The latest terror attack in France has claimed at least 84 lives, ten of them children. The killer was Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, a Tunisian living in France.
No one wants to see any more ISIS-inspired attacks, but they are going to happen. With each attack people are reminded of what a weak and feckless man is our current President. With each attack confidence in him and in Hillary Clinton further erodes.
And why would it be any other way?
Barack Obama is running out the clock. He set an agenda of first destroying ISIS, then downshifting to degrade and defeat and finally to “contain.” Military experts agree that Obama’s policies are not aggressive enough. He cannot even speak the real name of the enemy. His valley girl Marie Harf acknowledged that Obama believes the best way to defeat ISIS was to give them jobs.
And what do democrats offer us? Hillary Clinton, who wants us to empathize with the enemy.
Clinton wants a million more Muslims who cannot be properly vetted resettled here in her first term alone.
Meanwhile, the sycophantic left wing media continues to race straight into the toilet. PMSNBC called the attack in Nice a “truck crash”. Other media outlets blame the truck for the massacre. Worse, authorities are determined to stifle the truth about how truly awful these Islamic terrorist monsters are:
Report: French Gov Suppressed Evidence of ‘Gruesome Torture’ During Paris Attacks
But hang on a second- Captain Bullsh*t has flopped again- vowing once more to destroy ISIS. ISIS has killed nearly 19,000 in two years. They are the inspiration for these attacks. ISIS is the cause of nearly 20,000 deaths. ISIS is the cause of the refugee crisis and the crimes being committed by those refugees in Europe. None of this will stop until they are destroyed. Utterly.
Neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton is up to the job. That much is clear. We need change and ironically ISIS may provide the impetus for it.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
How long do you think it takes to plan a terror attack using a truck? What is it that someone carrying out such an attack is looking for? Why, large crowds. What do you suppose you are going to have around the Republican Convention?
You guessed it… truck attack bait.
I doubt radical Islamic terrorists would attack a Black Lives Matter protest; they have too much in common. However, any of the hundreds of other victim-groups that will be out protesting their widdle feewings being hurt would make perfect targets.
In addition, the police will be out in force to protect the rest of the world from these violence-prone groups. The police, in concentrated numbers, also present a target, now for the New Black Panthers cowards.
The protests should be banned, for the sake of public safety.
Did you hear what she said about pokemon? Hey Hillary in a member of TEAM ROCKET and im releasing my Pidgeot and he knows super gust attack
Considering the horrid topic, some of the headlines were positively hilarious.
As if the TRUCK had a mind of its own.
A terrorist truck.
But then, after we learned that the perpetrator was a Muslim migrant who somehow gathered guns, grenades and ammo in gun-controlld France, new headlines popped up.
He wasn’t ”really” a Muslim!
He quit going to Mosque, ate pork.
I guess people forgot that the 9-11-01 hijackers did the same, even shaving off their beards.
It is called ”Takfari.”
Takfari means you are going to get into paradise for your part in jihad SO you can do anything beforehand!
One imam even excused anal sex!
Apparently some suicide bombers were having a hard time getting their bombs up in there.
LOL.
The guy was yelling ”allahu akbar,” too.
But, hey, don’t we all?
Doesn’t mean he was Muslim, you know.
Two very high-profile events are nearly here, both of which are likely seen as ideal targets. They’ll both be the focus of intense national and global news coverage from the moment they start, and in each case the potential target areas will be much larger than the immediate surroundings of the events themselves. I’m not sure any amount of vigilance and diligence could reduce the risk to “highly unlikely.” Maybe we’ll be lucky. If something happens, everybody loses.
@Greg: No one needs to hope. The incompetency of this administration has done everything except pick the site. They have sold guns to terrorists. They have returned terrorists with experience and contacts to the field. They have refused to actually define the enemy. They have failed to provide adequate resources to remove ISIS from the middle east.
Ahead of GOP Convention, Cleveland Officials Affirm Protesters May Carry Guns
But water guns, toy guns, knives, aerosol cans, rope, tennis balls are barred.
