Comments on: Obama Got His 3 AM Phone Call

By: Iran Watch « Tai-Chi Policy

Iran Watch « Tai-Chi Policy — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 14:15:03 +0000

[...] Obama, meanwhile is caught absolutely flatfooted. Is he still trying to implement foreign policy based on his ideals as a college student? Or can the American left really not tell the difference between their imagined thuggery of Bush and real oppression when they see it? All he can manage to say is that it’s a situation to watch carefully. Yeah, no duh. Weak response, Obama – or should I say Carter 2. Heck, Obama’s still hoping to negotiate with the Iranian regime over the “peaceful” nuclear power they can have but we shouldn’t. How is this such a difficult choice: rather than supporting a freedom seeking populace over their oppressive government (lauded for its fair election by Venezuela, North Korea, Carter, Syria, and Palestine), or sit on the sidelines and wait through the crackdown so you can cut a deal with the power hungry regime of a rogue state? Way to vote present on this one, Barack. You can’t even have the state department condemn the crackdown? But I guess at least it’s not a crisis issue like health care, right? [...]

By: Scott

Scott — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 06:47:54 +0000

Fletcher, even if Obama said such a thing, I cannot imagine any world political leaders naive or foolish enough to believe him. Given who he is, and who is supporters are, the probability of America responding with serious force to almost any provocation (and I would include provocations a lot more serious than the loss of a single building) is quite remote.

To be blunt, this is a much less acceptable update (‘reimagining’?) of Jimmy Carter, but without the steely backbone and deep insight…

By: DaveP.

DaveP. — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 02:04:08 +0000

Obama didn’t say anything because to him and his buttboys, the A-Man is the good guy.

After all, he agrees with them on Israel and America…he can’t be ALL bad.

By: McGehee

McGehee — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 02:01:12 +0000

Given what I’ve seen of President Obama, I really do think the Iranian people, and the American people, and the world, are all better served if he keeps his hopenchangey mouth shut.

He may not think so, but the mullahs certainly do, that the President of the United States is their enemy, and whatever he may want, they will oppose with all their might. Obama would be unprepared for this response, and disaster would result.

By: Fletcher Christian

Fletcher Christian — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 22:16:37 +0000

Scott – YES. With a caveat. They get firmly told that they got the first lick in in 2001 – they might get a second – but they won’t get a third, as they won’t be alive to make the try. Any of them.

Another way to put it: “In our opinion, one of our buildings is worth one of your cities and one of our cities is worth all of yours. And we are not interested in your opinion.”

By: Scott

Scott — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 21:00:49 +0000

As long as Ahmadinejad’s boys have the guns and their support for him is not splintered, it is unlikely that these protests will come to much. THe sad truth of the matter is that unless the tyranny in question is on its last legs, popular uprisings have very little impact upon said tyranny…

With that said, there is no question that Obama should speak out… Are we to stand by while this sort of thing is done and say nothing?

By: Rand Simberg

Rand Simberg — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 20:09:38 +0000

I concur.

Do you ever not concur with anything the Obama administration does?

Allowing Ahmadinejad to frame this as “Iran versus the US” is a good way to assure that Ahmadinejad wins this thing.

Here’s an idea. Don’t allow him to do that. Frame it as the Iranian people and America against the mullahs. I’m sure that TOTUS can come up with the right words.

Do you really think that the Soviet people were upset when Reagan called the USSR an evil empire? Do you really think that the dissidents didn’t take heart from it? Again, how stupid do you think the Iranian people are?

Rand, do you prefer that Ahmadinejad win this thing?

[rolling eyes]

By: Bill White

Bill White — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:51:48 +0000

From American Conservative magazine:

By my lights at least, the thing for Obama to do is to give no indication at all that his administration cares one way or another about the outcome of this election, as it’s only in this way that he can keep this situation from becoming, in Andrew’s own words, “the Iran-vs.-America” story that Ahmadinejad would clearly love it to turn into.

http://www.amconmag.com/schwenkler/2009/06/15/obama-and-iran/

I concur. Allowing Ahmadinejad to frame this as “Iran versus the US” is a good way to assure that Ahmadinejad wins this thing.

And right now, with two million Tehran-ians in the streets Ahmadinejad could very well lose this thing. So lets not muck it up.

Of course, folks like Daniel Pipes and Charles Krauthammer have been openly rooting for Ahmadinejad to win so perhaps those demanding that Obama speak boldly are perhaps playing a reverse psychology game intended to assist Ahmadinejad.

Rand, do you prefer that Ahmadinejad win this thing?