Iran blames US despite Obama’s waffling

I’d like to hear Morrissey or AP explain how Obama’s words are going to change the situation for the better in Iran.

orange on June 17, 2009 at 3:15 PM

Well, I’m not Allah or Ed, but I’ll give it a shot. Words mean things. The right words spoken by the leader of the free world can have a tremendous impact on the global stage. Witness the end of the Cold War, brought about in no small part by the forceful and meaningful words of Ronald Reagan. He gave many, many speeches and statements over the years, spoken with conviction and force, that all had a cumulative positive effect in fighting the evil of the Soviet Union. Just four words alone, “Tear down this wall!” still reverberate more than 20 years later, particularly in the place where that wall used to stand. Reagan’s own people fought him on those words, trying repeatedly to get him to take them out for fear of offending Gorbachev too much. But Reagan’s words were the weapons with which he fought the Cold War to its victorious end. If Obama had been president at that time, I’m pretty sure the Berlin Wall would still be standing today because he would have spoken with moral equivalence, refused to meddle, and taken great care not to offend Gorbachev and the USSR.

aero on June 17, 2009 at 3:43 PM

Hmm, I recall a lot of people on the right criticizing Obama for just giving pretty speeches. Now suddenly his speeches can move mountains and upend regimes. Interesting.

orange on June 17, 2009 at 4:23 PM

The difference, as another commenter pointed out, is that Reagan spoke with conviction and backed his words up with actions. Obama’s words are empty because everyone knows he does not believe in extending the blessings of liberty to other nations of the world. He has said as much himself on more than one occasion. Who are we to say that our system is any better than anyone else’s, right? I suppose I’m forced to agree with you, then, that Obama saying the right thing now would ring hollow and have no positive impact whatsoever. It’s because it’s Obama, though, not because the words of the U.S. President don’t matter. Obama is the first President since Carter who has deliberately weakened the United States to the point that his words make the world shrug their collective shoulders.

But Reagan’s words did make a difference. Many eastern Europeans credit him with inspiring them to fight for their freedom. The Estonian president is on record as saying that Reagan is one of his greatest heroes. Thanks to the Estonian president, Ronald Reagan, and to Milton Friedman, Estonia now has one of the most thriving free-enterprise economies in the world.

aero on June 17, 2009 at 4:49 PM

Yeah, I mean – as long as you ignore the well-regarded speech he had about the Middle East just recently or the hugely attended speech he had in Europe before he was even president. Sure, if you disregard all the factual evidence, then what you say seems plausible.

European leaders do not respect Obama. He has insulted the UK multiple times since he took office, and they are pissed. France’s Sarkozy called Obama a naive empty suit. Merkel sneers at Obama routinely, also calling him naive. “Well-regarded” by whom? What tangible evidence is there that Obama’s empty, weak words have raised the world’s opinion of the United States, and/or improved life for anyone, anywhere?

But those eastern Europeans liked the US to start with. Iranians, by and large, dont. I imagine you can see the difference. Iranians will not embrace Obama’s words as readily as the eastern Europeans did.

Gorbachev didn’t like Reagan at first, either. Reagan won him over, across a period of years, many meetings, and many strong public statements that shamed Gorby into more discussions.

George W. Bush did his big, tough talking by calling Iraq, Iran and NK an “axis of evil”. Ooo! Big talk! And by the end of his tenure, that resulted in what? We get bogged down in Iraq and cant get out, Iran is closer to a nuke, and NK has one. Those tough words sure did a lot of good.

orange on June 17, 2009 at 5:27 PM

I never said George Bush was a powerful speaker. In fact, I’m on record as saying (before you started commenting at HA) that GWB’s lack of eloquence and unwillingness to explain or defend his policies was his fatal flaw. That said, you can’t deny that when GWB spoke, the world listened. They were pretty sure the “crazy, unilateralist cowboy” would do what he said. At least what the U.S. President said still carried weight under GWB. But Reagan remains the best example of how to use the U.S. President’s foreign policy pulpit to its greatest effect.

And, by the way, you left out the part about Iraq being free from tyranny because of George W. Bush. You’re right about Iran and NK still being under the thumbs of evil autocrats, but please don’t discount the value of bestowing the freedom to choose their own government on millions of people in a region most inhospitable to such freedoms. One despot at a time, orange. One despot at a time. The Iranian people might be taking care of the second themselves. We’ll see about the third.

aero on June 17, 2009 at 5:49 PM