Iran to Obama: Your willingness to talk proves your weakness

posted at 6:15 pm on January 31, 2009 by Allahpundit

Like CJ says, that fist sure looks clenched.

US President Barack Obama’s offer to talk to Iran shows that America’s policy of “domination” has failed, the government spokesman said on Saturday.

“This request means Western ideology has become passive, that capitalist thought and the system of domination have failed,” Gholam Hossein Elham was quoted as saying by the Mehr news agency.

“Negotiation is secondary, the main issue is that there is no way but for (the United States) to change,” he added.

Surprised by the knock on capitalism from jihad HQ? Don’t be. The enemy of Iran’s enemy is its friend, which is why they’ve buddied up to anti-American socialist regimes via the Nonaligned Movement with a special emphasis on Chavez. International opinion matters, especially to Democrats, and digs at capitalism help advance Iran’s cause internationally even if they’re not exactly a raison d’etre for Islamic fundamentalists. (See also Bin Laden talking up Noam Chomsky and dumping on corporations in his last video message.) The significance of this isn’t that they’re using The One’s outreach to their own ends; self-aggrandizing propaganda is what Islamists do, after all, which is why Israel kicking the hell out of Hamas for a few weeks somehow gets spun as a Hamas victory. The significance is that it shows how obsessed the regime is with the perception that it’s winning its ideological battle with the west, to the extent that even rare attempts at rapprochement from the U.S. are sneered at as crude concessions of defeat. Like I’ve said before, that bodes very, very ill given how much national pride they’ve invested in the nuclear program. How can they make a deal with America to give up nukes when they’ve built their identity on defiance of America? Why, it’s practically a national slogan.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

This has been the liberal plan all along:

1) Terrorists kill people;

2) So we give terrorists everything they want;

3) And this convinces terrorists to stop killing people.

The liberals are now going to – very, very patiently – wait for Step Three to happen.

logis on January 31, 2009 at 7:26 PM

UNREPENTANT CONSERVATIVE CAPITOLIST on January 31, 2009 at 7:17 PM

More like Carter Millenium Edition

DarkCurrent on January 31, 2009 at 7:26 PM

After Lenin took power in Russia in 1917, he made a highly unfavorable peace treaty with Germany. His plan being, it was more important to consolidate power internally than fight a foreign aggressor.

History has a nasty habit of repeating itself. Obama will sacrifice American foreign interests to push us into a Chicago-style corrupt one party state. Count on it.

Rebar on January 31, 2009 at 7:26 PM

Just in two weeks.

Gabe on January 31

I already feel like he’s been president a month or more! What’s it going to be like a year from now? Every stinking day his frowning face on the cover of every magazine and paper with his hand out telling us all it’s going to keep getting worse,, before he goes back to his warm and toasty Oval Office dining on those exotic wagyu steaks and sipping martini’s!
Check the boss’s sight for those steaks! (can I call her the boss?)
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/01/29/obama-celebrates-spending-binge-with-cocktails-and-wagyu-steak/

JellyToast on January 31, 2009 at 7:26 PM

The Precedent knows this and expected exactly this reaction. That’s because he hates America and was always looking to weaken us. But, that’s what we get when we “elect” someone who is obviously not really an American.

By the time the idiot messiah messiah is done, he might just have succeeded in reforming the US in the image of the land of his childhood years growing up … Indonesia.

In the old days, the actions of this Precedent would be called treason. He is siding with our enemies, giving aid and comfort. Plain and simple.

progressoverpeace on January 31, 2009 at 7:28 PM

Ahmad to Obama… “What part of “Death to America” didn’t you understand?”

RalphyBoy on January 31, 2009 at 7:33 PM

Ahmad to Obama… “Pansy”

RalphyBoy on January 31, 2009 at 7:33 PM

Man, over 100 posts and none from the resident Obamatron trolls. This topic must be above their pay grade.

venividivici on January 31, 2009 at 7:34 PM

The only question in my mind is who is the puppet master.

Oldnuke on January 31, 2009 at 7:14 PM

Soros?

IrishEi on January 31, 2009 at 7:21 PM

I think we have a winner!

There’s a palpable Soros-Alynski connection out there somewhere…Alynski’s ideas, Soros’ globalist ideas and tons of money?

coldwarrior on January 31, 2009 at 7:34 PM

I’ve said for a long time that Obama is nothing but an empty suit and somebody else is pulling his strings. The only question in my mind is who is the puppet master.

Oldnuke on January 31, 2009 at 7:14 PM

My guess is “legion” for they are many.

Maxx on January 31, 2009 at 7:35 PM

Ahmad to Obama… “Hey. Boy… You… Yeah that one. Don’t look at me when I insult you.”

RalphyBoy on January 31, 2009 at 7:35 PM

I’ve said for a long time that Obama is nothing but an empty suit and somebody else is pulling his strings. The only question in my mind is who is the puppet master.

Oldnuke on January 31, 2009 at 7:14 PM

See: Soros, George
He is the name behind the faceless corporations that are the true power behind the president. I have never been much of a conspiracy guy believing the trilateral commission and the bankers ruling from behind the scenes, but I can’t seem to find any other logical explanation for the last election. Or the behavior of GWB during the last 4 years(especially the last 2) It all points to a severe weakening of the US to get a world government.

Corsair on January 31, 2009 at 7:36 PM

Ahmad to Obama… “Sissy”

RalphyBoy on January 31, 2009 at 7:37 PM

Ahmad to Obama… “Jimma… Is that You?”

RalphyBoy on January 31, 2009 at 7:38 PM

Wait….that quote wasn’t from a speech by Obama?

genso on January 31, 2009 at 7:38 PM

Obama to Oprah… “Waaaaaaaaa”

RalphyBoy on January 31, 2009 at 7:40 PM

Or the behavior of GWB during the last 4 years(especially the last 2) It all points to a severe weakening of the US to get a world government.