Given Orlando, followed quickly by Dallas, and then by Nice, the fact that the party conventions are totally obvious, very high profile targets for both carefully planned attacks by terrorist organizations and for spontaneous, spur-of-the-moment attacks by a random assortment of homicidal psychos, does it really need to be pointed out how totally freaking insane this is?
So, Randy, if something does happen, don’t blame the Obama administration. There’s enough sense in the Obama administration to understand that this is the perfect set up for a seriously bad outcome, and one that’s being made nearly impossible to remedy. It will be pure luck if the nation gets through the next few weeks without a serious incident, and it won’t be like nobody was warned.
@Greg: Dummy, why do you think the situation has come to this? Obama can not open his mouth without talking gun control. This is the expected back lash. Maybe we can blame it on the teleprompter!
short memory-recall the private deal with iran (execuative order) was to decreased terrorist attacks-that is why the POS-lisbian hill, drunk kerry and cocaine pres. got paid big bucks
It has been proven that both holder and obama were the instigators of the fast and furious debacle. Their reason was so obama could write/pass (as if he had the authority) strict(er) gun laws. It has been proven that obama based on the following sources, is an enabler of terrorism. (there are more instances, however I don’t have the time to post all)
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/06/shocker_gun_used_in_paris_terrorist_attack_part_of_fast_and_furious_gun_walking_op.html
(Accomplices before the fact? Aware but didn’t call police? Family? No clues in print …. yet.)
“““
The media tried to blame the truck, his craziness, called him a lone wolf, a non-Muslim, etc.
Turns out he practiced Takfari Islam before killing a bunch of infidels and dying in the process.
Remember 9-11-01?
Many of those terrorist-hijackers practiced Takfari Islam before their deaths, too.
See, the Takfari ”reasoning” is that you are a saved man simply for doing this jihadi attack.
Therefore ANYTHING you do before hand is excused.
One imam even told jihadis that anal sex was acceptable because you might need a bomb in there later.
Drinking alcohol, shaving one’s beard, non-attendance at Mosque, eating pork are all OK for Takfari jihadists.
PS, according to some who have tried it, even writing about Takfari Islamic jihad can get you banned from Facebook.
No wonder people are ignorant.
Facebook and Twitter and all the others give them the ILLUSION that they can get informed via those outlets.
@Randy, #7:
Another thing I dislike about Trump is the effect he’d have as president on the manners and behavior of America’s impressionable children. He’s already had such an effect on his adult supporters.
But getting back to the point: If you can’t figure out that allowing open carry among potentially huge crowds of demonstrators when the crowds themselves will be totally obvious high-profile targets for terrorist attackers, you are utterly without a clue.
We have just had several clear demonstrations of why this is a very, very bad idea. It’s like giving terrorists an engraved invitation to a perfect opportunity to kill large numbers of innocent people, while setting up lights and cameras so that the whole thing can be televised world-wide. It goes beyond stupidity.
@Greg: Obama and the left agenda has sold more guns and caused almost all of our open carry laws to be enacted. Now d you under stand? Likely notsince you can not think that far.
Open carry means OUT IN THE OPEN.
So, police will be able to see – and run background checks on – each and every one of those who decide to carry.
Probably pretty quick arrests for anyone menacing, threatening or pointing guns at folks.
@Greg:
Obama has taught our youth that they should “punish their enemies” and “if they bring a knife, bring a gun”. He has been teaching the lesson that violent protest is just fine if it is for a leftist cause and even murder does not disqualify your protest.
Obama has been teaching that dependency on the government is honorable and responsibility can be replaced with blaming anyone handy.
Hillary, of course, teaches that lying and corruption is profitable.
Something you leftists have not quite grasped is that if a criminal bent on committing violence wants to carry a gun, they will. Neither do they seek permission or obey any laws.
Cleveland police union asks for suspension of ‘open carry’ in wake of Baton Rouge, ahead of RNC
Why ask for this? Because, all politics aside, they know that anything else while the RNC is going on would be completely crazy.
@Greg: Because they fear the left with guns. We see no violence from any group but the left. THEY are the concern.
