Romney: Where’s Obama on Iran?

Politics • Views: 2,330

Interviewed on “This Week,” Mitt Romney called on Barack Obama to speak out about the Iranian election.

Mitt Romney, a once and maybe future presidential candidate, calls Iran’s presidential results “a fraud” and urged President Barack Obama to speak out against the disputed re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Obama, Romney said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” should “indicate that this has been a terribly managed decision by the autocratic regime in Iran.”

The former Republican Massachusetts governor also used the Iranian results to broaden his indictment of Obama, saying “it’s very clear that the president’s policies of going around the world and apologizing for America are not working.”

Meanwhile, tens of thousands of Iranians celebrated the election results in a huge victory rally in Tehran.

Jump to bottom

245 comments
1 Pupdawg  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:03:27am

...holding breath.

2 pingjockey  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:03:43am

Apologizing is not working! No shit.

3 Diamond Bullet  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:04:25am

I have no problem with Obama traveling the world to complain about America. The problem is that he keeps coming back.

4 Gus  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:04:25am

The Obama Effect

/

5 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:04:44am
Obama, Romney said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” should “indicate that this has been a terribly managed decision by the autocratic regime in Iran.”

Kind of an odd way of putting it, IMO.

6 Sharmuta  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:04:56am

I think the Leader of the Free World should make it crystal clear to the Iranian people that the American people share in the desire for a free, prosperous, and peaceful Iran.

7 VegasRick  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:06:08am

Mitt Romney should be POTUS now. Fuck you huckabee!

8 Racer X  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:06:30am

America should stay out of it for the time being. U.S. meddeling would be counterproductive.


The former Republican Massachusetts governor also used the Iranian results to broaden his indictment of Obama, saying “it’s very clear that the president’s policies of going around the world and apologizing for America are not working.”


Ha! Thats gonna sting.

9 MJ  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:06:43am

Well, Joe Biden has spoken out:

Vice President Biden said Sunday that there are "real doubts" about whether Iran's presidential election was free and fair, but the United States has to "accept" Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the winner for now.

The vice president, speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press," stressed that monitors and officials do not yet have enough information to gauge whether the results are accurate but said several factors raise serious questions about the credibility of the vote.

"We don't have all the details. It sure looks like the way they're suppressing speech, the way they're suppressing crowds, the way in which people are being treated, that there's some real doubt about that," Biden said. "I think we have to wait and see, but it didn't seem to be on its face to be as clear cut...."


[Link: www.foxnews.com...]

The problem, of course, is that the "elections" weren't fair to begin with.
The Mullahs decide which candidates can run and which ones can't.
Pipes calls this a "selection" process, not an election process.

10 nadnerb  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:06:59am

He's waiting for a poll. I really don't think Obama has any real conviction here, nor does he have the stones to act on anything. Same goes for North Korea.

11 Darth_K  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:07:12am

Biden is speaking out, the state dept is investigating. Obama is probably just withholding comment till we know more.

12 Diamond Bullet  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:07:42am

On another hilarious note, Biden has apparently admitted that the Administration's projections for job "creation or savings" and employment rates were just guesses.

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

Vice President Joe Biden said Sunday that ''everyone guessed wrong'' on the impact of the economic stimulus, but he defended the administration's spending designed to combat rising joblessness.

Biden said inaccuracies in unemployment predictions shouldn't undercut the White House's support of the $787 billion economic revival plan that has not met the expectations of President Obama's team. Instead, the vice president urged skeptics to look at teachers who kept their classroom assignments and police officers who kept their beats because of financial assistance from Washington.

Obama lied, everybody got fired?

13 subsailor68  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:08:19am

I think the mullahs need a catchy phrase, and since Sir Winston Churchill's not available, I thought I'd try to help out:

If you're not out protesting at 20, you have no heart.
If you're still out protesting at 40, you'll have no head.

14 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:08:39am
Meanwhile, tens of thousands of Iranians celebrated the election results in a huge victory rally in Tehran.

I can't help but notice from the portions of that video in which it's enough of a closeup for faces to be recognizable, that all of the "spontaneous" pro-ShortShit enthusiastic "celebrants" appear to be men, of roughly military age.

Hmm.

15 Kronocide  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:08:50am

Obama is 'monitoring it closely.' Gives me a lot of hope.

16 sattv4u2  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:09:09am

Tens of thousands of people have joined a rally in central Tehran to celebrate the re-election of Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

And the question unanswered is the numbers of protesters. I know geographically they are pretty widespread i n major cities, but are we talking tens, hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands?

17 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:09:12am
Obama, Romney said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” should “indicate that this has been a terribly managed decision by the autocratic regime in Iran.”

The former Republican Massachusetts governor also used the Iranian results to broaden his indictment of Obama, saying “it’s very clear that the president’s policies of going around the world and apologizing for America are not working.”

I have no problem with Obama remaining tight lipped about this. We want this to at least appear to be an internal popular revolution not supported or instigated by the US. Making it appear to the an American support coup attempt would make it much less popular with the people of Iran.

18 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:09:27am

re: #11 Darth_K

Biden is speaking out,

Oh, no... [preemptive wince]

19 JarHeadLifer  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:09:28am

re: VegasRick

Yep. The bigoted Huckster, and his 5,000 year old earth, embodies everything that's wrong with the GOP.

20 tradewind  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:09:33am

re: #10 nadnerb

The ChiComs have said that while they will agree to sanctions on the norks, there must be ' no violence or force' associated with them.
So much for the dreaded Sanctions.
Norks threaten to nuke ? if they are blockaded. We should call that bluff.

21 MacDuff  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:09:37am

Alas, for all of President Obama's happy talk, on Friday-

"Whoever ends up winning the election in Iran, the fact there has been a robust debate hopefully will advance our ability to engage them in new ways"

The Mullahs' newly "reelected" pit bull, Ahmadinejad, remains as feisty as ever and comes out swinging.

It would appear that the "robust debate" thing didn't work out as Obama hoped. The "whoever" that won the "election" apparently wasn't the "whoever" the administration envisioned - as though it really mattered.

I'm sure that Obama is on the roof of the White House, observing the wind sock to determine how he'll play this one out

22 VegasRick  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:09:45am

re: #11 Darth_K

Biden is speaking out, the state dept is investigating. Obama is probably just withholding comment till we know more.

Karma: -25
Registered since: Apr 3, 2008 at 6:46 pm
(Logged in)

No. of comments posted: 12No. of links posted: 0

Get out much?

23 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:09:47am

re: #8 Racer X

Agreed.

24 tradewind  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:09:49am

re: #15 BigPapa

But nothing will change.

25 J.S.  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:11:22am

re: #17 Killgore Trout

I agree. Obama needs to remain (at this time) aloof -- let the Iranians settle their affairs, sans Americans giving "advice."

26 Sharmuta  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:11:39am

Really- it's not that surprising the administration is being relatively silent. Bush I was not forceful after the Tianenmen Square massacre. I was deeply saddened that the President didn't condemn the massacre more vigorously at that time. I'm still sickened by how the Butchers of Beijing basically got away with it.

This is no different. The mullahs will get away with screwing over their own people by the international community. The only ones who will hold them accountable are the Iranians themselves, and they don't really have the means to do that. Sad.

27 SixDegrees  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:12:09am

re: #12 Diamond Bullet

On another hilarious note, Biden has apparently admitted that the Administration's projections for job "creation or savings" and employment rates were just guesses.

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

Obama lied, everybody got fired?

Obama lied, employment died.

28 pingjockey  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:12:37am

re: #26 Sharmuta
That still pisses me off.

29 nadnerb  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:12:53am

re: #20 tradewind

Yup. Unenforceable sanctions. Sounds safe to me. Think of it: North Korea could simply place a nuke on a cargo ship bound for somewhere in the civilized world. Does China really think this is a reasonable policy to not stop the ships?

30 alegrias  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:13:18am

OT
LIVE
Israeli PM Bibi Netanyahu speaking on tv, mentions Iranian threat looming large above us, in full force as we learned yesterday....radical Islam and nuclear weapons....

31 Kosh's Shadow  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:13:18am

When Russia invaded Georgia, McCain had his comments right away.
It took Obama's team several days to say the same thing!
They're probably waiting for someone else to say something, then they will wait to make it look like they came up with the idea.
Unfortunately, now he's in charge and people are waiting for him.

32 tradewind  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:13:29am

re: #22 VegasRick

BHO's fallback position when he doesn't want or know what to say is ' the prudent thing is to wait until we know more to comment'.... like he did when asked why he was silent on the bailout fraud...... even though he had been briefed months before.
Just another way to obfuscate while pretending to remain so above the fray.

33 J.S.  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:13:48am

OT

Netanyahu is giving his speech...

