The first of many weakness charges to be leveled against Obama comes from Iran:
US President Barack Obama’s offer to talk to Iran shows that America’s policy of “domination” has failed, the government spokesman said on Saturday.
“This request means Western ideology has become passive, that capitalist thought and the system of domination have failed,” Gholam Hossein Elham was quoted as saying by the Mehr news agency.
“Negotiation is secondary, the main issue is that there is no way but for (the United States) to change,” he added.
Now that is changing the world opinion of the US for the better right? It’s not like tyrants and dictators only respect strength, they also respect when your act like a cuddly teddy bear.
Sigh….
See author page
Iran demands an apology for all US offenses against the world and the Iranian people over the past 60yrs, AND demands US forces immediately withdraw from around the world to bases inside American borders.
Turns out….Democrats have already apologized
Now, as Curt points out, Iran says any talks w the US are proof that the US is weak.
Ok, here it goes again…
1)Iran will have a bomb sometime this year (ie, in months)
2) Obama thinks talks will work (despite the fact that the UN, EU, IAEA, and multiple allies have tried and failed as well as multiple American administrations from both parties)
3) It is not likely talks will work
If they don’t work (as expected) are people willing to live with nuclear-armed state sponsor of terror?
If not, then
will the left support air strikes on Iran?
and
will President Obama have the balls to kill people with his pen?
It’s “you’re” not your.
Already Obama is losing hearts and minds thoughout the world. He doesn’t want to attack our enemies and he refuses free trade with our allies. It’s going to be Carter all over again, including a corrupt staff with at least two tax dodgers.
Obama is already getting walked all over by tyrants overseas. Iran, North Korea, Cuba… just to name a few. My bet is that Russia and China will join the party. I predict three things will happen during Obama’s administration: Russia invades a neighboring country and doesn’t leave; China invades Taiwan; and N. Korea tests a nuclear bomb (in open air nonetheless).
And when did they make all the U-235 to make that bomb? Since inauguration day?
The US has no military credibility against Iran, thanks largely to Iraq. Long ago, the Iranian mullahs figured out that we didn’t have the capacity to invade Iran and take then on.
Why is it Obama’s responsibility to bomb Iran? If Iran needed bombing, why didn’t Bush bomb them? Why didn’t Bush’s tough stance against Iran scare them away from enriching uranium? Didn’t they fear that we’d take military action against them? No, they didn’t fear this. Because they saw how many resources we were spending in Iraq, which gave us zero credibility as a military threat against them.
Obama’s words didn’t hurt the USA, at all. It showed our Western allies that we were the good guys, going the very last mile to convince the Iranians that we were reasonable people, wanting to arrive at some degree of conciliation. This may have been lost on Iranian President I’m-a-dinna-jacket, but it wasn’t lost on the Iranian people, many of whom would like to see the US and Iran improve relations. This also wasn’t lost on the rest of the Islamic world, none of which was in any way frightened by the specter of the US army invading their countries, which they knew wasn’t going to happen, thanks to Iraq. The “Arab Street” is just as important a target of opportunity as the Iranian mullahs. More important, actually.
Obama has strengthened the position of America, not weakened it. He has strengthened our alliances. Strengthened the inclination of the police forces of the world to work with America to interdict nuclear weapons. He is proving to the world that the USA is more than the “tough guys.”
We are also the “good guys.”
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
“We are also the “good guys.” The only part of Larry’s post that I agree with.
Declaring weakness of Obama is a bad omen, when Islamofacists sense weakness they attack. I’m afraid that America just made the largest election mistake in our history. Obama will be responsible for any and all casualties that we take. Damn the Democraps and supporters!
“It is weakness rather than wickedness which renders men unfit to be trusted with unlimited power”
– John Adams
BO is clearly in over his head.
Lord help us all.
Obama? Weak? Why, that’s like saying water is wet. Oh wait…
And when did they make all the U-235 to make that bomb? Since inauguration day?