Actually, there’s been this minor problem with a non-leftist organization called ISIS lately, which likely sees the 2016 political conventions as ideal, made-to-order opportunities to do something really big with an absolute minimum of preparation, resources, or effort. So, there’s that.
@Greg: Oh? Now you acknowledge ISIS as a problem? Should we curtail Muslim immigration until we can properly vet the applicants?
Black Lives Matter, New Black Panthers, violent thugs paid by Soros to commit violence is a threat, too.
@Greg: @Bill: You will never admit to understanding that all of this started because Obama never supported the police until Baton Rouge. His comments were “the police acted stupidly” when they found a man who happened to be black breaking into a home. They wanted him to prove it was his home. That has actually happened to me. Obama sided with the black professor who was uncooperative with police. He sided with Black Lives Matter when the shooting in Ferguson was deemed a valid shoot even by his own justice department. He always blames guns instead of the shooter. His ignorant comments at the Dallas Police memorial event was a slap in the face of law enforcement. Allowing Hillary to skate on her crimes sent a message to the country that there are different laws for different people. He allowed his AG to dismiss the charges against the New Black Panthers in Philadelphia. Obama started this ball rolling and does not have the will or the intelligence to stop it. Any thing that happens in Cleveland where Black on Police occurs is part of Obama’s unintended consequences.
@Bill
Yep. ISIS. That would be the organization the Obama administration has been conducting open warfare against for the past two years. Maybe republicans should get his Request for Authorization to Use Military Force out of whatever Congressional bottom drawer they dropped it in and read the d-mn thing. Then maybe they should think about all the sh-t they gave him over domestic surveillance programs. They probably could have worked that in somewhere between Benghazi investigations and their 60 attempts to repeal Obamacare.
@Bill: Bill, Sorry. I clicked you by mistake.@Greg: Actually Greg, You have been singing that same old song for years. Obama has all the authority he need to do the job. He only wants to do a half assed job like, everything else he has attempted.
The Trump organization can’t even select a logo without looking like complete idiots.
@Bill #1:
Ah, yes.
There is the call to suspend freedom of speech, the right of assembly, and the right to disagree. How fascist can you get?
How come these rights were worth dying for in 1776 but are no longer worth risking the “public safety” over?
You want martial law declared because you don’t like the current president?
If that ISN’T it, what exactly DO you propose?
@Greg: I am sure that selecting a logo rates up there with not being able to negotiate a nuclear deal with Iran.
At last! Specifics! Trump’s plan to wipe out ISIS.
The man is an idiot. We are going to destroy ISIS, but it won’t require troops. We’ll use surrounding countries. We’ll use NATO. Yada yada yada yada. Pence knows Trump just said nothing, but his job is to provide cover:
Pence: “This is the kind of leadership America needs. And it begins with deciding to destroy the enemies of our freedom.”
Stahl: (Yet again) “How?”
Pence: “How we do that—I have every confidence—you remember, I served on the Foreign Affairs Committee—and I’m very confident that when Donald Trump becomes President of the United States he’ll give a directive to our military commanders, bring together other nations, and we will use the enormous resources of the United States to destroy that enemy.”
So, in a more eloquent fashion, Pence also says absolutely nothing. WTF? We seem to be one Stooge short of a complete set.
Allow me to call your attention to the fact that Trump and Pence have just described in the vaguest possible terms what the Obama administration has actually been doing with success for the past two years.
@Randy, #24:
If you can’t figure out how to tie your shoes, you probably aren’t ready to be given the keys to the family car.
@George Wells: Martial law? Why is it you have so much trouble with comprehension that you have to project your wishes into what others say?
Did you not see what happened in Dallas and Nice? Oh, that’s right… Dallas was about gun control and the left is probably still trying to figure out what to blame Nice on so you are in the dark there.
First, we don’t need any more Black Lives Matter protests against their self-generated lies. No cops have killed any people on account of their race, so what are they protesting? We don’t need more property damage and violence over their propaganda.
And we DAMN SURE don’t need to endanger any more cops as the protect these Soros-funded, leftist agitators. A cop that suffers so much as a scratch is too high a price to pay for liars to spread violent propaganda.