34 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:14:06am

Posted on Tehran Bureau's Sunday Iran Alerts at 11:38AM Eastern Time (US)

"... getting calls from tehran saying that the kids there are in bad shape"

35 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:14:24am

re: #17 Killgore Trout

I have no problem with Obama remaining tight lipped about this. We want this to at least appear to be an internal popular revolution not supported or instigated by the US. Making it appear to the an American support coup attempt would make it much less popular with the people of Iran.

Of course, there's a difference between that, and simply a forthright statement in support of fair elections and against thuggery.

I agree it's a tough call. There are risks to Obama making a strong statement. But there's risk to silence, too; that the pro-democracy demonstrators in Iran will feel abandoned, and give up.

36 nadnerb  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:14:26am

re: #33 J.S.

Is there a live feed?

37 itellu3times  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:14:32am

Obama is just sad that nobody in Iran even wrote in his name.

38 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:14:32am

I thought Obama HAD spoken out and called the Iranian "elections a fraud" am I wrong about that - or maybe it's a timing thing - Romney speaks and Obama answers by coming out against it?
Or Obama speaks out and Romney doesn't know it and says he should speak out?

NIAGARA FALLS, Ontario - The U.S. on Saturday refused to accept hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's claim of a landslide re-election victory in Iran and said it was looking into allegations of election fraud.

Any hopes by the Obama administration of gaining a result similar to Lebanon's recent election, won by a Western-backed moderate coalition, appeared to be in jeopardy.

"We are monitoring the situation as it unfolds in Iran, but we, like the rest of the world, are waiting and watching to see what the Iranian people decide," U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said at a news conference with Canada's foreign affairs minister, Lawrence Cannon.

Minutes after Clinton spoke, the White House released a two-sentence statement praising "the vigorous debate and enthusiasm that this election generated, particularly among young Iranians," but expressing concern about "reports of irregularities."

[Link: enews.earthlink.net...]

39 Last Mohican  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:14:44am

re: #17 Killgore Trout

I have no problem with Obama remaining tight lipped about this. We want this to at least appear to be an internal popular revolution not supported or instigated by the US. Making it appear to the an American support coup attempt would make it much less popular with the people of Iran.

I agree with that point. Many Iranians clearly despise their government, but I don't think that too many have a great love for the United States either. It would be an enormous blessing for all mankind if the mullahs were to be ejected from that country, but nothing would kill any prospects of that happening any faster than the perception of American meddling.

40 alegrias  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:14:47am

re: #6 Sharmuta

I think the Leader of the Free World should make it crystal clear to the Iranian people that the American people share in the desire for a free, prosperous, and peaceful Iran.

* * * *
That's what Bibi Netanyahu is saying right now! Go, Bibi, new leader of Free Democracies with balls.

41 pink freud  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:14:57am

Netanyahu about to deliver his speech.

Streaming.

42 MJ  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:15:36am

it's truly interesting to watch the Obama team come to grips with this
"selection".
Why is it taking so long for the Obama team to their act together? They have sent conflicting messages.
Didn't it occur to anyone in the State Department or the White House that the "selection" process might be a fraud from the get-go?

43 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:15:43am

re: #25 J.S.

I agree. Obama needs to remain (at this time) aloof -- let the Iranians settle their affairs, sans Americans giving "advice."


We almost certainly have NSA and CIA folks on the ground and giving assistance but it's very important that whatever our involvement or support should be very low profile. There are already a lot of rumors that the police are importing Hezbollah fighters to help squash the protesters. This really damages the government's credibility.
Hell, now that I think about it I'm pretty sure the Israelis are offering assistance too. Some things are best left off the front pages.

44 Sharmuta  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:15:45am

re: #35 Occasional Reader

Of course, there's a difference between that, and simply a forthright statement in support of fair elections and against thuggery.

I agree it's a tough call. There are risks to Obama making a strong statement. But there's risk to silence, too; that the pro-democracy demonstrators in Iran will feel abandoned, and give up.

I agree. Saying that we support the will of the people should be problematic. I would think it would give the Iranians some resolve that they're not alone.

45 tradewind  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:15:49am

re: #29 nadnerb

In UN-speak, ' imposing sanctions' has always been code for ' we got nothin'.

46 J.S.  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:15:56am

re: #36 nadnerb

It's on BBC World (if you get that channel..)

47 alegrias  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:16:14am

OT
Bibi called Iran's elections yesterday "so-called elections"

Calling a sham a sham! Not buying your ACORNmullah electioneering.

48 albusteve  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:16:33am

re: #26 Sharmuta

Really- it's not that surprising the administration is being relatively silent. Bush I was not forceful after the Tianenmen Square massacre. I was deeply saddened that the President didn't condemn the massacre more vigorously at that time. I'm still sickened by how the Butchers of Beijing basically got away with it.

This is no different. The mullahs will get away with screwing over their own people by the international community. The only ones who will hold them accountable are the Iranians themselves, and they don't really have the means to do that. Sad.

Bush said little while the Buddhists got their asses kicked in Myanmar...Chinese again

49 VegasRick  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:16:35am

re: #32 tradewind

BHO's fallback position when he doesn't want or know what to say is ' the prudent thing is to wait until we know more to comment'.... like he did when asked why he was silent on the bailout fraud...... even though he had been briefed months before.
Just another way to obfuscate while pretending to remain so above the fray.

He goes around the globe giving speeches on how bad we are and now he is being coy in not discussing Iran. Bullshit.

50 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:16:36am

re: #42 MJ Um, please see my #38 - from the AP.

51 nadnerb  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:16:43am

re: #46 J.S.

Thanks!

52 Gus  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:17:17am

Call me cynical but if Obama remains silent it won't be for any altruistic reasons or to allow the appearance of an "internal popular revolution." He will remain silent in order to not "offend" Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs so he can finally get that gig he's been seeking with Ahmadinejad -- without pre-conditions.

53 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:17:36am

re: #43 Killgore Trout


Some things are best left off the front pages.

Again, you're conflating two very different things. Nobody is calling for Obama to give a speech in which he declares "we have CIA agents on the ground in Iran at this very moment, working on this thing."

54 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:17:55am

re: #52 Gus 802 Uh, Gus?
Please see my #38 above.

55 alegrias  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:18:32am

re: #15 BigPapa

Obama is 'monitoring it closely.' Gives me a lot of hope.

* * * *
That's what those thugs with big sticks were doing at the Philadelphia election place, "monitoring" and offering free flagellation.

56 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:19:20am

re: #53 Occasional Reader

No, but I think even a speech praising the popular uprising could hurt it. He might make some off hand non-committal statement but I think anymore than that right now could do more damage than good.

57 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:19:31am

re: #38 realwest

I thought Obama HAD spoken out and called the Iranian "elections a fraud"

You're quoting where there is no such quote, my friend... the actual link is to much, much weaker language about "looking into allegations" of fraud.

58 pingjockey  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:19:32am

re: #55 alegrias
It's an Islamic thing...you wouldn't understand. ///

59 alegrias  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:19:56am

re: #24 tradewind

But nothing will change.

* * * *
It's Jimmy Carter rocking in his rocking chair while Iranian thugs stomped out Western values, all over again. This time, they're nuclear armed mullahthugs.

60 quickjustice  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:20:34am

Lenin's supporters are celebrating the defeat of Trotsky? No big deal.

61 VegasRick  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:20:41am

re: #55 alegrias

* * * *
That's what those thugs with big sticks were doing at the Philadelphia election place, "monitoring" and offering free flagellation.

That is legal now, I guess. I'm gonna do it and sue the fuck out of somebody when I get charged.

62 nadnerb  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:20:58am

Netanyahu is bringing it home. Sweet, sweet clarity.

63 sattv4u2  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:21:05am

I wish I understood the language. I'm at work and just moves a satellite dish to a bird that carries several Iranian channels. So far hrre are no images of protests, wither pro or anti gov't (the channels most likely are gov't controlled, btw) . I'll keep an eye on it

64 gander  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:21:10am

I want to know if Jimmy Carter has approved these election results. (Perhaps Obama does too.)

65 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:21:17am
Meanwhile, tens of thousands of Iranians celebrated the election results

Could be worse; it could be a Tea Party.

///

66 J.S.  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:21:23am

re: #53 Occasional Reader

Right now there seems to be something of a split in the conservative thuggery of Iran -- Ahmadinejad vs Mousavi -- and I think it'd be problematic for the United States to be seen as taking sides in this internal affair...

67 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:21:50am

re: #57 Occasional Reader
Geez this new LGF spy addition is addicting - I know what I quoted O.R., but how much further do you think Obama should go about these (to me, anyway) fraudulent elections?

68 MJ  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:21:50am

re: #50 realwest

Um, please see my #38 - from the AP.

U.S. Officials to Continue to Engage Iran

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is determined to press on with efforts to engage the Iranian government, senior officials said Saturday, despite misgivings about irregularities in the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad...