———-
Nobody really knows exactly how far they have come in their nuclear program but most are reporting they have an advanced program (evidenced by the amount of centrifuges they have, you use a gas centrifuge to further refine yellowcake into weapons grade material)… The point is that once they have enough it’ll be too late.
We know they have yellow-cake, we know they have a huge amount of gas centrifuges for turning yellow-cake into refined 235. We also know what Ahmadinijad has said he will do and the record of his proxy forces (who have committed unspeakable attrocities)
——————-
The US has no military credibility against Iran, thanks largely to Iraq. Long ago, the Iranian mullahs figured out that we didn’t have the capacity to invade Iran and take them on.
——————–
Most intelligence agencies worldwide (not only Bush) were saying Saddam had weaopns of mass destruction! The democrats, including Karry, Berger, Pelosi, Gore (I posted quotes in an earlier post) were making the exact claims Bush did.
500 tonnes of Iraqi yellowcake recently ended up in Canada (not sure why that’s not considered a WMD, the IEAE was babysitting it IN IRAQ while saying there were no WMDs IN IRAQ).
As for your argument that they do not have the capacity, I sincerely hope you do not mean the ‘military capacity’ as I can’t see how you’d support this claim. Iran’s army is HOPELESSLY outdated and they DO NOT have a credible air-force!!! They’re armoured corps are at least a generation (if not 2 or 3) behind both the USA & Israel. Their infantry is totally inexperienced in active combat & commanders would have little or no experience commanding battalions.
They do have a relatively signifigant missle capability but THESE ARE NOT KATUSHAS OR KASSAMS – although these types of missles do MUCH MORE damage if they hit, they are also far easier to intercept than the low-tech rockets! Israel has the best anti-ballastic missle suite in the world (Oren Yarok and Arrow2 missles), and the United States (FINALLY!!!) has a capable theater defence system in the Patriot3.
Iran’s only effective weapon would be to begin a campaign of terror worldwide by activating their proxy forces Hamas & Hezbollah. I don’t discount that threat but militarily, Iran is really more bark than bite. They have a LARGE army, but the implements are old, the people inexperienced.
——————————
Why is it Obama’s responsibility to bomb Iran? If Iran needed bombing, why didn’t Bush bomb them? Why didn’t Bush’s tough stance against Iran scare them away from enriching uranium? Didn’t they fear that we’d take military action against them? No, they didn’t fear this. Because they saw how many resources we were spending in Iraq, which gave us zero credibility as a military threat against them.
————————–
Do you really believe having tens of thousands of well armed American troops right next door isn’t affecting Iran?
As for the responsibility – it’s Obama’s responsibility because he’s the president now & this is still an active situation. I’m not sure what point you are trying to make, are you saying if one president didn’t take care of something then the next president has a right to just let it fester?! Was going after Al Qaeda not Bush’s responsibility because Clinton allowed them to grow and entrench unthreatened for 8 years?!
Furthermore, this idea of diplomacy with Islamists is PATENTLY ABSURD! What could he possibly say? “Yes, your Koran says not to trust or talk with the infidel, and orders good Muslims to bring all of Dar Al Harab (the abode of war) into Dar Al Islam (the Abode of Islam) by the sword… YES, your Hadith shows the life of Muhammed to be one of endless Jihad against the infidel… and I KNOW you’ve been fed Islamist supremist rubbish all your life – but look into my eyes – I Barack Hussein Obama tell you that you have been lead down the wrong pass… Can I get a HALLELUJA?!”
The Iranian Mullahs & Ahmadinijad are ‘true believers’… They are not feigning these views ala more secular dictators like Saddam Hussein.