But, being a leftist yourself, I’m sure cops’ lives is a small price to pay to protect more violence so the Obama administration can propose more restrictions on the lives of everyone but the instigators and perpetrators.
@Greg: You know what HASN’T worked? Sending aircraft fully loaded with ordinance only to have them return fully loaded because the President would not give authorization to strike a target. It’s as if Obama doesn’t want to harm his most magnificent achievement… the rise of ISIS.
@Bill, #27:
Have you considered the ridiculous premise underlying that point? Here it is: Every aircraft sent out to engage an identified target should expend all ordnance before returning. Even if that target has since vanished, apparently, or moved inside an elementary school, or hospital, or into a crowded residential area. Apparently you should always bomb something, for the sake of greater efficiency.
You do understand that when missions are cancelled they aren’t then counted as attacks on enemy positions, I assume. The count of ISIS targets destroyed doesn’t include elementary schools that we refrained from blowing to bits.
I see somebody has pulled down the YouTube video I linked to in #25, concerning the details of the alternate Trump/Pence Plan to Destroy ISIS. Trump’s comments have reappeared here. You can read Pence’s clarification of Trump’s empty-headed blather in Post #25. Better still, watch the entire 60 Minutes interview on the CBS website. They will employ a Magical Presidential Directive against ISIS.
Details? They don’ need no steenking details. They’ve got a Magical Directive.
@Greg: More than 25% should, shouldn’t they?
@Randy #24:
Successful negotiation of deals requires that BOTH parties have something that the other party wants. Everyone who so merrily blames Obama for “negotiating” a lousy deal with Iran seems to be ignorant of the fact that we have almost nothing that Iran wants. We don’t have a monopoly on technology – they can buy what technology they need elsewhere – and they are in no great need of our dollars, so the fact that we don’t need their oil is moot. They have the power to behave themselves and thereby help stabilize the Middle East, which is something that we want very badly… AND THEY KNOW IT, and they are consequently disinclined to behave nicely.
Iran has an enormous logistical advantage in the Middle East by simply BEING there, while every bullet we waste over there has to be shipped half-way around the globe… AND THEY KNOW IT. Every ounce of gold worth of mischief they create costs us a hundred ounces to counter… AND THEY KNOW IT. Obama basically had nothing with which to apply leverage (sanctions having already done all they COULD do) other than threatening nuclear war, and Iran KNEW that we would not cash that check. So there was no “deal,” really, no legitimate quid pro quo, no agreement at arms’ length between equals. Just a political dance, a bit of political theater.
I would agree that the “logo” issue is a bunch of nonsense. Our collective obsession with all things even remotely phallic suggests that a neurosis of epidemic proportions is upon us. I sure hope they aren’t going to serve bananas and plums at the convention!
@Randy #5:
Since when does the president’s administration provide resources? Congress holds the purse strings, not the president. And do you REALLY mean to imply that removing ISIS from the Middle East would end Radical Islamic Terrorism?
Every time you kill one Islamic terrorist, you create several more, and there are over 1.6 billion Muslims, so you do the math.
@Bill #27:
I have no problem with comprehension. I UNDERSTAND that the constitutionally protected right to protest is not dependent upon any measure of justification, truth, righteousness, or any other qualitative metric. The SUSPENSION of that liberty is equivalent to the imposition of martial law. What do YOU not understand about that?
There continues to be very serious racial friction here in America, and we differ in our respective assessments of the causes of that friction. But laws already exist that deal with property destruction, physical violence and murder, and these should be enough to handle the likes of our recent events.
If you conclude that the police CANNOT maintain civil peace, then you DO declare martial law, you DO suspend constitutionally guaranteed liberties, and you call in the Army and the National Guard to RESTORE order and the freedoms that you temporarily had to suspend.
Or perhaps you’d prefer to rely on the professional expertise of all those open-carry, assault weapon-toting civilians to protect you INSTEAD of outfitting the police with sufficient firepower to overwhelm the thugs who YOU’VE allowed to buy military-grade arms. Yeah, I see how YOUR way will get us right back into another civil war – something that the South has been wishing for since 1865.