Corsair on January 31, 2009 at 7:36 PM

It’s not a conspiracy, just rampant stupidity. The Bush family has always been into globalism. It was Bush Sr. who first empowered the UN after the USSR fell (one of the dumbest moves in all of history, so far as I’m concerned) and W never followed through on his threat to leave the UN after they spat in our faces and did everything they could to hurt us. In fact, W only went on to further empower the UN and he looked to give away US sovereignty at almost every opportunity.

progressoverpeace on January 31, 2009 at 7:40 PM

IrishEi on January 31, 2009 at 7:21 PM

Bingo. Bought and paid for.

Here’s some evidence.

The game changer
By George Soros, January 28, 2009

Now that the bankruptcy of Lehman has had the same shock effect on the behaviour of consumers and businesses as the bank failures of the 1930s, the problems facing the administration of President Barack Obama are even greater than those that confronted Franklin D. Roosevelt. Total credit outstanding was 160 per cent of gross domestic product in 1929 and rose to 260 per cent in 1932; we entered the crash of 2008 at 365 per cent and the ratio is bound to rise to 500 per cent. This is without taking into account the pervasive use of derivatives, which was absent in the 1930s but immensely complicates the current situation. On the positive side, we have the experience of the 1930s and the prescriptions of John Maynard Keynes to draw on.

The bursting of bubbles causes credit contraction, the forced liquidation of assets, deflation and wealth destruction that may reach catastrophic proportions. In a deflationary environment, the weight of accumulated debt can sink the banking system and push the economy into depression. That is what needs to be prevented at all costs.

It can be done – by creating money to offset the contraction of credit, recapitalising the banking system and writing off or down the accumulated debt in an orderly manner. They require radical and unorthodox policy measures. For best results, the three processes should be combined.

To prevent the US economy from sliding into a depression, Mr Obama must implement a radical and comprehensive set of policies. Alongside the well-advanced fiscal stimulus package, these should include a system-wide and compulsory recapitalisation of the banking system and a thorough overhaul of the mortgage system – reducing the cost of mortgages and foreclosures.

Energy policy could also play an important role in counteracting both depression and deflation. The American consumer can no longer act as the motor of the global economy. Alternative energy and developments that produce energy savings could serve as a new motor, but only if the price of conventional fuels is kept high enough to justify investing in those activities. That would involve putting a floor under the price of fossil fuels by imposing a price on carbon emissions and import duties on oil to keep the domestic price above, say, $70 per barrel.

Dude.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on January 31, 2009 at 7:40 PM

We just need to detonate one of our unicorns over an unpopulated area. They’ll be suing for peace after they see that.

DarkCurrent on January 31, 2009 at 7:41 PM

I think we have a winner!

There’s a palpable Soros-Alynski connection out there somewhere…Alynski’s ideas, Soros’ globalist ideas and tons of money?

coldwarrior on January 31, 2009 at 7:34 PM

I’m not convinced that Soros is at the top of that food chain. I’m not a big fan of conspiracy theories but there is just too much strangeness in this whole series of events.

Oldnuke on January 31, 2009 at 7:41 PM

Ahmad to Obama… “Jimma… Is that You?”

RalphyBoy on January 31, 2009 at 7:38 PM

Obama to Ahmad… “Jeremiah… Is that You?”

the_nile on January 31, 2009 at 7:43 PM

progressoverpeace on January 31, 2009 at 7:40 PM

Oddly enough I hope you are right and it’s just stupidity.

Oldnuke on January 31, 2009 at 7:44 PM

Iran to Obama: “Ooops… Dropped my soap… Obama?… Would you mind bending over and picking it up?”

franksalterego on January 31, 2009 at 7:48 PM

Oddly enough I hope you are right and it’s just stupidity.

Oldnuke on January 31, 2009 at 7:44 PM

It’s a tough call, Oldnuke. Conspiracies can be broken and usually just disintegrate of their own internal problems, but stupidity can go on for much longer and is totally impervious to reason.

It’s looking pretty gloomy, either way. People, in general, don’t seem to realize what is really at risk.

progressoverpeace on January 31, 2009 at 7:49 PM

I’m not convinced that Soros is at the top of that food chain. I’m not a big fan of conspiracy theories but there is just too much strangeness in this whole series of events.

Oldnuke on January 31, 2009 at 7:41 PM

I am quite convinced that he is. He has done well during this collapse, something even Buffett can not say.

genso on January 31, 2009 at 7:49 PM

Not the Iran I knew!

clinker46 on January 31, 2009 at 7:53 PM

I’m not convinced that Soros is at the top of that food chain. I’m not a big fan of conspiracy theories but there is just too much strangeness in this whole series of events.

Oldnuke on January 31, 2009 at 7:41 PM

Me too, Oldnuke.

petefrt on January 31, 2009 at 7:55 PM

The significance is that it shows how obsessed the regime is with the perception that it’s winning its ideological battle with the west, to the extent that even rare attempts at rapprochement from the U.S. are sneered at as crude concessions of defeat.

Sounds like the new pro-American Democratic party, though somehow conservatism is so outdated. Now we know the logic behind Allahpundit’s thimking.

chunderroad on January 31, 2009 at 7:56 PM

michelle to obama…barack, come out from unda that desk.

SMACK…..DOHHH
i told you, quit sucking yo thumb!

sandlin71 on January 31, 2009 at 7:58 PM

“Thimk” is a Taxi Driver reference, sine Allahpundit is, in my mind, a youngish, fashionably bearded cabbie moonlighting as a blogger and deliberately shocking his family.

chunderroad on January 31, 2009 at 7:59 PM

Wussification of America is in high gear now.

They go back to calling us a paper tiger in 3…2…1….

Hog Wild on January 31, 2009 at 7:59 PM

I’m not convinced that Soros is at the top of that food chain. I’m not a big fan of conspiracy theories but there is just too much strangeness in this whole series of events.