Iran, like it’s proxy forces Hezbollah & Hamas cannot be trusted. They use the example of Muhammed at Khyber (where he decieved the Jews, then killed them when they were not expecting it) as the prototype for every Hudna they have ever signed. It’s a temporary measure to recuperate and rearm before attacking the enemy when he least expects it (this tactic was absolutely espoused by Muhammed). To understand their views on negotiations, read the Hamas Charter (part about negotiations and conferences is enlightening)
—————
Obama’s words didn’t hurt the USA, at all. It showed our Western allies that we were the good guys,
—————————
Why does America need to reconcile with Iran for?! WHY would they reconcile with the greatest supporter of terror in the world when they are fighting a war on terror?!
As for the Western Allies, don’t be so quick to buy that Bush caused them to villify the USA. In Germany, France & Canada, bastions of leftism, they’ve elected pro-Bush conservatives!
Those that believe the USA are not the good guys will never be convinced. USA is already the greatest provider of aid in the world. It’s the only country in the world to put it’s future generations in harms way for others, esp. for Muslims! When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait the Arab world didn’t lift a finger, it was the USA. When Saddam turned from Kuwait towards Saudi Arabia, the USA sent troops. When the Muslims of Somalia were victims of rampant warlordism, the USA sent in troops. And when the Muslim Kosovar Albanians claimed a Holocaust, it was the USA and NATO that went in. While other countries talk, while the UN bickers and makes speeches claiming ‘never again to genocide’ – it’s only the USA that acts.
The USA is far from perfect but if there is a ‘good guy’ in this world it’s the USA (btw: I live in Canada :-))
—————————–
….going the very last mile to convince the Iranians that we were reasonable people, wanting to arrive at some degree of conciliation.
This may have been lost on Iranian President I’m-a-dinna-jacket, but it wasn’t lost on the Iranian people, many of whom would like to see the US and Iran improve relations.
———————–
WHAT DO THE IRANIAN PEOPLE HAVE TO DO WITH IT?! It would not matter if all Persians where Zionist kibbutzniks wanting to making a Birth Right trip – THEY DO NOT GET A SAY!
We have heard about the ‘well educated, western leaning’ ‘Iranian street’ for 30 YEARS yet they have not even attempted revolution! When Khatami was elected everyone said that FINALLY, the reforms would come but nothing came of it! The Mullahs still rule and Iran has only become more belligerent in the region, not less!
At the end of the day, the Iranian people must be masters of their own destiny. If they do not exact regime change (which will no doubt be a bloody, brutal civil war…A move from dictatorship to anything else is rarely, if ever, peaceful or easy!) then they will be the ones that inevitably suffer most from the actions of their government. The same can be said for the citizens of Gaza, Syria, & Saudi Arabia.
——————
Obama has strengthened the position of America, not weakened it. He has strengthened our alliances. Strengthened the inclination of the police forces of the world to work with America to interdict nuclear weapons. He is proving to the world that the USA is more than the “tough guys.”
—————————-
What alliances has he strengthened? T’was the Bush Administration that fostered intelligence sharing worldwide for the first time in history. Through Bush’s term the USA was getting intelligence from such pariahs as Indonesia & Syria. It was the Pakistanis who arrested Khalid Sheik Muhammed! It was Bush (and the Iraq invasion) that made Qadafi ‘change his ways’ (since Bush left office he’s started to show his true colors again, t’seems he’s gone off his meds again, did you see his recent comment on Israel).
And did you notice the silence of the Arabs leaders during the recent Gaza incursion. Hosni Mubarak actually came out with a statement against Hamas (that’s bloody unheard of) while the rest of the Arab world sat mum (except for Israel’s ally Turkey… the ME is funny that way). I don’t pretend they’ve changed their minds on Israel, but it does show a change of their usual modus operandi…(I also can’t give Bush 100% of the Credit for it in fairness; alot of their silence was due to the fact they want to see Iran brough down a few notches, and hitting at Hamas achieves that)
Nope. It’s been going on now for years and years despite infinite efforts by the UN to stop it diplomatically.