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

Like I said, they've been sending conflicting messages.

69 albusteve  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:22:00am

re: #56 Killgore Trout

No, but I think even a speech praising the popular uprising could hurt it. He might make some off hand non-committal statement but I think anymore than that right now could do more damage than good.

nothing ventured, nothing gained....he can speak out in terms of the quest for fairness and freedom without rocking the boat...he does not want to

70 sattv4u2  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:22:27am

re: #66 J.S.

Right now there seems to be something of a split in the conservative thuggery of Iran -- Ahmadinejad vs Mousavi -- and I think it'd be problematic for the United States to be seen as taking sides in this internal affair...

sort of like choosing between who you want to take your lunch money. John Dillinger and Baby Face Neslon, , huh

71 kynna  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:22:28am

re: #7 VegasRick

Mitt Romney should be POTUS now. Fuck you huckabee!

He wouldn't have won. Nobody could have been Obama in '08. If his opponent (whoever you put in that role) had beaten him, we'd still be in litigation over it. As it was, he did win and we have what we have.

72 Gus  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:22:33am

re: #54 realwest

Uh, Gus?
Please see my #38 above.

I don't see anything new there. That report is covering the comments from Hillary Rodham Clinton in which she said, "the enthusiasm and the very vigorous debate and dialogue." As far as I know Obama has simply commented on a "robust debate."

73 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:22:45am

The US and Israel have been supporting real rebel groups in Iran during the past 8 yrs. I wonder if the US still is? My fear is that we will abandon the Iranians like we have in prior democracy movements. The problem is, I can understand how, we didn't do anything in Czechoslovakia (because of the Soviets), but there is no reason not to be actively engaged here. This may go down as the same type of failure as the Kurdish uprising against Sadam did.

74 tradewind  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:22:50am

re: #52 Gus 802

This latest stunt by dinnerjacket should make it impossible for him to expect negotiations with BHO without preconditions.
Should.

75 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:23:12am

re: #68 MJ Thanks MJ - I hadn't seen that before.
Wonder why they are sending conflicting messages?

76 Dr. Shalit  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:23:35am

On Iran as with much else Mitt Romney is on top of it - President Obama is "Present."

-S-

77 MacDuff  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:23:49am

re: #64 gander

I want to know if Jimmy Carter has approved these election results. (Perhaps Obama does too.)

I'm sure if Ahmadinejad would just call him, Jimmy could do it right over the phone - then we can put this whole ugly mess behind us./

78 pingjockey  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:24:01am

re: #75 realwest
Because it's amateur hour in the WH and State Dept.

79 brookly red  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:24:26am

re: #74 tradewind

This latest stunt by dinnerjacket should make it impossible for him to expect negotiations with BHO without preconditions.
Should.

Of course there will be preconditions, & O will agree to all of them.

80 sattv4u2  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:24:28am

re: #75 realwest

Thanks MJ - I hadn't seen that before.
Wonder why they are sending conflicting messages?

you're kidding, right?

When sitting on a fence, depending on which way you face, you have to have the "correct" story for that side of the fence

81 quickjustice  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:25:10am

re: #68 MJ

"The Obama Administration is determined to press on with efforts to engage the Iranian government"?

Let me translate for you: "The Obama Administration is determined to sell out democratic opponents of the Iranian regime by reaching an accommodation with the mullahs."

82 Gus  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:25:15am

re: #74 tradewind

This latest stunt by dinnerjacket should make it impossible for him to expect negotiations with BHO without preconditions.
Should.

Pretty much. If anything it's starting to look like Ahmadinejad is setting the conditions or will set the conditions for any meeting with Obama.

83 MacDuff  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:25:24am

re: #75 realwest

Thanks MJ - I hadn't seen that before.
Wonder why they are sending conflicting messages?

So that all posteriors may be covered?

84 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:25:32am

re: #67 realwest

Geez this new LGF spy addition is addicting - I know what I quoted O.R., but how much further do you think Obama should go about these (to me, anyway) fraudulent elections?

As I said above, I fully acknowledge that it's a hard call. (I *do* find his "vigorous debate" quote rather appalling... it implicitly pretends that open democratic debate is actually allowed in Iran, and seems representative of the worst sort of hopey-changey smileyface nonsense.) But something along the lines of "we support a free and democratic Iran, we denounce the violence that has been unleashed against the demonstrators", at a minimum, could be helpful.

85 Sharmuta  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:25:32am

Bibi says it is a prerequisite that the palestinians must recognize Israel.

86 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:25:36am

re: #72 Gus 802 Well see here's the problem I have. What COULD Obama say without either pissing off the "democratic" (or, more accurately anti-theocratic rule) groups or the Mullahs?

87 alegrias  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:25:58am

re: #35 Occasional Reader

Of course, there's a difference between that, and simply a forthright statement in support of fair elections and against thuggery.

I agree it's a tough call. There are risks to Obama making a strong statement. But there's risk to silence, too; that the pro-democracy demonstrators in Iran will feel abandoned, and give up.

* * *
Sorry didn't reply last night, my spotty air card connection died.

Of course Pres. Obama will say weak things signifying NOTHING (to the aspirations of Iran's freedom fighters). Obama promised to meet with Ahmedinejad without preconditions, as Hillary Clinton told China their "internal human rights" mean nothing to us.

Let Tian An Men's 20th anniversary be forgot.
Old terrorist acquaintances' feelings are more important than real "change" such as Pres. Bush brought to Iran's neighbors on both sides of Iran.

88 irongrampa  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:26:02am

re: #75 realwest

So that Obama can use whichever scenario to his best advantage,while assuming neither blame or responsibility for any untoward consequences.

89 pingjockey  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:26:13am

re: #85 Sharmuta
Well, that's a deal killer right there!

90 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:26:25am

OT-BiBi calling on the Palestinians to accept Jewish state as a precondition. Saying that is where peace starts not in settlements. This could be BiBi's "We are not Czechoslovakia" moment.

91 itellu3times  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:26:27am

re: #81 quickjustice

"The Obama Administration is determined to press on with efforts to engage the Iranian government"?

Let me translate for you: "The Obama Administration is determined to sell out democratic opponents of the Iranian regime by reaching an accommodation with the mullahs."

There is no Iranian government, there is just the will of Allah.

92 VegasRick  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:26:34am

re: #80 sattv4u2

you're kidding, right?

When sitting on a fence, depending on which way you face, you have to have the "correct" story for that side of the fence

The many faces of the zero.

93 Last Mohican  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:26:44am

re: #56 Killgore Trout

No, but I think even a speech praising the popular uprising could hurt it. He might make some off hand non-committal statement but I think anymore than that right now could do more damage than good.

I think that's true. But it's worth noting that failing to show support at a crucial moment can have negative consequences too.

In his book See no Evil, Bob Baer describes being a CIA agent covertly deployed in Iraq in 1995. At that time, according to him, a group of disaffected Iraqi military officers and Kurdish rebels had joined together, and were planning a coup against Saddam Hussein. Baer had made contact with them, and they summoned him, asking if the coup would have the blessing of the U.S. government. They didn't want any help, military, financial, or otherwise. They just wanted to know that the U.S. would be willing to deal with their new government. They asked for this because there was a suspicion that the U.S. secretly liked having Saddam in power, and would resist a coup.

Baer asked his superiors for confirmation that the U.S. would in fact support the new government. Not only did they not respond in the affirmative, but they (Clinton himself, maybe) had Baer called back from Iraq to face bizarre, trumped-up charges that he was illegally plotting to kill Saddam. The would-be insurgents took this as abandonment, and the coup never happened. If it had been successful, the Iraq war presumably wouldn't have been necessary.

94 tradewind  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:26:45am

We could use a Bibi thread about now.....
He just said something so simple and clear, and yet so unattainable..... that everything could be solved if the Pals would just say publicly ' Israel is a nation that has the right to exist along side us'.........
What part of that does Jimmy Carter not understand?

95 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:26:46am

re: #85 Sharmuta

Bibi says it is a prerequisite that the palestinians must recognize Israel.

Great minds.

96 quickjustice  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:26:48am

re: #72 Gus 802

Lenin was "robustly debating" Trotsky as he stuffed the ballot boxes? And can we please please please get a deal with you mullahs?/

97 Sheila Broflovski  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:27:04am

Bibi is saying the "refugees" must be resettled in Arab countries. No "right of return" to Israel!

98 alegrias  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:27:04am

re: #48 albusteve

Bush said little while the Buddhists got their asses kicked in Myanmar...Chinese again

* * *
McCain talked about An Saang Suu Chi of Myanmar for YEARS however.

99 sattv4u2  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:27:20am

re: #85 Sharmuta

Bibi says it is a prerequisite that the palestinians must recognize Israel.