Oldnuke on January 31, 2009 at 7:41 PM

Soros is the money. I’m convinced of that. Now whether he’s pulling policy strings, that’s a different story. It wouldn’t shock me if he is betting on the collapse of the American economy and the emergence of a new tightly woven global economy.

BardMan on January 31, 2009 at 7:59 PM

Dude.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on January 31, 2009 at 7:40 PM

Dude……… indeed!

I noticed that Mr. Soros did not include in his article the Democratic Social Engineering policies that caused this whole mess in the first place…………..

………… but more radical government control of our financial institutions and regulation of our energy policies to keep prices higher are.

Just how much more damage to this country and our freedoms are we going to allow this ass-clown to take?

Seven Percent Solution on January 31, 2009 at 8:03 PM

LISTEN!

We will NOT miss NY, L.A. S.F. Chicago, Miami or what ever other cities will be gone in a matter of minutes. So lets jump around on the Bambi band wagon. Get rid of those useless blue states. Go Bambi, Go Bambi!

SCREWED FOR SHIZZLE!

Mercy4Me on January 31, 2009 at 8:04 PM

How many times do we have to learn the same stupid lesson; when we broadcast our self-doubt and fecklessness to a world full of predators, we will soon be fighting for our lives.

Ah but there’s the rub. The superlefties don’t see the world as full of predators. They see the world as full of innocent victims being preyed upon by the evil capitalist empire of America. In Obama’s first media interview, with Al Arabiya, he pretty much said this.

ProfessorMiao on January 31, 2009 at 8:04 PM

I am quite convinced that he is. He has done well during this collapse, something even Buffett can not say.

genso on January 31, 2009 at 7:49 PM

Dont forget what he did to the British Pound and the Bank of England back in 1992.

Currency speculation
On Black Wednesday (September 16, 1992), Soros became immediately famous when he sold short more than $10 billion worth of pounds, profiting from the Bank of England’s reluctance to either raise its interest rates to levels comparable to those of other European Exchange Rate Mechanism countries or to float its currency.

Finally, the Bank of England was forced to withdraw the currency from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism and to devalue the pound sterling, and Soros earned an estimated US$ 1.1 billion in the process. He was dubbed “the man who broke the Bank of England.”

The Times of Monday, October 26, 1992, quoted Soros as saying: “Our total position by Black Wednesday had to be worth almost $10 billion. We planned to sell more than that. In fact, when Norman Lamont said just before the devaluation that he would borrow nearly $15 billion to defend sterling, we were amused because that was about how much we wanted to sell.”

According to Steven Drobny,[15] Stanley Druckenmiller, who traded under Soros, originally saw the weakness in the pound. “Soros’ contribution was pushing him to take a gigantic position,” in accord with Druckenmiller’s own research and instincts.

In 1997, during the Asian financial crisis, then Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad accused Soros of using the wealth under his control to punish ASEAN for welcoming Myanmar as a member.

Dreadnought223 on January 31, 2009 at 8:05 PM

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on January 31, 2009 at 7:40 PM

Enlightening article. In other words, bye bye free market, bye bye capitalism…. and, oh yeah, bye bye freedom.

Maxx on January 31, 2009 at 8:06 PM

Ah but there’s the rub. The superlefties don’t see the world as full of predators. They see the world as full of innocent victims being preyed upon by the evil capitalist empire of America. In Obama’s first media interview, with Al Arabiya, he pretty much said this.

ProfessorMiao on January 31, 2009 at 8:04 PM

That’s just the way it is. Maybe they can snap out of it.

the_nile on January 31, 2009 at 8:08 PM

It looks pretty certain that Netanyahu will be Israel’s next prime minister, and you can bet your *ss he’s not going to wait forever while the Obamessiah writes nice conciliatory letters to Iran and Hillary tries a soft power roll on the mullahs. Israel will attempt to take out as many of Iran’s nuclear facilities as they can, before the end of this year I would wager, and all hell will break loose. That will be the excuse the Obamessiah is looking for to isolate Israel and set the wolves loose, I suspect.

It’s too early to be sure, but I’d wager that Obama will be far, far worse than Carter. He’ll leave the world a different place all right, but it isn’t going to be a better place. Not for us, and not for Israel.

ProfessorMiao on January 31, 2009 at 8:09 PM

Amazing,….I recall Gov Palin saying Iran would see us a weak.
Barry is such a tool,…he knows,..many people told him,..he just doesn’t give a rats @ss what people think of America, he’s just another American hater who just happens to be POTUS,..thanks acorn.
Is acorn aware that terrorist will kill them to?

christene on January 31, 2009 at 8:10 PM

According to my older son when he was an Army First Lieutenant infantry platoon leader in his first tour of duty in Iraq (now a Captain in his second tour), that Bin Laden’s statement about being the strong horse was absolutely right in the Middle East.

I was very concerned that Obama’s speech would be viewed as a sign of weakness on th epart of America. It is a recipe for disaster.

Phil Byler on January 31, 2009 at 8:10 PM

Fundamentally, Obama and (broadly speaking) the liberal/left believes that if we “unclench” our fists – offer the right carrots and rewards – that Iran will unclench their’s. That is, Tehran’s animosity was driven by our policies and their “misunderstanding” of our policies.

So, we change our policies, unclench our fists, and they’ll respond accordingly.

That might work if Iran was a conventional power and not a revolutionary one.

And it might be worth the risk if we knew that our allies – putative and real – would then join with us and crack down on the Mullahs once they rejected the offer.

But Obama has no fallback position. All carrots, no stick.

SteveMG on January 31, 2009 at 8:10 PM

Not a surprise.

nor on January 31, 2009 at 8:16 PM

Is acorn aware that terrorist will kill them to?

christene on January 31, 2009 at 8:10 PM

Why would the terrorists kill the terrorists..

the_nile on January 31, 2009 at 8:17 PM

Load up a C-17 with crates of the InTouch magazine where Barry has his shirt off and drop them over Iran- STAT.