@Greg: Greg, you really have no idea how to prioritize important issues or action. It is evident you would never have made a leader in your storied career as a military officer. If a logo is supposed to define a career and a mentality, what do you think your irrational conclusions and post say about you.
Sorry. I couldn’t quite follow that. One point of clarification, however: To paraphrase a fondly-remembered drill instructor, I was never a Sir; I always worked for a living. Now, drop and give me twenty!
@George Wells:
Oh, so you’ve never seen protests banned in the interest of public safety?
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2012/03/the_anti_protest_bill_signed_by_barack_obama_is_a_quiet_attack_on_free_speech_.html
When you have protests that are designed to bring the police out and exposed as targets, especially a protest based on blatant lies, they should be disallowed. They do, after all, have to receive a permit. No permit, no protest. No protest, no risk to police.
@George Wells: We had $150 billion, which we handed over before they ever honored any of the agreement.
@Bill #35:
Exactly my point, Bill.
What do you think Iran would have done if we DIDN’T pay them to delay their nuke program? You think they were anticipating blusterous buffoon Trump as president, and were AFRAID of him and his self-legendary negotiating skills? (Hardly.)
We were “negotiating” from a position of absurd weakness, having no consensus among the rest of the countries that matter to Iran as to what SHOULD be done… to back us up, and no leverage to speak of. What else did you expect to happen?
Personally, I’d have rather we waited until Iran actually nuked someone, and then we wiped them off the face of the earth with a vengeful retaliation on Israel’s (of course) account. Would have started WWIII, but we’re on that road anyway, so WTF. Serves mankind right for having squandered this once-beautiful, once-unpolluted planet by over-reproducing ourselves like so many crack-addled lab rats. Blessed are the insects, for THEY shall inherit the Earth.
And let me get this straight…
You are JUSTIFYING Obama’s “quiet attack on free speech”???
Because you’re suggesting exactly the same thing.
Pardon me, SIR, but your double standard is showing.
Two wrongs don’t make a right.
A half dozen cops get needlessly killed, and you’re ready to suspend the Constitution.
Mighty skittish of you, I think…
@George Wells: So now we are paying tribute again. I thought Jefferson put a stop to that.
But, you’re OK with paying ransoms to terrorist states to pretend to stop bad behavior. I see.
@Bill #37:
It is so Trumpish of you to paint the Iran deal in those words, but totally expected.
Am I “OK” with it?
Well, considering what the alternatives were, the answer to that question would have to be an unenthusiastic “YES.”
Unenthusiastic because, while we were certainly in a BETTER position than the Axis powers who SURRENDERED at the end(s) of WWII, we DID have other, much worse options that had a SLIGHT chance of working. There IS a SLIGHT chance that something else might have worked, only nobody knows what that something IS.
No, Obama paid Iran to kick the can down the road, and in doing so bought EVERYBODY a ten-year-long chance to either help Iran redirect its murderous ambitions, or to develop either the technology or a strategy to neutralize whatever Iran develops IN TEN YEARS.
Time is money. Obama bought some time. If the World squanders this ten-year period of grace, for whatever it is worth, then we’ll be right back in the same frying pan. But even then, we will have gained that ten years past, during which you and I will have eaten countless lobsters and the like, and we’ll be ten years closer to meeting our maker and all the happier for that.
Throughout history, plenty of people have paid “ransoms” or “tribute” or whatever else you want to call it when you PAY somebody to do something that you have no POWER to force them to do. It is what people do when they find themselves in this sort of position, and WE are in this position NOW, along with the rest of the non-Muslim world.
You should thank Obama, and don’t waste the ten years HE bought you.
@George Wells:
The alternative being a safe world. When Chamberlain returned from Czechoslovakia with “peace for our time”, how’d that work out?
That Obama… what a foreign policy genius.
I see where the leftists ACLU(Athiests Communists & Lawyers Undergrounds planning some stupid lawsuits if trump gets elected I’m telling you the ACLU need to be exterminated run clean out of america along with BLM,NBPP,Nation Of ISlam and the Useless Nations
@Bill #39:
You reveal a world vision no more realistic than the idiotic answers given by Miss Universe contestants when asked “What is YOUR greatest hope for Mankind?” (“I hope for World Peace where all children can hold hands and sing “Cumbia” together.”)