To be clear Larry, this is not a problem of Obama’s creation, but (and this is an important but) he said for years that he’d try diplomacy, and if that failed (as it always has) then no options are off the table including military force (like an air war-see also Kosovo, Bosnia, 4 air campaigns against Saddam, and more). Just ’cause invasion+occupation is a really really hard thing w/out a draft doesn’t mean there are no military options or that an invasion+occupation is impossible (just unlikeliest of military options…though, Obama did make that push for national service first and foremost didn’t he?)
I know you people really hate when we don’t stick to the subject. But you have to see the gorgeous Sarah Palin entering the Alfala Dinner in Washington, D.C.. She rocks!
Palin Arriving at the Alfalfa Dinner.
http://www.tammybruce.com/
@Larry #4: I see you read my responses to you on the Castro-Chavez-Obama thread. May I ask you don’t make the same mistake repeated over and over again?
Curt did not suggest that Iran’s attitude began – or will end – with Obama. Only that Iran will mock his failed campaign promises of “change” with the same glee that they did the POTUS predecessors who wandered in thinking they could change the hearts and mind of the Middle East intolerance.
And forgive the heck out of us we occasionally toss back in your face the Obama promises to the American electorate that – with his ascent to power – the Middle East would be more receptive to the US.
Reality’s a bitch, eh?
But you really must take a breath before posting, and not assume everything the FA authors comment about in our posts are events that began or end with Obama’s oath of office or election. Fact is, we recognize that – despite Obama’s campaign hopes and dreams – this is deep rooted, generations old warfare and hate that predates Obama, Bush, Clinton and most who came before them in our lifetime.
I can legitimately only speak for myself, but I’m sure that most of us hope that Obama does what we consider is the right thing for the US national security and int’l relations. I certainly believe Obama is suffering from delusions if he thinks his international flavor and upbringing, or more complacent attitude towards negotiations, will accomplish anything more than efforts for decades before … But the slower he is to learn this, the more time they have to develop more advanced programs or re’arm their militia and support forces.
I fervently hope he is a fast learner, and doesn’t keep the rose colored glasses on for long. But this is the time that Obama needs to reconcile his “hopes” and “change” with reality INRE foreign policy and our enemies. And at every opportunity, I’m sure that I, or others here, will point out that what Obama led you to believe.. and what is real… will prove to be diametric opposites – just as history has consistently shown.
Not every post is ODS. But many posts may be pointing out that throughout the Obama “just words” yesterday, the reality that predated his “just words” remains constant today.
Are you again doing the nanosecond of history review? Tell me, Larry… how “long ago” did the Iranian mullahs figure out that we “didn’t have the capacity to invade Iran”?
The US military capacity has gone up and down for decades, depending on times of peace or war. It was certainly gutted for it’s former self during the 90s by a Clinton admin, with the help of a GOP Congress. However this is a rather bold military status statement for a doctor. Especially one not concerned with history prior to George W. Bush.
If you are suggesting that with both the NATO front in Afghanistan… where the NATO allies refused to hold up their share of the load since late 2006… and the Iraq theatre have rendered us incapable of taking on yet another front with equivalent manpower, you are probably correct.
But that would not be “long ago”. That would be your way of saying “under Bush”.
But “long ago, under Bush”, invading Iran for regime change was not prime, and highly premature. Israel, if threatened, may again take out any WMD sites. But that is not “invading”. Why would we invade Iran when most of the population would be happy to revolt against their govt when the time is right? Why would we invade Iran when the int’l pressure is increasing on them, as it did with Saddam in the late 90s? If we use that as a guide, Iran won’t be ready for “invading” for another 13-15 UN resolutions yet.
But Iran is completely different than Iraq. There is no cookie cutter approach to modernizing these restrictive and oppressive Muslim regimes. Each one has it’s own situation. Iran will take patience, and maintenance… IMHO. But in the long run, I’m betting on the Iranian youth to win out, and the old regime to die out…. before that 17th UN resolution is broken.
Sigh, I hope this didn’t slip by unnoticed.