Chuck Schick on January 31, 2009 at 8:20 PM

michelle to obama…barack, come out from unda that desk.

SMACK…..DOHHH
i told you, quit sucking yo thumb!

Mama bama that was not my thumb I was sucking!!!

izoneguy on January 31, 2009 at 8:21 PM

Okay, show of hands, who thought something like this would happen?

mindhacker on January 31, 2009 at 8:23 PM

Amazing,….I recall Gov Palin saying Iran would see us a weak.

She was right! Barry is waving the white flag.

izoneguy on January 31, 2009 at 8:23 PM

Okay, show of hands, who thought something like this would happen?

mindhacker on January 31, 2009 at 8:23 PM

Do you mean like Obama taking the forces of our government that were directed against our enemies under Bush and redirecting them against American Citizen Joe Sixpack. Yeah, I saw it coming from a mile away.

Maxx on January 31, 2009 at 8:29 PM

SteveMG on January 31, 2009 at 8:10 PM –

Obama being so “new” to the world scene…naive, really…he has no actual credibility among our allies, real or putative. He has offered nothing except talk, and vague ideas about how thing might turn out if only certain other vague goals are accomplished.

Now, if you were President, Prime Minister, or King somewhere…would you bet the farm on backing Obama?

Secondly, as President of the United States, the most powerful nation in the Free World, there is a lot of symbolism in every act, statement or decision Obama makes that reaches far beyond what may have been intended. His first official phone call to whom? President Abbas? His first televised interview with whom? Al-Arabiya? His decision to cut 10% from the defense budget. His statements about how long the US and global recovery will take no matter what he does.

All of this is received and perceived far beyond our shores.

What in his first 12 days in office has served to convince our allies, real or putative, that we have, in the White House, someone they can depend on when crunch times comes?

If Iran decided to pull off a major strike somewhere, or have one of their proxies do so…if you were the leader of the targeted nation, who would you call first?

If I were Netanyahu, I’d make a decision to do whatever it took to ensure the longevity of Israel, and screw what the US under Obama may or may not do. If I were Georgia, or Poland, or any of the Baltic members of NATO, I’d start looking for other-than-US coalitions to hedge my bets and protect my borders and people. If I were a member of a freedom movement striving to get out from under the heelk of a tyrant…I’d be a lot more pessimistic today than I would have been prior to 4 November. The Dems and Obama decried how our “friends” in Europe no longer looked to the US for leadership. Guess what? Obama thus far hasn’t indicated any leadership. Can’t even get Pelosi and Reid to shave off massive amounts of unnecessary pork from what was supposed to be, touted to be, a stimulus package to get the American economy back on a strong and even keel.

If he can’t influence key members of his own Party…can one really believe he can influence the actions of other nations, many of them right now looking at their own economic and political survival?

coldwarrior on January 31, 2009 at 8:30 PM

“capitalist thought and the system of domination have failed”

well, to be exact, “liberal thought and the system of buying votes to achieve power have failed”

notagool on January 31, 2009 at 8:30 PM

Amazing,….I recall Gov Palin saying Iran would see us a weak.

She was right! Barry is waving the white flag.

izoneguy on January 31, 2009 at 8:23 PM

Remember when the nutroots screamed that Palin wanted to start a war with Russia when all she was doing was affirming our NATO commitment?

Palin has so many more balls than BHO.

White flags, rainbows, unicorns and several refrains of “Can’t We All Just Get Along.” Planks in the left’s national security platform.

We are so screwed.

BardMan on January 31, 2009 at 8:31 PM

US President Barack Obama’s offer to talk to Iran shows that America’s policy of “domination” has failed, the government spokesman said on Saturday.

“This request means Western ideology has become passive, that capitalist thought and the system of domination have failed,” Gholam Hossein Elham was quoted as saying by the Mehr news agency.

“Negotiation is secondary, the main issue is that there is no way but for (the United States) to change,” he added.

Look,, Obama.. if he is true to his word,, has got to come out and agree with this little midget from Iran. Awwwkmaaadeeenweeenmajaaad is only repeating back to Obama what Obama has said!! America has got to change,, capitalism has failed, yada yada yada. See,, Obama needs to just sit down and write this guy a letter or pick up the phone and leave a message straight from his Marxist heart.

I can see him saying,, “Hello,,, this is President Obama calling from the Office of the President Elect,,,wait,, uhh, that’s not right,, uhh, ,, I mean the Oval Office,,, uhh,,,, I just wanted to say, Yes, I agree. We have common enemies, uh, uhh,,, but I am working hard from uhh, 9 or 10 in the morning to 5 or so to change America,,, uhh, rid it of capitalism and profits (except for whatever I can bring in with my new trade mark line) and, uhh, uhh, change our foreign policy so, uhh,,,, our troops are no longer air raiding villages and killing civilians. In fact, uhh, just the other day I proposed a %10 cut in our military. And, uhh,,,, that will be just a good first step. So, uhh, I have heard, uhh, from my Vice President, Mr Biden,,, you were once a community organizer like myself. And, uhh,,,, many of our friends have, uuh, some,, uhh, things in common. So, uhh, if we could talk,, and uhh,,,, if you came to visit,,,, well, I will uhh,,, I am sure we’d have some good laughs and stories to share about,, uh,, the past. So, you have nothing to fear from me,,, don’t worry,, we’re not a Christian nation anymore either. Those rumors just aren’t true! So,, uhh, Lets be friends, OK? Lets get together and uhhh, I was told it gets hot in Iran,, so I’ll crank up the thermostat. Make sure the White House is nice and toasty for you! I,, So,, uhh, call me soon. “

JellyToast on January 31, 2009 at 8:36 PM

Okay, show of hands, who thought something like this would happen?

mindhacker on January 31, 2009 at 8:23 PM

Hand up here.