100% correct. Hard to have a PEACE between 'countries" with someone that doesn't even admit you ARE one

100 sattv4u2  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:27:39am

re: #88 irongrampa

gmta (#80)

101 tradewind  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:27:40am

re: #79 brookly red

Then TOTUS vastly overestimates the balance in his political capital account, IMO....

102 SeafoodGumbo  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:27:51am

The Downside To Mousavi Winning

True, Ahmadinejad won the election (supposedly).
However, if Mousavi had won--or even worse, if the current 'revolution' puts him in power--there could be a downside.

For Israel.

With all the talk that Mousavi is the reformer--how could Israel possibly go ahead with plans to disable Iran's nuclear facilities? Imageine the world outcry: here is Iran turning a new leaf with the election of a moderate leader and Israel goes ahead and introduces increased tension just when a moderate leader has taken control!

And now, with the rioting going on against the election of Ahmadinejad--if Mousavi should end up somehow taking power, it would make Israel look even worse to attack.

But Israel is still justified to attack in such a case--regardless of how the media describes Mousavi, he is no reformer.

Con Coughlin writes that just as candidates for the Iranian parliament are vetted to insure that they are ideologically pure--

Now the regime, in the form of the Guardian Council, which is charged with upholding the tenets of Khomeini's revolution, has employed the same tactic ahead of the presidential election: Of the original 475 applicants only four candidates have survived the cull. All of them have revolutionary credentials beyond reproach.

Mousavi has kept those credentials nicely polished. Max Boot writes that Rep. Mark Kirk, Republican of Illinois has been sending a “Dear Colleague” letter around the House, pointing out among other things that Mir-Hossein Mousavi, is unlikely to change anything about Iran's nuclear program. In his letter, Kirk notes:

On April 27, 2009, Mr. Mousavi told Der Spiegel, “We will not abandon the great achievements of Iranian scientists. I too will not suspend uranium enrichment.” Der Spiegel asked if he would at least consider the outsourcing of uranium enrichment, as proposed by Russia. Mr. Mousavi responded simply, “No.”

On April 13, 2009, Mr. Mousavi told the Financial Times, “No one in Iran would accept suspension. Progress in nuclear technology and its peaceful use is the right of all countries and nations. This is what we have painfully achieved with our own efforts. No one will retreat.”

On April 6, 2009, according to the Associated Press, Mr. Mousavi said, “We have to have the technology,” adding that “the consequences of giving up the country’s nuclear program would be ‘irreparable’ and that the Iranian people support the nuclear program.”

On March 11, 2009, the Washington Post quoted Mr. Mousavi as saying, “The nuclear technology is one of the examples of the achievements of our youth.”

103 Sheila Broflovski  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:28:27am

He's saying the State of Israel is not dependent on the Holocaust.

104 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:28:30am

re: #84 Occasional Reader

As I said above, I fully acknowledge that it's a hard call. (I *do* find his "vigorous debate" quote rather appalling... it implicitly pretends that open democratic debate is actually allowed in Iran, and seems representative of the worst sort of hopey-changey smileyface nonsense.) But something along the lines of "we support a free and democratic Iran, we denounce the violence that has been unleashed against the demonstrators", at a minimum, could be helpful.


Yeah, you're right. OTOH, I don't see a whole lot of hope here for those demonstators making a lot of headway in Iran and maybe (?) Obama's just trying to cover his ass about this - not wanting to piss off the powers that I regrettfully fear are gonna win even if by force.

105 Gus  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:28:31am

re: #86 realwest

Well see here's the problem I have. What COULD Obama say without either pissing off the "democratic" (or, more accurately anti-theocratic rule) groups or the Mullahs?

I'm not trying to predict what he should or would say at this point. My point was just a prognostication as to what will actually motivate the president not to comment. And like you mention what could he say that wouldn't "piss off" the Mullah's. Given that and his intention to have a dialogue with the Iranian mullahcrocy he will thus prostrate himself to attain that goal.

106 Scion9  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:28:33am

re: #56 Killgore Trout

No, but I think even a speech praising the popular uprising could hurt it. He might make some off hand non-committal statement but I think anymore than that right now could do more damage than good.

I disagree. I know what you are saying, but Obama delivering a boilerplate, yet timely pro-Democracy statement would be enough, to at least have been on record doing so.

107 Last Mohican  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:28:42am

re: #90 jayzee

OT-BiBi calling on the Palestinians to accept Jewish state as a precondition. Saying that is where peace starts not in settlements. This could be BiBi's "We are not Czechoslovakia" moment.

Good for him. I don't even understand why this is even such a revelation. Why would anyone expect Israel to make concessions to anyone who explicitly refuses to accept even the mere existence of Israel?

108 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:28:52am

re: #85 Sharmuta

Bibi says it is a prerequisite that the palestinians must recognize Israel.

How dare that Zionist honco spit in the face of the wonderful multiculturally groovy indigenous traditions of the Palestinians, specifically their charming folkways of screaming for genocide!

109 Kronocide  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:28:55am

A well delivered speech accepting Iran's re-election of Ahmadinejad would be prudent at the conclusion of Carter's certification of the election. The theme of the speech should be 'Axis of the Open Hand.'

That'll work.

110 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:28:59am

Hey - has Jimmy Carter given his blessing to this election?!

111 alegrias  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:29:17am

re: #25 J.S.

I agree. Obama needs to remain (at this time) aloof -- let the Iranians settle their affairs, sans Americans giving "advice."

* * * * *
You're channeling Mr. Chamberlain again: Mr. Adolf Schicklgrubr is handling his internal affairs and doesn't need advice to make peace in our time.

112 aboo-Hoo-Hoo  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:29:20am

From an earlier posted Fox story, I suspect Obama & Co. are preparing for the moment when Supreme Fubar & the Jihadi's

...will look so bad as a result of whipping up Iranian hopes for democracy and then squelching them that the regime may feel compelled to show some conciliatory response to President Obama's gestures of engagement.

No, you can't make this poop up. A pity the story wasn't sourced as it sounds exactly like...well...you know who.

113 irongrampa  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:29:23am

re: #100 sattv4u2

At my typing speed, it's a wonder I got that in so quickly.

114 sattv4u2  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:29:48am

re: #110 realwest

Hey - has Jimmy Carter given his blessing to this election still trying to be relevent?!

ftfy

115 Digital Display  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:29:54am

re: #67 realwest

Geez this new LGF spy addition is addicting - I know what I quoted O.R., but how much further do you think Obama should go about these (to me, anyway) fraudulent elections?

Spy? You guys can't see me...I'm a spy...
I still can't believe When I got riff'd from the Government after 20 years of building Nuclear Submarines I got offered a GS5 position with the CIA. Ten bucks an hour to file folders all day long....You feeling me now? I still can't believe I'm so worthless to our Government...

116 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:29:58am

re: #109 BigPapa
LOL GMTA - my #110!

117 MacDuff  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:30:07am

re: #110 realwest

Hey - has Jimmy Carter given his blessing to this election?!

I'm sure that he'd be happy to phone it in.

118 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:30:26am

re: #104 realwest

not wanting to piss off the powers that I regrettfully fear are gonna win even if by force.

And there's the problem, right there. His instinct to make thugs like him.

119 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:30:45am

re: #107 Last Mohican

Good for him. I don't even understand why this is even such a revelation. Why would anyone expect Israel to make concessions to anyone who explicitly refuses to accept even the mere existence of Israel?

The disgusting part of the new US stance is that settlements on territory yet to be negotiated is not a violation of anything. Refusal to recognize Israel is a non starter. In essence the US re interpreting 242.

120 tradewind  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:30:49am

re: #85 Sharmuta

And yet he said so much more than that.... he said if that were accomplished, there could actually be a lasting peace. A very large carrot with that prerequisite stick.
Not that it matters what anyone leading Israel says to them.... it is not about the real estate. They want Israel gone from the face of the earth, and that is why they do not really want or seek peace.

121 Racer X  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:30:52am

What would Reagan do?

122 sattv4u2  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:31:13am

re: #113 irongrampa

At my typing speed, it's a wonder I got that in so quickly.

I can either type slow to avoid typos, but by the time I hit POST the thread has moved to other topics

OR ,, I can type fast and let all of you try to figure out WTF I was trying to say!

123 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:31:27am

re: #118 Occasional Reader

And there's the problem, right there. His instinct to want to make thugs like him.

PIMF

124 tradewind  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:31:33am

re: #117 MacDuff

He's sulking because he was not asked to monitor in advance.

125 MJ  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:31:38am

re: #110 realwest

Hey - has Jimmy Carter given his blessing to this election?!

Yeah, the minute he allowed the Shah to be over-thrown.

126 Cato the Elder  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:31:39am

re: #82 Gus 802

Pretty much. If anything it's starting to look like Ahmadinejad is setting the conditions or will set the conditions for any meeting with Obama.