What’s up with the Active Discussions link? Is it my computer, or did someone change something, it’s kind of difficult to follow like this.
@Missy: I think I fixed it Missy
Thanks Curt. It scared me, I expected someone to tell me I had to do something with my computer which would have been a task beyond my capability. I lie in wait to corral my grandchildren to teach me computer stuff, sometimes they have time and patience, sometimes not. If it were not for them I would have never learned how to copy and paste, they also take care of all the other little techy things around the house for me. Bottomline, as long as you have offspring, don’t fear the future.
More evidence that Obama did really know what he was doing in his diplomatic overture to Iran:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/UKNews1/idUKTRE5134JV20090204
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/02/04/europe/iran.4-423135.php
Strengthening Iran’s moderate voices and gaining the respect of our allies — seems like a good thing to me.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
Obama “knew what he was doing” when extending negotiation offers? Interesting concept, Larry.
First, on the Reuters link and what you see as Iran “strengthening” their moderate voices. That only happens if the Iranians kick Ahmadinejad out of office. It is ultimately Khamenei who sets the policy, and perhaps he’d be more transparent with someone other than Ahmadinejad as the President. But I won’t be holding my breath. However none of that has whit to do with Obama and his ovatures.
Secondly, it used to be the US set conditions for diplomatic talks with our enemies. Now Obama’s given that advantage to Iran, who is… as the article says…
So you see Obama letting Iran dictate the terms instead of the US as an improvement. Okie doke…. Even Reuters sees this as a ploy to see what Iran can squeeze out of Obama for US concessions.
The US and the Bush admin had Iran on a tight economic leash, with economic measures that went well beyond those that were suggested by the UNSC. If Ahmadinejad loses, it will be for his fiscal mismanagement of the country’s wealth (aggravated by the oil price drops), and the citizens being royally PO’d. And that is no Obama accomplishment. It is a direct result of Bush economic sanction policies and is a credit only to the prior POTUS. Certainly not by a guy who’s decided to let Iran call the shots for dialogue.
As far as the “gaining the respect” bit… you confuse acquiescence and recognized authority of terrorists with respect. There was no respect to be had by negotiating with Arafat. Abbas was a different matter. There is no respect to be had dealing with Ahmadinejad… but if he’s gone, it’s a different story.
And you wish to point out what’s different? Per the IHT story, the EU sets the same conditions the US does for negotiations.
ummmmm sound familiar?
From WaPo May of 2007:
From IHT in June of 2008:
So not one thing has changed for US conditions… except that you think the world “respects” us more because Obama has decided to let Iran dictate the terms for diplomatic relations?
Right…
Sigh, he’s really got those Iranians in a trick box, you go Obama:
“WASHINGTON – The Obama administration is sending a women’s badminton team to Iran this week as part of a broad bid to engage the Iranian people through educational and cultural exchanges, the State Department said Monday.
Amid a wide-ranging review of U.S. policy toward the Islamic Republic, the trip is the new administration’s first foray into such exchanges that began while President George W. Bush was in the White House. Past exchanges have involved athletes from other sports, artists, academics and professionals.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090202/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iran
“Tehran – Iran denied entry visas for a US women’s badminton team which was scheduled to come to Iran, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hassan Ghashghavi said Wednesday.
The spokesman argued that the lengthy visa procedure made it impossible for the team to come to Tehran for a February tournament.
A crush of photographers and TV crews on Tuesday night rushed to the IKIA airport outside Tehran to cover the team’s arrival via Dubai but were told by officials about the cancellation.”
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/middleeast/news/article_1457502.php/Iran_rejects_entry_visas_for_US_womens_badminton_team_
Missy, that is hilarious! I had read that the badminton team was being sent there as a good will gesture to those Iranians… dying for “dialogue”. And what a slap in the face to Obama and the US to have their visas denied….
Dang! As Aye would say “ouch… that’s gonna hurt”
Hmmm, wonder why the Iranian government doesn’t feel they have to play nice with Obama.