This SOP for despots, dictators, and even the old school days bully on the bus. They never negotiate from a position of weakness and if they do negotiate through a dialogue it is only to accomplish their own sinister goals.

Methinks Obama has never had to deal with this even on a personal level having grown up in a relatively coddled environment.

Ah but don’t worry. Samantha Power has a position as senior director for multilateral affairs at the NSC. She’ll be working alongside that monster Hillary Clinton to solve these matters pronto!

Yes, we’re basically screwed.

Mr Gus on January 31, 2009 at 8:38 PM

Obama being so “new” to the world scene…naive, really…he has no actual credibility among our allies, real or putative. He has offered nothing except talk, and vague ideas about how thing might turn out if only certain other vague goals are accomplished.

Well, the problem is that many of our allies – at least the ones in Europe – believe what Obama does. That is, if we “remove” the threat to Iran (as Tehran sees it), if we convince them of our peaceful intent, if we offer them the right package of incentives (recognition, trade, investment), they’ll “unclench their fists” at us.

Again, it’s not just Obama that believes this.

Certainly, our enemies – I can imagine Putin smiling as this farce is carried out – sense weakness. I’m less concerned directly with Iran than I am with a Putin or a Hu. Or a North Korea (whoever is running that hellhole).

The main problem I have with Obama is not that he’s offering an olive branch to Tehran. Let’s face it, I think most Americans endorse some sort of talk or negotiations. After all, Obama won; he’s got the mandate.

The problem I have is that he has no fallback position. If the carrots/incentives fail, what does he plan to do next? Will he be able to convince Moscow and Beijing to crackdown on Tehran?

Very doubtful. It’s not just Iran that senses weakness.

SteveMG on January 31, 2009 at 8:40 PM

JellyToast on January 31, 2009 at 8:36 PM

If only he could play Chicago politics with Americas enemies.

the_nile on January 31, 2009 at 8:40 PM

Funny how Obama makes Carter look a strong leader by comparison. To be fair, Neville Obama isn’t likely to be afraid of a rabbit. A very, very small rabbit.

Physics Geek on January 31, 2009 at 8:41 PM

“Negotiation is secondary, the main issue is that there is no way but for (the United States) to change,” he added.

I don’t see why anyone would be surprised. Obama promised us he was going to change America.

MikeA on January 31, 2009 at 8:43 PM

Okay, show of hands, who thought something like this would happen?

mindhacker on January 31, 2009 at 8:23 PM

Yeah, but not THIS fast!

gmoonster on January 31, 2009 at 8:46 PM

From Jihad Watch:

Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s leading candidate for prime minister, said Saturday that Iran “will not be armed with a nuclear weapon.”

In an interview with Israel’s Channel 2 TV, Netanyahu said if elected prime minister his first mission will be to thwart the Iranian nuclear threat. Netanyahu, the current opposition leader and head of the hardline Likud party, called Iran the greatest danger to Israel and to all humanity….

Here’s the link to the AP column.

INC on January 31, 2009 at 8:46 PM

SteveMG on January 31, 2009 at 8:40 PM –

His broadcasting indecision, or reluctance, with no fallback position, does indeed add more dimension to how he is perceived by our “allies.” How he is perceived by our enemies or fence sitters is something else entirely, though in no way disconnected by the former.

I believe that Obama believes, actually believes, that talking, making concessions, and such, is the proper course…and he has a lot of hope, hope that his plan will work out. The reality of it all, is that if our allies see us as making concessions, they too will be less reluctant to make concessions. Or, on the other hand, may make alliances among themselves, for their own mutual benefit. The possibilities of Grand Alliances and Ententes in Europe, New Europe in opposition to Old Europe, or parts of Europe in opposition to spreading Islamacism against those in Europe who believe concessions to the Islamacists may, it is hoped, work out. Thus, we will have a fracturing of Europe, and other parts of the world into smaller political units, alliances, all looking out for their own best interests today, versus their best interests a few years or mnore from now…all for expediency, all with the best intentions.

In the past century and the century prior we saw this many many times, and the result of this fractioning seems to have been a propensity toward war, either as seeker or victim…and Obama with no fallback position vis-a-vis Iran seems to indicate he has no fallback position vis-a-vis any other nation either.

You don’t get to the Super Bowl and win the Super Bowl on Hope alone. Obama, as regards foreign policy, economic policy, and dealing with our very real enemies, seems to believe all ya need is hope…and being nice…

Most of the rest of the world has shown to have a very different view of realpolitik.

coldwarrior on January 31, 2009 at 8:53 PM

coldwarrior on January 31, 2009 at 8:30 PM

I reckon after this sometime soon one of Iran’s Proxy’s will try and pull something against Israel to see how Obama reacts. And when Obama does nothing except issue a harshly worded statement Israel will take matters into its own hands and tell Obama to go get stuffed if he tries to interfere.

Dreadnought223 on January 31, 2009 at 8:54 PM

the absence of trolls is interesting

Jamson64 on January 31, 2009 at 8:55 PM

Or, on the other hand, may make alliances among themselves, for their own mutual benefit.

Gosh, I don’t see that taking place in Europe. Even if they did align up, they have no armies to threaten anyone.

And if the world economy continues to fall, I can easily see these European powers waging economic battles against one another.

Europe – old Europe – is dead. Their populaces won’t fight for anything except the welfare state. And that’s not threatened yet (see above).

However, I can envision a South Korea or a Taiwan or certainly countries in South America gravitating away from us. If they can’t depend on our support, it’s wise to make friends with the biggest guy on the block (NK, PRC, Venezuela/Brazil).

SteveMG on January 31, 2009 at 9:00 PM

Liberal Democrat politician, propped up by the liberal Main Stream Media, with no executive experience, just because he was cool, and black, and fresh, and hope, and change…………

……….. in fact, ALL of our enemies around the world wanted him elected.

HA………… HA………… HA………….