This is nothing new. The whole "without preconditions" story is a canard, as last year already the Tehran régime set conditions of its own.

1. U.S. must stop supporting Israel

2. All U.S. troops out of Muslim lands

Only then would they speak to Obama. Since despite the mouth-foaming rightwad newsclowns' assertions to the contrary Obama is not about to fulfill either of those conditions, his offer to meet without preconditions is a political ploy and nothing more. It only serves to make him look good in comparison to the mullahs. And there's nothing at all wrong or stupid about that.

127 VegasRick  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:31:47am

re: #121 Racer X

What would Reagan do?

1980 all over again.

128 jcbunga  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:32:03am

...awaiting a statement from The One, the pre-eminent speaker of our time, that begins "And let me be very clear..."

129 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:32:09am

If there had been an Israel, there would not have been a holocaust-Bibi

130 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:32:16am

re: #118 Occasional Reader
Is it "His instinct to make thugs like him." Or realpolitik?

131 Sheila Broflovski  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:32:27am

Now Bibi is insisting that any Palestinian state must be completely demilitarized.

132 quickjustice  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:32:34am

All Bibi is saying is that Israel won't commit suicide. No biggie there. It's clear that Obama will break his arms to make him change those positions. Under Obama the U.S. is no longer Israel's friend.

133 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:32:35am

re: #91 itellu3times

There is no Iranian government, there is just the will of Allah.

But one still has to know where they're "Qom-ing" from.
The "crocodile's" take on it is different from al-Sistani's over in Iraq.

134 Racer X  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:33:01am

re: #106 Scion9

I disagree. I know what you are saying, but Obama delivering a boilerplate, yet timely pro-Democracy statement would be enough, to at least have been on record doing so.

Why? What would Obama accomplish?

135 pingjockey  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:33:03am

re: #131 Alouette
Sounds like one helluva speech!

136 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:33:35am

re: #131 Alouette

Now Bibi is insisting that any Palestinian state must be completely demilitarized.

Nothing is going right for the president this month.

137 Sheila Broflovski  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:33:37am

"There must be no Hamastan!"

go Bibi

138 itellu3times  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:34:11am

re: #133 pre-Boomer Marine brat

There is no Iranian government, there is just the will of Allah.

But one still has to know where they're "Qom-ing" from.
The "crocodile's" take on it is different from al-Sistani's over in Iraq.

Of course.

The thing about the will of Allah, is that only Allah really knows what that is.

139 Kreuzueber Halbmond  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:34:25am

re: #128 jcbunga

...awaiting a statement from The One, the pre-eminent speaker of our time, that begins "And let me be very clear..."

Or, "Uhhh, and let me be very clear..."

140 VegasRick  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:34:44am

re: #132 quickjustice

All Bibi is saying is that Israel won't commit suicide. No biggie there. It's clear that Obama will break his arms to make him change those positions. Under Obama the U.S. is no longer Israel's friend.

He needs to tell 0 to fuck off.

141 Kronocide  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:34:46am

re: #110 realwest

Well.... would it matter?

142 MJ  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:34:52am

re: #132 quickjustice

All Bibi is saying is that Israel won't commit suicide. No biggie there. It's clear that Obama will break his arms to make him change those positions. Under Obama the U.S. is no longer Israel's friend.

I think Israel is learning very quickly not to depend on the Obama Administration:

Israel’s Foreign Minister Cozies Up to Moscow


MOSCOW — “Would you mind speaking without an interpreter?” Vladimir V. Putin asked, and his visitor, Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s new foreign minister, responded that he could not imagine doing business any other way. The two then chatted in Russian, as if their meeting this month were a homecoming for a local boy who made good....

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

143 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:35:03am

re: #126 Cato the Elder

his offer to meet without preconditions is a political ploy and nothing more. It only serves to make him look good in comparison to the mullahs. And there's nothing at all wrong or stupid about that.

Then how do you explain the State Dept. and other Obama Administration quotes noted above, that demonstrate an apparent still-existing panting desire to "improve relations" and have "better dialogue" with the mullahcracy? I mean, I must have missed the part where Obama said, "the conditions set forth by Tehran are shocking and ridiculous, and we decline".

144 Sharmuta  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:35:08am

Jerusalem must remain the united capitol of Israel with religious freedom for all.

145 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:35:33am

re: #144 Sharmuta

Jerusalem must remain the united capitol of Israel with religious freedom for all.

Amen

146 tradewind  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:35:36am

re: #138 itellu3times

Actually, none of those m/f'ers are in charge. This is just a dress rehearsal for the real bos, that elusive twelth imam.
When he shows up, then the party starts.

147 opnion  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:35:46am

Greetings all. At Cairo University Obama said that in so many words that he was cool with Iran going nuclear for peaceful purposes.
If he really believes that the Iranian program is for peaceful energy use, then he is profoundly naive.
The Mullahs have no fear of BHO.

148 Racer X  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:35:48am

re: #140 VegasRick

He needs to tell 0 to fuck off.

I think he just did.

Nuance.

149 Sharmuta  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:35:50am

re: #137 Alouette

"There must be no Hamastan!"

go Bibi

He looks particularly handsome today. Blue suits him.

150 Sheila Broflovski  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:35:58am

He's ready to recognize a Palestinian state:

1. When they unambiguously recognize Israel as a Jewish state
2. The Palestinians must be completely demilitarized.

Meanwhile:

1. Jerusalem will be the undivided capital of the Jewish state
2. "Settlers" are not the enemy, they are our Jewish brothers and sisters. "Natural expansion" of Jewish families in the settlements will continue!

151 transient  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:36:25am

The obvious answer is to send Jimmy Carter to Iran to investigate election irregularities.
Then leave him there.

152 sattv4u2  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:36:28am

re: #144 Sharmuta

Jerusalem must remain the united capitol of Israel with religious freedom for all.

That'll tic off the whole "seperation of church and state" crowd here in America

153 Sheila Broflovski  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:36:37am

re: #149 Sharmuta

He looks particularly handsome today. Blue suits him.

I'd do him.

154 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:36:37am

re: #150 Alouette

He's ready to recognize a Palestinian state:

1. When they unambiguously recognize Israel as a Jewish state
2. The Palestinians must be completely demilitarized.

Meanwhile:

1. Jerusalem will be the undivided capital of the Jewish state
2. "Settlers" are not the enemy, they are our Jewish brothers and sisters. "Natural expansion" of Jewish families in the settlements will continue!

AMEN!

155 itellu3times  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:36:39am

As an earnest of their good will, the Palestinians should demolish Al Aqsa mosque and turn the area over to Israel.

/hahahahahahahahahahaha

156 VegasRick  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:36:40am

re: #146 tradewind

Actually, none of those m/f'ers are in charge. This is just a dress rehearsal for the real bos, that elusive twelth imam.
When he shows up, then the party starts.

I have a lot of noise-makers.

157 Sharmuta  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:36:49am

The palestinians must decide between peace and hamas.

158 Macker  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:36:54am

re: #20 tradewind

الرئيس أوباما is busy, he'll get back to you at 0300.

159 karmic_inquisitor  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:36:57am

To dither about the election being "free and fair" because one hard liner lost to a psychotic hard liner is a bit stupid.

The elections stopped being free and fair from the moment that the candidates were "permitted / not permitted" to run

160 Sheila Broflovski  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:37:15am

Now he's talking about Shalit.

161 tradewind  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:37:20am

re: #152 sattv4u2

It's not as if they're happy campers now......

162 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:37:22am

re: #126 Cato the Elder

This is nothing new. The whole "without preconditions" story is a canard, as last year already the Tehran régime set conditions of its own.

1. U.S. must stop supporting Israel

2. All U.S. troops out of Muslim lands

Only then would they speak to Obama. Since despite the mouth-foaming rightwad newsclowns' assertions to the contrary Obama is not about to fulfill either of those conditions, his offer to meet without preconditions is a political ploy and nothing more. It only serves to make him look good in comparison to the mullahs. And there's nothing at all wrong or stupid about that.


Well hold on a sec, there. If in fact Obama has no intentions of meeting with Iran (unless they drop THEIR pre-conditions) why doesn't he come right out and say "We are and had hoped for fair and truly democratic elections in Iran. Failing that, as has happened, we won't be meeting with Iran at all."?

163 Macker  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:37:25am

re: Sharmuta

The palestinians must decide between peace and hamas.

They already did. They chose Hamas.

164 brookly red  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:37:35am

re: #142 MJ

I think Israel is learning very quickly not to depend on the Obama Administration:
Israel’s Foreign Minister Cozies Up to Moscow

I think we can expect Israel to do more reaching out in the near future.

165 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:37:44am

re: #130 realwest

Is it "His instinct to make thugs like him." Or realpolitik?

