Jan of this year (prior to the Inaugural)

The members of a network found guilty of attempting to orchestrate a “Velvet Revolution” in Iran have been sentenced to prison.

In a Saturday statement, the Islamic Revolution’s Court hit out at the Bush administration for “making strenuous efforts to topple the Iranian government.”

“Under the Bush administration renegades and fifth elements in Iran have kept close contact with US intelligence agents. Under the cover of governmental and non-governmental institutions, with the support of the US State Department and Congress they have been working toward achieving their objectives,” read the statement.

Earlier on Tuesday, Iran’s Judiciary Spokesman, Alireza Jamshidi, said authorities had arrested four Iranian nationals who were plotting a regime change at the behest of the Bush administration.

The cause for the disgruntled Iranians is the wasteful and radical Ahmadinejad. It was his policies that prompted Bush to renew and increase the Iranian sanctions. It was not the election of “that one”.

So you again give Obama credit where no credit is due. He is just reaping the benefits of an economically weakened Iran due to it’s idiot President, combined with the effects of the Bush year sanctions and his covert aid in the “Velvet Revolution”.

Nice try… is it Aye who says “thanks for playing”?? LOL

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Larry,

Bush and Cheney (and Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr., and W. J. Clinton) were unable to curb Iran’s appetite for nukes because Iran’s leaders are not compassionate towards outsiders or their own citizens. Tehran has been on a mission to extinguish the infidels of the world at any and all cost.

Obama and Biden will similarly have no success against Iran; Ahmadinejad and Musavi have tipped their hand by calling Obama and the U.S. “weak”.

Diplomacy only works when people are wilng to be diplomatic. From outward appearances, Obama arguably would likely be seen as more diplomatic than the previously mentioned administrations, but Hillary is too much of a hawk to be seen as a trustworthy international diplomat. Worldwide recognition gets her in the door, but she is hardly likely to be any more effective negotiating with Iran (assuming that Iranian officials are even willing to deal with her as an equal “statesman”.

Iran an North Korea are going to test Obama’s mettle. Out best hopes are for each of these nations to be less capable than they purport to be. I see no feasible diplomatic or military solutions for dealing with either nation’s unpredictable leaders.

Jeff

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Yes, we should have let the Euros and the UN take the lead with their more nuanced diplomacy, the way that the Democrats demanded, and Bush should have stepped back and stayed out of it to give that approach a chance.

Oh, wait. That is exactly what happened. It failed, so now vilify Bush and Cheney while acknowleggeing that, lo and behold, they were right.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I think that Obama’s done quite well vis a vis Iran, in the short time he’s been in office. He’s given “aid and comfort,” — not to the Mullahs and Ahmadinejad, but rather to the large and growing group of moderate forces in Iran. It will be harder and harder for Iran to keep defying the rest of the world, when it is forces within their own country which are becoming more sympathetic to the policies of the USA than they are sympathetic with the self destructive policies of their own country.

We already know that the Bush-Cheney policies toward Iran were an abject failure. Complete, utter failure. We had no military credibility against Iran, on account of what they saw happening in Iraq, and that’s why they are on the verge of having a functioning nuke.

So the choice is between more of the same, leaving the only alternative an incredibly messy, dangerous, and expensive military effort, or else “emboldening” the Iranian moderates to change the course of their country’s foreign policy.

It is very clear that veiled, implied threats of military intervention, coupled by a refusal to talk without preconditions, let to the current state of dreadful affairs, regarding Iran.

We clearly need a new, effective approach to the problem, beyond the discredited policies of the past, which have brought us to where we are now.

- Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA

Like or Dislike: 0  0