Isn’t that cool………….. oh, wait! This isn’t American Idol………. this isn’t The View………. this isn’t an episode of “24″ that when you turn it off, it’s only make believe………

…….. there are people in this world that wake up every morning with only one thought in their heads…….

“How do we kill Americans today?”

Some are highly financed, organized, state supported, armed, trained, and have purposely propagandized the lower social classes of over populated, poverty stricken, under educated masses to fill their ranks and do their bidding……..

Most are those under educated masses trained to do the bidding…….

President George W. Bush recognized this, and although protecting American lives and property soon became unpopular thanks to the Democrats, Media, and Hollywood……..

……… he took the fight to these bastards to the very last day he was in office.

Now……….

…….. we have “President in Training” based on “School Yard Politics” from the Rules for Radicals…. Affirmative Action, and Pop Culture.

The United States of America, I fear, is going to have to learn a very painful lesson in order to see the errors of our ways.

Internally, Democratic Social Engineering policies caused our economic crisis we are dealing with at home…..

…….. and now Internationally, we have the “Boy King”, giving orders to drop our shields, lower our weapons, and stand motionless as the enemies plan their attack.

Ten days in office, and anyone can see Mr. Obama is totally over his head…….

………… and our enemies in this world see it, too.

Seven Percent Solution on January 31, 2009 at 9:00 PM

Dreadnought223 on January 31, 2009 at 8:54 PM –

I fear the Obama will show reluctance to act.

Unless Iran or a proxy, or any other nation with ill intent, targets a large American entity…be it a military barracks or base overseas, or an attack on the mainland, here, Obama will seek conferences, consultations, discussions, focus group results and the like, prior to taking any action if he takes any action whatsoever.

And, even if a large American entity is hit, will Obama immediately go into his typical “vote present” mode or will he put at risk the entire United States by forceful engagement at the same time showing reticence, or put America at risk by not acting decisively or acting at all?

This is the problem I have with what amounts to having a cypher in the Oval Office.

coldwarrior on January 31, 2009 at 9:02 PM

Unless Iran or a proxy, or any other nation with ill intent, targets a large American entity

It seems to me that Iran doesn’t want war with us (excluding the real crazies, which is kind of hard to do). They want to drive us out of the Middle East and dominate the region with their “Shi’a Crescent.”

SteveMG on January 31, 2009 at 9:06 PM

I fear the Obama will show reluctance to act.

Unless Iran or a proxy, or any other nation with ill intent, targets a large American entity…be it a military barracks or base overseas, or an attack on the mainland, here, Obama will seek conferences, consultations, discussions, focus group results and the like, prior to taking any action if he takes any action whatsoever.

And, even if a large American entity is hit, will Obama immediately go into his typical “vote present” mode or will he put at risk the entire United States by forceful engagement at the same time showing reticence, or put America at risk by not acting decisively or acting at all?

This is the problem I have with what amounts to having a cypher in the Oval Office.

I wonder what he would do if DC is attacked and Michelle & his daughters are killed?

izoneguy on January 31, 2009 at 9:07 PM

Dreadnought223 on January 31, 2009 at 8:05 PM

Right. He seems to be around quite a few financial and currency problems and happens to make the winning play every time. Draw your own conclusions, but I think he got himself a pawn in the right place with Obama.

genso on January 31, 2009 at 9:09 PM

Oh grow up people. This is EXACTLY what Obama was elected to do. Remember all the anti-war stuff? This only seems like something is going wring if you are of the belief that America is supposed to win at these things. Obama was elected precisly so that we would not win. As Rush says, elections have concequences. And one of them, unfortunatly, is going to be a nuke-armed Iran, and a bunch of dead people. Is was Obama’s destiny, remember?

MikeA on January 31, 2009 at 9:10 PM

Oh grow up people.

And we’re supposed to go quietly into the night?

Your point is correct. This is what he told us he would do; and the American people voted for it (roughly).

But that doesn’t mean, it seems to me, that we can’t oppose it. Otherwise, what’s the use?

SteveMG on January 31, 2009 at 9:12 PM

I wonder what he would do if DC is attacked and Michelle & his daughters are killed?

izoneguy on January 31, 2009 at 9:07 PM

No offense, but if it also teaches our political class a lesson they never forget, it’s a small price to pay. Someone needs to get these people to wake the f up.

venividivici on January 31, 2009 at 9:15 PM

And one of them, unfortunatly, is going to be a nuke-armed Iran, and a bunch of dead people. Is was Obama’s destiny, remember?

MikeA on January 31, 2009 at 9:10 PM

And Netanyahu affirmed that Iran will not. Popular world opinion aside, Israel won’t let Obama or anyone sell them out without a fight.

http://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/ap/20090201/twl-ml-israel-politics-38359fb.html

genso on January 31, 2009 at 9:15 PM

SteveMG on January 31, 2009 at 9:06 PM –

I find it very difficult to believe a rational actor would want war with the United States, but recent history over the past century, has shown that it is the irrational actors that are the most troublesome.

Does Iran seek a war with the United States? On the surface, no rational observer would think so. But, looking over Iranian television and print media over the past few years, and more recently since the November election, there is still present a lot of blustering, and a lot of news for internal consumption that says perhaps they do. Every few weeks yet another military exercise is played out on Iranian television, and the people are exhorted to prepare for the Great Satan to come streaming over the horizon, or that Israel is going to try to lay waste to them as they sleep.

That they are a dysfunctional military, with a dysfunctional form of government notwithstanding, Iran could precipitate a war in the region. It is that threat of war that they seek to use, as you alluded to, to drive America from the region so they can have free rein over lesser armed or less cohesive populations. Frankly, from Teheran, the view is if and when the New Caliphate comes it will be Shi’a, not Sunni.

If Iran provokes hostility in the region, what is our response? Obama is beholden to the Left. Issuing orders to send US forces into the region to protect Dubai or Bahrain, or even Israel, is not going to sit well with his electorate.