Of course, that fiction is no more disturbingly mindless than the constant stream of mind-numbing slogans coming from Trump (“Make America Great Again.”) (“Make THEM pay for the wall.”) (“I’d make GOOD deals.”) A big bag of slogans that sparkle don’t add up to competent leadership. They add up to a fantasy that an ad agency specializing in 15-second sound bites has seemingly sold to YOUR HALF of the American public AT A TERRIBLE PRICE.
Just because “safe” is what we’d LIKE to be doesn’t mean that we can simply vote in favor of it and make it so. If Trump is anywhere NEAR being the “Great Negotiator” he claims to be, he KNOWS that he doesn’t have any leverage over Iran… that would be the leverage that YOU haven’t bothered to illuminate, by the way. And, unless he’s blisteringly mad, he won’t start World War III just to show whomever survives that the last REPUBLICAN president had more moxie than the last Democrat CIC.
What has Trump actually suggested he’d do differently? “I’d NEGOTIATE!!!!”
Big deal.
Tell me something REAL.
@George Wells: Well, actually negotiating would be a start instead of rolling over on their backs with their tail between their legs hoping the Iranians won’t say something unkind to them… then THANKING them for capturing our sailors.
I find it most difficult to imagine anyone cites this administration as a positive example of negotiating from strength. Look around, George… does the world look safer and more peaceful since Obama and Hillary have had their turn?
@Greg: Given Orlando, followed quickly by Dallas, and then by Nice, the fact that the party conventions are totally obvious, very high profile targets for both carefully planned attacks by terrorist organizations and for spontaneous, spur-of-the-moment attacks by a random assortment of homicidal psychos, does it really need to be pointed out how totally freaking insane this is?
lol we do shit like this to make the left lose it, when nothing happens they just are amazed and ride the rainbow unicorn off to where liberal policies work.
As much as they wait for the fireworks the only police brutality they can find is a kid getting fistbumps from every cop he could toddle up to.
http://www.newsnet5.com/news/local-news/cleveland-metro/kids-high-five-fist-bump-police-officers-in-public-square
@Bill #42:
You continue to fantasize about “negotiating from a position of strength” when we are in no such position with Iran. I told you this already, remember? We have nothing they want. What do you propose we bargain with?
Regarding the sailors Iran captured, our OWN assessment was that OUR personnel erred (we are in the process of disciplining them, for command errors and for failure to comply with UCMJ regulations covering behavior while in enemy hands. The boat was in Iranian water that it had no right to be in, and Iran acted lawfully. We apologized for OUR MISTAKE, and Iran graciously surrendered what they captured BACK TO US. What did you expect Obama to do, threaten to nuke them because WE made a mistake? We are not ALWAYS in the right, and when we are wrong, it takes COURAGE (not obnoxious bluster) to admit it.
Regarding “siting this administration as a positive example of negotiating from a position of strength”… WHO is doing that?
Certainly, with Iran, the ONLY position of strength we hold over them is that we ALREADY have a nuclear arsenal, while they don’t. Understandably, they are keenly aware of this particular advantage we hold over them, and they’d like to correct it. Sooner or later they will, and THEN we will have NO position of strength from which to negotiate ANYTHING with them.
Your fantasy about “negotiating from a position of strength” is just that – a fantasy. When your enemy (or adversary or whatever else you want to call him) isn’t impressed by the strength that you THINK you have, for all intents and purposes you DON’T have that strength in that arena. Iran is convinced that we WON’T use nuclear weapons on them first (and we won’t, so they are right) and therefore the fact that we HAVE such weapons is moot. This is a predicament from which we have no escape. If you REALLY believe otherwise, explain what strength of ours Iran DOES tremble at the sight of.
Oh, RIGHT! You think that if we elect a maniac as president, Iran will BE VERY, VERY AFRAID.
Actually, EVERYONE will be afraid if that happens.
Let’s hope it doesn’t.
@George Wells:
True, but Obama created that position of weakness.