It's realpolitik when you have to "engage" (to some degree) with the USSR during the Cold War, in the grim acknowledgment that they have several thousand nukes pointed at you.

It is NOT realpolitik to pretend we have to play nice with the mullahs. Totally different situation.

166 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:37:52am

re: #138 itellu3times

Of course.

The thing about the will of Allah, is that only Allah really knows what that is.

Of course, how true.

167 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:37:56am

re: #159 karmic_inquisitor

To dither about the election being "free and fair" because one hard liner lost to a psychotic hard liner is a bit stupid.

The elections stopped being free and fair from the moment that the candidates were "permitted / not permitted" to run

Once again showing how utterly naive our new failing foreign policy is.

168 Cato the Elder  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:38:13am

re: #143 Occasional Reader

Then how do you explain the State Dept. and other Obama Administration quotes noted above, that demonstrate an apparent still-existing panting desire to "improve relations" and have "better dialogue" with the mullahcracy? I mean, I must have missed the part where Obama said, "the conditions set forth by Tehran are shocking and ridiculous, and we decline".

I suggest you find a good online source for the history and practice of diplomacy. That should answer your questions.

169 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:40:04am

Who wants to bet that President Obama's criticism of BiBi's speech will be much harsher than any criticism of Iran?

170 Cygnus  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:40:05am
171 Killgore Trout  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:40:40am

Repost from earlier.....
Iranians on Twitter during the june clashes
Ive finally found a use for twitter. Some really interesting tweets.

172 itellu3times  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:40:46am

re: #168 Cato the Elder

I suggest you find a good online source for the history and practice of diplomacy. That should answer your questions.

Sure, look up the chapter on how H.W. Bush handled the Phillipines, "We admire the Marcos' government dedication to democratic principles." Look in the index under, "Wish fulfillment, as a model for diplomacy".

173 VegasRick  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:41:10am

re: #169 jayzee

Who wants to bet that President Obama's criticism of BiBi's speech will be much harsher than any criticism of Iran?

-480, big favorite.

174 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:41:22am

re: #168 Cato the Elder

I suggest you find a good online source for the history and practice of diplomacy. That should answer your questions.

Well, golly, Cato... and in turn, I'll take the same arrogant debate tactic, and suggest you find a good biography of Neville Chamberlain, which might inform you why a constantly supine position with respect to thugs is not necessarily smart "diplomacy".

175 sattv4u2  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:41:33am

re: #168 Cato the Elder

I suggest you find a good online source for the history and practice of diplomacy. That should answer your questions.

Neville Chamberlain ,,, Jimmy Carter ,,,, nuf said! (I could go on, but ,,, why!?!)

176 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:41:57am

re: #141 BigPapa
In the World of intelligent thinking people, no it wouldn't matter what Carter said. However if he did say (and no I'm not putting this past that s.o.b.) that the elections were fair or whatever, Iran would hold that up to the world and say "See, we told you and here's a former President of the US who agrees with us!" And that might indeed attract at least a willingness of certain Islamic or Iranian trading partners (see,e.g., Russia, China) to "overlook" what actually happend in these elections.

177 sattv4u2  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:42:43am

re: #169 jayzee

Who wants to bet that President Obama's criticism of BiBi's speech will be much harsher than any criticism of Iran?

Not me, I'm going on vacation next week and want more cash in my pocket, nit less!

178 pingjockey  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:42:54am

re: #169 jayzee
That's no bet! He'll go off about how disappointed he is in Israels instrangitients and impediments to peace.

179 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:43:00am

re: #174 Occasional Reader

I miss Teddy.

/(no, I'm not QUITE that old)

180 Sharmuta  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:43:15am

re: #163 Macker

They already did. They chose Hamas.

Spy poster, you.

Anyways- if the Israelis could get the palestinians to recognize Israel's right to exist, it would be a miracle.

181 sattv4u2  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:43:19am

re: #174 Occasional Reader

gmta (175)

182 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:43:22am

On another note, how long before Hamas, Hizzballah and Shiites in Iraq act up again to take the heat off Iran? Better yet, NK does something else too. All in bed together-Axis of Evil.

183 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:43:58am

Okay, crossword puzzle was stupid (read..I can't lay a glove on it)...

184 tradewind  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:44:20am

re: #162 realwest

Because, if you've noticed, he's not really big on commitment.

185 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:44:25am

re: #165 Occasional Reader
Geez O.R. - this thread is moving so quickly and interweaving Bibi's speech and all it's gonna take me a while to try to answer you. But hang in there, I will.

186 Occasional Reader  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:44:29am

Too nice a day here in DC.... off for some poolside time. Later.

187 Macker  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:45:12am

re: Sharmuta

Spy poster, you.

Nothin' wrong what that, is there? :)

188 [deleted]  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:45:52am
189 Macker  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:46:29am

re: Iron Fist

And he's got an opponent in 2010!

190 sattv4u2  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:46:29am

re: #186 Occasional Reader

Too nice a day here in DC.... off for some poolside time. Later.

Beaut of a day here in Atlanta also. Sadly, i'm stuck inside at work for 12 hours

I guess I could go get a bucket and stick my feet in it though

191 Gus  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:46:41am

re: #126 Cato the Elder

This is nothing new. The whole "without preconditions" story is a canard, as last year already the Tehran régime set conditions of its own.

1. U.S. must stop supporting Israel

2. All U.S. troops out of Muslim lands

Only then would they speak to Obama. Since despite the mouth-foaming rightwad newsclowns' assertions to the contrary Obama is not about to fulfill either of those conditions, his offer to meet without preconditions is a political ploy and nothing more. It only serves to make him look good in comparison to the mullahs. And there's nothing at all wrong or stupid about that.

The list you present as conditions from the Iranians seems accurate. However, his stance and insistence on meeting without preconditions is a sign of weakness. It may attain the personal goals of the president but will only undermine American and Israeli interests in the long run.

192 Kronocide  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:49:04am

re: #176 realwest

You may be right, but my pessimistic uber-pragmatism took hold, if for a moment.

I think we're not Giving Peace a Chance by being to quick to judge this great master plan being propagated by Obama. It's like communism; it's just never been done right, that being Divine Supinity so your opponent has no choice but to acquiesce to your peaceful overtures, therefore peace is the only option.

193 Cygnus  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:49:09am

re: #110 realwest

Hey - has Jimmy Carter given his blessing to this election?!

He's been hired as Dinnerjacket's Secretary of State.

194 Spare O'Lake  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:49:43am

Netanyahu's speech was perfect.
"Hamastan" - perfect
No right of return - perfect
United Jerusalem in Israel - perfect
No negotiation with Hamas - perfect
No negotiations until Palis recognize Israel as a Jewish State - perfect
Pali state will be demilitarized, with no army, no control of its air space and no ability to import missiles - perfect
Perfect.

195 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:50:06am

re: #193 Cygnus

He's been hired as Dinnerjacket's Secretary of State.

You can't be PA PM and Iranian Sec State at the same time can you?

196 reine.de.tout  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:50:14am

re: #171 Killgore Trout

Repost from earlier.....
Iranians on Twitter during the june clashes
Ive finally found a use for twitter. Some really interesting tweets.

Interesting.

From "smileofcrash":

we write in our vote Moosavi they read as Ahmadinejad!oh god please help us:( i going crazy
about 4 hours ago from web
197 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:51:07am

re: #165 Occasional Reader

It's realpolitik when you have to "engage" (to some degree) with the USSR during the Cold War, in the grim acknowledgment that they have several thousand nukes pointed at you.

It is NOT realpolitik to pretend we have to play nice with the mullahs. Totally different situation.


OK - sorry for the delay but I'm not thinking all that quickly today (and no, smart aleck, I am not thinking as slowly as I always do; I didn't get more than an hour or so of sleep last night). The problem is, even absent nukes (at least that we know about) Iran is a royal pain in the ass and is in an GREAT position to undermine all that we've achieved in Iraq. So even though we don't have MAD (and probably never will with the Mullahs in power) there are reasons to "play" political games here.
Especially when Obama isn't ready to go full tilt boogie against Iran (I mean non-nuclear military confrontation) as he clearly is not.

198 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:51:16am

re: #196 reine.de.tout

That's how the voting went in Iowa last year right?

jk

199 FurryOldGuyJeans  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:52:41am

re: #64 gander

I want to know if Jimmy Carter has approved these election results. (Perhaps Obama does too.)

The anti-Semite is declaring who the real enemy to world peace is:

Carter warns US and Israel on collision course
Jun 14 08:12 AM US/Eastern
AFP

Israel is headed for a clash with main ally the United States over the issue of Jewish settlements, former US president Jimmy Carter said in an interview on Sunday.

Asked by the liberal Haaretz newspaper whether the Jewish state was looking at a "head-on collision" with the United States if it doesn't comply with Washington's demands, Carter said "Yes."