If played right, Iran can achieve not only its nuclear ambitions, but also hegemony in the region without firing a shot, but if it takes a bit of weapons down range, Iran, not being a rational actor, will use means at its disposal. We are the weak horse presently. Will the people in the region seek our assistance or will they come to terms with the new order?

coldwarrior on January 31, 2009 at 9:17 PM

I think many of those who voted for him actually thought that talking nicely to those who want to kill us would work. They assumed that Obama’s appeal was universal.

I don’t think we should go gentle into that good night.

INC on January 31, 2009 at 9:18 PM

Liberal trolls, please come tell us how this isn’t an issue! We need your worldly wisdom so that we don’t fall prey to our reactionary stupidity!

venividivici on January 31, 2009 at 9:19 PM

I suggest anyone who is concerned about what is going on to find an old book written by Taylor Caldwell called “Captains and Kings.” It’s fiction, but it’s spot on regarding what’s going on in this country. She even says in the preface she hopes the youth of America will wake up before it’s too late. Well, looks like we didn’t. It was written in early seventies. Just read it; I read it when I was 25; I’m 57 now and have literally observed what she wrote coming to fruition.

americanpatriot on January 31, 2009 at 9:21 PM

The One needs to stabilize relations with Iran, so that he can establish a new American embassy in Tehran, and the mullahs can seize it all over again.

If history doesn’t repeat itself, as Twain said, at least it does rhyme.

FalseProfit on January 31, 2009 at 9:22 PM

If Iran provokes hostility in the region, what is our response? Obama is beholden to the Left. Issuing orders to send US forces into the region to protect Dubai or Bahrain, or even Israel, is not going to sit well with his electorate.

I think if they really wanted to do that Iraq would be much, much more unstable that it is. My guess – complete hunch – is that Iran pulled back out of Iraq as they saw Bush falling and they were content to not prevent his further weakening.

I have no doubt that significant segments in the government wouldn’t like to kill us. And willingly die themselves doing so.

But their ultimate goal – and I think Moscow’s and Beijing’s – is to weaken US influence in the region and, in turn, around the world.

They want us out of the region first; then dead.

SteveMG on January 31, 2009 at 9:25 PM

We keep hearing of the Chicago ruthless politics and practices. If Obama fu*ked over everything in his path to the Presidency, why should he become a pussy now to the world? Why would he not intend to fu*k Iran and the very world over, Chicago style?

BL@KBIRD on January 31, 2009 at 9:26 PM

If Iran provokes hostility in the region, what is our response?

How he decides to deal with Hamas may provide the answer to that question. If it is true that Israel opted out of further engagement in Gaza earlier this month at his behest, then we already have our answer. But I haven’t seen anything yet that persuades me that this is true.

ProfessorMiao on January 31, 2009 at 9:28 PM

We keep hearing of the Chicago ruthless politics and practices. If Obama fu*ked over everything in his path to the Presidency, why should he become a pussy now to the world? Why would he not intend to fu*k Iran and the very world over, Chicago style?

BL@KBIRD on January 31, 2009 at 9:26 PM

Well, Iranians aren’t Christian and they aren’t Republican. Beyond those two groups, Democrats don’t f*ck over anyone. Like p*ssies everywhere, they stick to safe targets.

venividivici on January 31, 2009 at 9:31 PM

MikeA on January 31, 2009 at 9:10 PM

Precisely. That’s why the left is quiet, they might not be able to come here and justify what they want and what they voted for, but it’s here now and they must own it. Happily or otherwise.

clnurnberg on January 31, 2009 at 9:32 PM

Incidentally, this very scenario is why a civil war in the West which ended in the slaughter of all appeasers would get the Iranians’ (among others) attention. It would show them that “we” meant business. They’d be like “Damn, they killed off half their population just so they wouldn’t appease us. They’re crazier than we are”.

Sorry, just trying to bring some historical realism to the discussion. I’m happy to be proven wrong.

venividivici on January 31, 2009 at 9:34 PM

coldwarrior on January 31, 2009 at 9:02 PM

What concerns me about this situation is the potential for a wider war to breakout in the middle east and the World as a result.

Think about it, Obama’s perceived weakness leads to an emboldened Iran, who starts to blatantly ramp up its Nuclear program as a result.
Israel believing that it can no longer rely on the US to keep Iran contained and prevent it from obtaining Nuclear weapons decides to deal with the problem itself.
Israel launches a massive strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities which Iran responds to by getting its proxies to launch a major assault on Israel.
At some point during the ensuing battle a dirty bomb or some sort of chemical or Biological weapon is let of in a major Israeli city by Iranian backed terrorists causing mass casualties.
Israel goes off the deep end and launches a retaliatory strike against Iran and its Proxy’s using Nuclear weapons. This causes massive outrage in the Muslim world who declare Jihad and attack Israel en mass.
The United states is caught in the crossfire and is eventually drawn in the the wider war when Jihadis start attacking American interests in the middle east for being the main guarantor of the Israeli state in the past.
Meanwhile Europe and England are paralyzed by massive civil unrest and Riots caused by their large migrant Muslim populations and Russia and China take full advantage of the situation to make some money selling weapons, settle a few scores and regain some lost territory.

Dreadnought223 on January 31, 2009 at 9:42 PM

Hillary has got to be asking herself, “What in the HELL have I gotten myself into.”

DrStock on January 31, 2009 at 9:44 PM

I haven’t read the whole thread so if I am repeating someone, sorry. After getting the dog do beat out of them, didn’t Hamas just claim victory over Israel? This just in, these folks don’t lose even when they lose.

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2009 at 9:47 PM

Dear Mr. “I’m In a Jihad”, Please come over for some expensive steaks and let’s sing kum bah ya. I’m sure we can put this very unpleasant nuclear business behind us. Love and kisses, Obama

Gulfcoastconservative on January 31, 2009 at 9:47 PM

Hillary has got to be asking herself, “What in the HELL have I gotten myself into.”