@Bill: That is correct. Iran was floundering under the sanctions until Obama gave them a billion dollars and basically everything they wanted. He also had the opportunity to support the opposition during the elections and failed there too.
@Randy: Whenever wise action has been required, Obama has done the exact opposite. His actions are what has fed the accusations of him being a Muslim stooge; he makes every effort to act like one.
@Bill #45:
Well, at least you got the first part right… FINALLY.
But Obama didn’t “create” the position of weakness that the United States is in with Iran. Have a bit of history, sweetheart:
The United States backed the Shah of Iran back in the 1970’s. We had numerous beneficial arrangements with the Shah’s government – our military actively trained Iranian pilots to fly the fighter jets THAT WE SOLD THEM, and we put thousands of Iranian students through college HERE IN AMERICA to help Iran appreciate Western… stuff. Republican Presidents Nixon and Ford were instrumental in supporting the Pahlavi dynasty. Then, in 1977, dissidents began demonstrating against the Shah’s Islamo-repressive regime, and in relatively short order, the “Iranian Revolution” replaced the Shah’s secular government with Ayatollah Khomeini’s Shi’ite theocracy. The collapse of Iran’s secular government marked the end of AMERICA’S influence in Iran. When the Shah left Iran, so did our influence. You may CHOOSE to blame Jimmy Carter for not INTERFERING in Iranian politics to PREVENT Khomeini from deposing the Shah – our “friend” – but you certainly can’t blame Obama for it.
Nothing that Republican Presidents Reagan and Bush did over the 12 years following Carter’s presidency mattered a lick to the Shi’i regime in Iran, and neither did Clinton’s, Bush’s or Obama’s tenure matter to them either. We haven’t had a lick of leverage over Iranian behavior since the Shah retreated into exile, and your implication that this history did not occur is ridiculous.
Since the Shah left power, the only thing that a US president could have done to get Iran’s undivided attention would have been to have dropped a few nuclear bombs on Tehran, and NONE of our presidents, Republican OR Democrat, were STUPID enough to do that.
Thus, NO leverage and NO “negotiating from a position of power.”
It is as simple as that.
@George Wells: Nice history lesson. Only, you leave out some details.
Obama started sucking up to Iran from his first day in office. He, believing his own false rhetoric that the world hated us because of George Bush, though he could just charisma Iran to cooperating with us. They spit on him.
Iran had two popular uprisings against the oppressive Islamic regime; Obama failed to acknowledge either one, allowing a brutal suppression of the second uprising, a protest against the sham election.
Iran was struggling and strangling under US led sanctions. Obama lifted them before Iran complied with a single line of the agreement and handed them $150 billion dollars… which they promptly went out and bought Russian weapons and missile technology with.
All along, Obama telegraphed what he was going to do… give in every step of the way. The mere sight of Kerry must have caused the Iranians to be giddy with anticipation of victory.
Obama excretes weakness. It is palpable. Our enemies can sense it and every one of them took great advantage of it. Obama and Hillary have been a foreign policy joke. A bad joke.
@Bill #49:
The “details” that you believe I “left out” are misleading to the point of being simply wrong.
Iran is over 90% Shi’ite, and the “uprising” you mention was the effort of a small minority that had no real chance of becoming anything other than ANOTHER unrepresentative dictatorship, had we bullied the Shi’ites into accepting their domination in exactly the same manner as had the Shah’s. THAT’S why we didn’t “support” that “uprising.”
“Self-governance” depends upon majority rule, does it not? The “oppression” that you seem to believe the Islamic regime was engaging in was the MAJORITY’S expression of Sharia Law, something that the PEOPLE rose up against the Shah because he DIDN’T impose it. Sure, there were thousands of Western-educated Iranians who became pariahs in their own communities as the culture shifted toward becoming principally an Islamic State, but THE STATE HAD THE RIGHT TO DO THAT!
IT WAS NONE OF OUR BUSINESS.
WE HAD NO RIGHT TO INTERFERE.
We have no business attempting to convert the entire World to OUR brand of governance any more than the Russians have a right to attempt to convert the World to Communism.
How can you not understand this?????