The former president, who brokered the historic peace treaty between Israel and Egypt in 1979, said Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank were the biggest hurdle in the hobbled Middle East peace process, saying they were "illegal and (an) obstacle to peace."

200 Our Precious Bodily Fluids  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:53:22am
The former Republican Massachusetts governor also used the Iranian results to broaden his indictment of Obama, saying “it’s very clear that the president’s policies of going around the world and apologizing for America are not working.”

... At which point Romney lost the high ground. This is what irritates me soooo much. Can Republicans PLEASE PLEASE for once act like grown-ups and just stick to presenting better ideas without the catty sound bites? Drop the sanctimonious adversarial bullshit and act like leaders. Take a hint from the private sector; think of it this way: Toyota doesn't sell cars by constantly talking about how much Honda sucks, they sell cars by constantly talking about how awesome Toyota is.

201 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:53:51am

Hope! Change!

Iraq acting very independent.

202 Cygnus  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:54:33am

re: #194 Spare O'Lake

Netanyahu's speech was perfect.
"Hamastan" - perfect
No right of return - perfect
United Jerusalem in Israel - perfect
No negotiation with Hamas - perfect
No negotiations until Palis recognize Israel as a Jewish State - perfect
Pali state will be demilitarized, with no army, no control of its air space and no ability to import missiles - perfect
Perfect.

Gosh, I love that guy. Go, Bibi! And G-d Bless Israel!

203 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:55:04am

re: #200 negativ

Nah-the key is to not let them know you are criticizing. But criticize you must.

204 Scion9  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:55:15am

re: #134 Racer X

Why? What would Obama accomplish?

Symbolic statements can be important. The Soviets didn't rush over to Berlin after Reagan's speech exhorting them to tear down the wall and nakedly supporting increased freedom for people under Soviet rule. Two years later, when they did, it was a retroactively important speech.

With all of the Hope and Change shine still on Obama, internationally, he could offer what now would probably be useless symbolism but might not be in the future. Depending on how things go in Iran and the rest of the world it could mean something.

As it is, I would kind of like an America that still engaged in useless symbolism and still touted itself as the land of the free and as a symbol of freedom.

No one in power is going to do that today though because it isn't 'pragmatic' or 'useful' in the moment and our support of freedom, democracy and everything else we stand for isn't politically or diplomatically expedient.

205 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:56:55am

re: #193 Cygnus

He's been hired as Dinnerjacket's Secretary of State.


That wouldn't really surprise me.
.
.
.
.
well, yes actually it would.

206 MacDuff  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:57:05am

re: #199 FurryOldGuyJeans

From my perspective, this what Carter has been working toward for decades and may be a little wishful thinking on his part. At what point can we just start calling Carter "Jew Hater"? He has become nothing more than a mouthpiece for Islamic radicals and with each statement he makes, it becomes increasingly clear that, in his view, the Israelis are the only stumbling block on the road to Middle East peace.

In an environment where Israel is continually pressured by her "allies" to make more and more concessions in the interest of peace, surrounded by countries that cannot even agree on her right to exist and continually attacked by them, how is it that Israel is the problem?

This "obstacle to peace" canard is tiring, unfair and dangerous as it fuels the anti-Israeli sentiment in the Middle East which is doing quite nicely on its own.

Where are the concessions from the Arabs or the Iranians who continually call for the destruction of Israel? Did it ever occur to this old fool that maybe, just maybe that the blood curdling hatred that many in the "Islamic community" have for all things Israeli might be an obstacle as well? Did it ever occur to Mr. Carter that Israel may be becoming weary of making sacrifices, in the blood of her own citizens as well as the relinquishment of even more land and getting nothing but more war in return?

Carter was a failure as a president and is an unqualified disgrace as a man. Israel should block his entry as an "undesirable".

207 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:57:44am

re: #194 Spare O'Lake
So I'm getting the impression you like Bibi's speech,eh?
:)
Me too.

208 alegrias  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:59:02am

re: #169 jayzee

Who wants to bet that President Obama's criticism of BiBi's speech will be much harsher than any criticism of Iran?

* * * *
Watch Pres. Obama wield his big stick & say, "Don't think we aren't keeping score, brother" against Israel.

209 realwest  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:59:39am

re: #199 FurryOldGuyJeans
I absolutely HATE that G-ddamned Jimmy Carter. I mean HATE.

210 [deleted]  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:59:57am
211 pingjockey  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:01:07am

re: #209 realwest
Don't hate. Despise, loathe, etc....

212 [deleted]  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:01:41am
213 MacDuff  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:02:01am

re: #209 realwest

I absolutely HATE that G-ddamned Jimmy Carter. I mean HATE.

AMEN brother!

214 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:02:13am

re: #208 alegrias

* * * *
Watch Pres. Obama wield his big stick & say, "Don't think we aren't keeping score, brother" against Israel.

How long can Rahm Emanuel hang on? Really I can't believe he doesn't puke himself to sleep every night.

215 jayzee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:02:49am

re: #213 MacDuff

AMEN brother!

Can we call a former POTUS an antisemitic prick?

216 pre-Boomer Marine brat  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:03:21am

From Tehran Bureau's Sunday Iran Alerts

the press is saying “tehran was calm today” — not so. it was in the daytime but since 5pm things have heated up. i’ve talked to friends in different neighborhoods; in Sa’adat Abad and Yousef Abad and Zafar — all over it is “ghogha.” My mom also was in Parkway two hours ago (its 9:30 pm) and there were mass demos and people handing out Mousavi’s latest bayanieh as fliers … and tear gas and attacks by “truckfuls” of Guard

... and ...

From Iranian American: I can confirm that the city of Gorgan where my grand mother live, there have been clashes between the police and the people on proportions similar to Tehran.
I also talked to a friend in Karaj. He lives in Pakdasht a suburb of Karaj and he confirmed that the town is out of the control of the police. His sister-in-law lives in Qom and she confirmed that there were clashes between the police and people around Musavi’s campaign headquarter in Qom.

217 MacDuff  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:04:00am

re: #215 jayzee

Can we call a former POTUS an antisemitic prick?

It would appear that the shoe fits.....

218 pingjockey  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:04:24am

re: #215 jayzee
Of course. Also a feeble minded moron, suck up to dictators, willing enabler of despots, and an all around wanker.

219 alegrias  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:06:21am

re: #200 negativ

... At which point Romney lost the high ground. This is what irritates me soooo much. Can Republicans PLEASE PLEASE for once act like grown-ups and just stick to presenting better ideas without the catty sound bites? Drop the sanctimonious adversarial bullshit and act like leaders. Take a hint from the private sector; think of it this way: Toyota doesn't sell cars by constantly talking about how much Honda sucks, they sell cars by constantly talking about how awesome Toyota is.

* * * *
Romney's right to point out appeasement plan isn't working. Romney's right to point out LEADING isn't appeasing.

Half our electorate thinks appeasing is powerful stuff. Obama didn't appease his way to the top, you naive baby. Obama stuck it to Hillary Clinton, bashed her, bashed McCain.

Quit lying about how Pres. Obama won high office.

220 alegrias  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:10:08am

re: #214 jayzee

How long can Rahm Emanuel hang on? Really I can't believe he doesn't puke himself to sleep every night.

* * * * *
How many legions has Reverend Wright? I'd watch my back if I were Rahm Emanuel! Wright's not happy.

221 brucee  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:11:59am
Meanwhile, tens of thousands of Iranians celebrated the election results in a huge victory rally in Tehran.

Charles, those are not all regular people. A significant portion of them are Guards out of their uniforms.

They did the exact same thing during the campaign for Ahmadinejad too. The official letters signed and stamped by Guard's ranks was leaked that made strict orders to guards switch out of uniforms and get on the assigned buses and go to campaign rallies. They are highly organized, and they planned for this for a long time.

222 Our Precious Bodily Fluids  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:15:22am

re: #219 alegrias

Romney's right to point out appeasement plan isn't working. Romney's right to point out LEADING isn't appeasing.

Except that in the context of what they're talking about, Obama's Apology Tour has bugger-all to do with what's going on in Iran right now.

you naive baby.

You stay classy, San Diego.

223 Flyers1974  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:22:40am

re: #204 Scion9

Symbolic statements can be important. The Soviets didn't rush over to Berlin after Reagan's speech exhorting them to tear down the wall and nakedly supporting increased freedom for people under Soviet rule. Two years later, when they did, it was a retroactively important speech.

With all of the Hope and Change shine still on Obama, internationally, he could offer what now would probably be useless symbolism but might not be in the future. Depending on how things go in Iran and the rest of the world it could mean something.

As it is, I would kind of like an America that still engaged in useless symbolism and still touted itself as the land of the free and as a symbol of freedom.

No one in power is going to do that today though because it isn't 'pragmatic' or 'useful' in the moment and our support of freedom, democracy and everything else we stand for isn't politically or diplomatically expedient.