DrStock on January 31, 2009 at 9:44 PM

BBBBBBBBWWWWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAHHHHHHAAAAHHA!!!

Seven Percent Solution on January 31, 2009 at 9:49 PM

SteveMG on January 31, 2009 at 9:25 PM –

I avoided mentioning Iraq specifically, but since the door has been opened…

Iraq is in its infancy. Yes, they had far far larger percentage turnout in their elections this weekend than we ever had in any of our own, but there is yet no unified Iraq…getting closer daily as various segments are quietly put to bed, Mooky al-Sadr, as one example, but, their government is still much like our own in our early 20 years…lots of aspirations but little means to actually do a lot about most of them, and from the beginning it was pretty well fractured, too.

Nonetheless, if Iran chose to do bad things to Iraq, other than our current somewhat massive military presence, what do the Iraqis have to defend themselves? An infantry/military police oriented armed forces, designed for internal security, not for defense of the nation from outside players. No combat capable air force, a small coastal patrol navy, and a command structure that lacks trained and experienced communications, command and control abilities. Going after a small AQI band of thugs in Ramallah is one thing, and they are doing a pretty good job on that thus far…but reacting to and responding to a larger threat? It’d be slugfest for a while, but in the end, unless we participated, Iraq would succumb, as it is presently organized, experienced and trained.

Iran backed off, but not because we posed a direct threat to them. They are bidding their time, so to speak, waiting for us to complete our withdrawal of combat forces, then, with a smattering of trainers, advisors and logistics personnel remaining in country, it will be up to the Iraqi armed forces to bear the burden…and Iran knows that right now nor in the near future, the Iraqis are not capable of doing so against an outside aggressor such as Iran.

Our intent was not to create a new Iraqi armed forces on the scale of Saddam, but to create an internal security force to hold the fort until small segments of the armed forces became more experienced and trained and slowly build the Iraqi armed forces into an entity that could, at some point in the future, defend itself. That will take years, in all honesty, that is how these things tend to work.

As for Moscow and Beijing, sure, they’d like to see us out of the region…their vital national interests in the region are not compatible with our own. That both Moscow and Beijing are supplying Iran, training Iranians, assisting Iran’s nuke program at just about every level, is a pretty succinct indication that once we are out of the area, their efforts will provide them with what they need.

Problem I have with the utterings of the current Administration, from the White House, mostly in Congress, and to an much more limited extent within the defense and intelligence establishment, is that we have no “plan.” Those put together in the prior Administration are all subject to review, as per Obama’s first day in office order. There exists a state of flux in these parts of our government that did not exist just a few weeks ago.

How Obama sets the sails, how the crew responds, and more importantly how Obama defines the mission, is what is going to make the difference as to our ability to act effectively in an unsettled realm.

With Obama’s first 12 days as a baseline, I’m not sanguine as to the possibilities.

coldwarrior on January 31, 2009 at 9:50 PM

I can’t understand Beijing’s endgame in all of this.

They clearly don’t want a destabilized Middle East. They need the oil as much as we do. In fact, more. And they certainly don’t want an economically diminished US since we’re their Wal-Mart customers.

Qui bono?

Putin obviously wants us weakened, oil prices as high as possible, and the Middle East destabilized. All of that is good for him.

But China?

SteveMG on January 31, 2009 at 9:50 PM

Meanwhile Europe and England are paralyzed by massive civil unrest and Riots caused by their large migrant Muslim populations and Russia and China take full advantage of the situation to make some money selling weapons, settle a few scores and regain some lost territory.

Dreadnought223 on January 31, 2009 at 9:42 PM

And this is the rosy scenario..

the_nile on January 31, 2009 at 9:51 PM

So who shoves it in the boy wonder’s face first? Putin? Imadinnerjacket? Chavez? They are all going to take their shots at him, you know that. They read him like you and I do: WUSS.

james23 on January 31, 2009 at 9:54 PM

Every time I read about this story, I can hear the theme song playing in the background: ‘Why Can’t We Be Friend?’ by War.

c3ichief on January 31, 2009 at 9:54 PM

that we have no “plan.”

That sums it up.

Actually, they do have a plan: it’s called “hope.”

Hope that Iran will act rationally and accept the offer, i.e., recognition, trade, investments.

If not, they’ve got no Plan B since they’ve taken force off the table.

Iran’s playing a waiting game with time on their side. They may be crazy (they are); but they’re not stupid.

SteveMG on January 31, 2009 at 9:54 PM

Dreadnought223 on January 31, 2009 at 9:42 PM –

Prior to last summer, I understand this precise scenario was war gamed several times at Carlisle Barracks and at Leavenworth…Army War College and the Command and General Staff College, respectively.

From what I have gleaned in conversations, the outcome is not at all pretty. A “go for broke” move (with our eye on the major outside players, Russia and China) could result in major casualties. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure is something the current Administration seems to fail to understand. A major part of the prevention is to show our allies, and our enemies that we have interests and will not fail to protect them. The minute reticence or reluctance on our part is shown, then the equation skews quite a bit.

coldwarrior on January 31, 2009 at 9:56 PM

I’m not convinced that Soros is at the top of that food chain. I’m not a big fan of conspiracy theories but there is just too much strangeness in this whole series of events.

Oldnuke on January 31, 2009 at 7:41 PM

The interm presidend of Iraq tells reporters that he thinks we can start to pullout our troops by the first of the year.

two days later Reid hops a jet to meet with Soros.

Three days later Murtha gives his infamous ‘speech of death’

four weeks later Iran sends in weapons and advisors, al quaida enters with a army, and sadar reactivates his army.

Yes Soros IS in charge.

allrsn on January 31, 2009 at 9:56 PM

This just in, these folks don’t lose even when they lose.

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2009 at 9:47 PM

As long as they are alive they consider themselves victorious. They don’t believe that their god will allow them to lose.

thomasaur on January 31, 2009 at 9:58 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3