As opposed to WWII when most Democrats and Republicans were opposed to declaring war on Germany until we were attacked by Japan?

224 Flyers1974  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:26:56am

re: #206 MacDuff

Carter was elected President in 1976 and defeated in 1980. The right hates Carter. Carter is no icon of the left. I'm not sure where his power would possibly come from, once he left office.

225 quiet man  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:28:03am

Iranian newscaster "A Dinnerjackets election created some Robust debate in Death to America today...."

226 wiffersnapper  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:37:23am

Way to call him out, Mitt. Keep it up.

227 MacDuff  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:42:05am

re: #224 Flyers1974

Carter was elected President in 1976 and defeated in 1980. The right hates Carter. Carter is no icon of the left. I'm not sure where his power would possibly come from, once he left office.

He does his "elder statesman" schtick (badly) and does have the inherent (cough) respect (spit!) and status that former Presidents tend to carry with them.

It's too bad that he hasn't returned the good will of the American people that gives him that status with some dignity, taste and by keeping his friggin anti-semite mouth shut!

228 Dirk Diggler  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:48:49am

alegrias,

It's Jimmy Carter rocking in his rocking chair while Iranian thugs stomped out Western values, all over again. This time, they're nuclear armed mullahthugs.

More like "Soon to be nuclear armed mullahthugs with active terror cells all over the world". Even more dangerous is the fact that the mullahs know their revolution, hold on power, and even apocalyptic Islamic vision are totally discredited. If they're going down, what's their motivation not take the rest of the Middle East with them? Why not launch a "From hells heart I stab at thee" nuclear strike?

229 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 11:55:43am

re: #111 alegrias

* * * * *
You're channeling Mr. Chamberlain again: Mr. Adolf Schicklgrubr is handling his internal affairs and doesn't need advice to make peace in our time.

Problem is that both candidates are Schicklgruber.

230 Kosh's Shadow  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 12:07:29pm

re: #194 Spare O'Lake

Netanyahu's speech was perfect.
"Hamastan" - perfect
No right of return - perfect
United Jerusalem in Israel - perfect
No negotiation with Hamas - perfect
No negotiations until Palis recognize Israel as a Jewish State - perfect
Pali state will be demilitarized, with no army, no control of its air space and no ability to import missiles - perfect
Perfect.

And the Palis have already rejected it (as I'm sure Bibi knew they would).

Senior PA negotiator Saeb Erikat was quick to reject Netanyahu’s speech.

“Netanyahu will have to wait a thousand years befire he finds a Palestinian who agrees to his suggestions. He has unilaterally eliminated all of the final status subjects like Jerusalem, refugees and security.”

“I turn to President Obama,” he said – “Netanyahu’s speech is a slap in the face to your speech.”


Now the question is, what will Obama do? Netanyahu uttered the words "Palestinian State", which is what Obama wanted.

My guess is he'll criticize Israel further and ignore that the Palis reject Israel's existence.

231 flyers1974  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 12:15:37pm

re: #227 MacDuff

He does his "elder statesman" schtick (badly) and does have the inherent (cough) respect (spit!) and status that former Presidents tend to carry with them.

It's too bad that he hasn't returned the good will of the American people that gives him that status with some dignity, taste and by keeping his friggin anti-semite mouth shut!

I don't doubt any of this a bit. But the status, respect and thus, power he does have, i'd say are pretty weak. Carter is a man without many friends. Many Democrats wished Clinton was back during Bush, and Republicans the same with Reagan. Not sure too many people ever reminiced for Carter. He just seems irrelevant to today.

232 flyers1974  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 12:22:13pm

re: #200 negativ

... At which point Romney lost the high ground. This is what irritates me soooo much. Can Republicans PLEASE PLEASE for once act like grown-ups and just stick to presenting better ideas without the catty sound bites? Drop the sanctimonious adversarial bullshit and act like leaders. Take a hint from the private sector; think of it this way: Toyota doesn't sell cars by constantly talking about how much Honda sucks, they sell cars by constantly talking about how awesome Toyota is.

For the purpose of having fun conversation, it is irritating. Politically speaking however, I bet the DNC, etc..., don't mind the Letterman episode, Obama's the worst, etc...

233 _RememberTonyC  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 1:07:44pm

gravitas

-noun

seriousness or sobriety, as of conduct or speech.

Mitt Romney has it ... I really want him to be our next President.

234 gegenkritik  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 1:10:40pm

(Exile)-Iranians are calling for some kind of DDOS-attack at official iranian websites:

[Link: twitter.com...]

Khameini's Site.

Ahmadinejads' Site

President's Site

Ahmadinejads' site seems to be down.

235 LeonidasOfSparta  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 2:32:50pm

comment #14

And I add to this cogent comment that, as is to be expected from BBC, the picture of THOUSANDS celebrating Ahmadinnerjacket's "win" is a small picture of a small group-- befitting a SMALL man who won questionably. Rage Boy must be somewhere in that SMALL picture of a SMALL group celebrating the SMALL man. They would never dare to use a WIDE angle and a panoramic shot it might show that there were in actuality 100 people paid to gather and celebrate the outcome.

236 sandbox  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 3:33:57pm

It is possible that a part of Obama's supporters on the left may object to continuing outreach to Iran in light of the just-elected Almadinnijad government being illegitimate, having stolen the election. I hope so.

237 bartok1001  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 5:33:55pm

I wish our President would say something in support of the people that are protesting (and things are starting to get down right scary). The young people are questioning the validity of the voting and the Iranian government has been attempting to shut these protesters down by any means possible.

It would reason, that a President who actually (surprisingly) gave a decent speech in Egypt about Islam,should say something in support of the students and other young people who want freedom in their harsh, brutal society. If Obama would say something in support of the students, maybe the rest of the world would go along). Currently, it looks like the rest of the world is going to stick its collective head in the sand because to do anything else would put at risk any possibility of working with Iran with their nuclear program.

Their thoughts are wrong. Ahmadinejad wants a bomb and he will do anything to get it. If our politicians think that Ahmadinejad will want or take anything else, they are clearly wrong (see North Korea for any lessons learned).

Our best way of getting Iran to change is to support the change within. Come on Mr. Hope and Change, say something and support the students in Iran. This is your time.

238 nyc redneck  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 5:40:47pm

o should come out strongly and soon for the courageous citizens of iran who are risking their very lives for a taste of freedom.
for him to calculate and wait and indecisively ponder and consider the angles, shows him to be a coward.
he could serve his image well and pretend to be a brave man.

239 winston06  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 8:22:17pm

whats up?

240 winston06  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 8:27:00pm

re: #236 sandbox

ACORN used the same tactics Ahmadinejad using. ;-)

241 NY Nana  Sun, Jun 14, 2009 10:12:25pm

re: #239 winston06

Hello! Great to see you posting.

242 enoughalready  Mon, Jun 15, 2009 2:35:43am

It might be worth noting that the people protesting are saying "we don't want US support". I don't think Obama should do or say anything at all about this for now.

243 Tatterdemalian  Mon, Jun 15, 2009 7:16:11am

Revolution in Iran? Maybe someday, but this isn't it. There will be a lot of noise about it for maybe a week, then the "revolution" will break up and Ahmadnejad will be President again.

It takes an understanding of why we vote, and what a revolution against even a fraudulent democratic process would require, before a revolution has any hope of success. This isn't going to do it, because Mousavi has taken the threat of violence off the table at the start, and without that, any challenge to the vote can never be anything more than a slapfest of empty threats and nasty letters that the "revolutionaries" will eventually lose interest in, with no gains and nothing accomplished.

244 Tatterdemalian  Mon, Jun 15, 2009 7:20:06am

Well, one thing accomplished: the West gets entertained by it, until a new season of "Lost" comes out, or another Paris Hilton video is released, or something.

245 drcordell  Mon, Jun 15, 2009 7:46:48am

Kind of disappointed in the coverage of the Iranian election here. The only mention of demonstrations is of the faked rally in support of Ahmadinejad? Right now there are millions of Iranians in the streets opposing the current regime, and getting shot and beaten for it. Doesn't jive with the generalization that "all Muslims are blood-thirsty savages" so I guess it doesn't get any play here?


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Why Did More Than 1,000 People Die After Police Subdued Them With Force That Isn’t Meant to Kill? An investigation led by The Associated Press has found that, over a decade, more than 1,000 people died after police subdued them through physical holds, stun guns, body blows and other force not intended to be lethal. More: Why ...
Cheechako
Yesterday
Views: 38 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
A Closer Look at the Eastman State Bar DecisionTaking a few minutes away from work things to read through the Eastman decision. As I'm sure many of you know, Eastman was my law school con law professor. I knew him pretty well because I was also running in ...
KGxvi
Yesterday
Views: 92 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 1