Here in the land of conservatism, it’s very easy to critique our terrorist-enabling State Department and our cowardly President, but didn’t Bush take a forgive-and-forget position vis a vis the Chicoms?

Jaibones on June 22, 2009 at 6:44 PM

That’s a valid point, but the surrounding circumstances are different. The Iranian problem revolves, mostly, around the nuclear issue (which The Precedent was hoping to hide until the Iranians actually had a nuke test, then doing nothing because ‘they have nukes’). This wasn’t the case in China – though there’s no question that the US fell down on its face, embarrassingly so, during that event.

The difference in this case is that the whole thrust of The Precedent’s moronic ideas about Iran was that a US President sitting at an official negotiating table with Achmadinejad and hte other savages lent no legitmacy to them, at all – that diplomacy was friction-less and free. That has been blown out of the water, though the moron refuses to acknowledge it, as it would reveal what an impenetrable fool he is (though anyone with a brain already knows that). This further push just shows how dumb he is.

There is no comparison between the two situations, that I see, and The Precedent is trying to play this one so that he is able to avoid the nuclear issue and hope that Iran gets it all finished before anyone in the West (Israel, specifically) is able to do anything about it. The contradiction in B Hussein’s own rhetoric is so stark (he just gave that moronic talk in Cairo two weeks ago) that no one can really escape it.

progressoverpeace on June 22, 2009 at 6:57 PM

Jaibones on June 22, 2009 at 6:44 PM

I rambled a bit on my first response. Succinctly, the difference with Iran and Tienamen Square is that the reasoning offered by The Precedent for not backing the protesters (that that would give legitimacy to the regime to kill them and blame the US) is exactly at odds with his earlier reasoning that negotiations don’t automatically lend some legitimacy to those accepted as our negotiating partners. The Precedent is losing both sides of the argument, at the exact same time, which is pretty unbelievable.

progressoverpeace on June 22, 2009 at 7:06 PM

But view China carefully, for if you believe that economic engagement and (what I consider) very soft criticism by GHWBush in the face of 2,300 dead civilian protesters and over 5,000 injured was ultimately the right path,

I don’t. I have been against engagement with China (not for human-rights reasons, but because I didn’t trust their government and viewed them as a threat – I still do, even moreso, now). I’m with you on this. Sorry if I gave the wrong impression. My only distinction was that the situation over Tienanmen was not as consequential, by tiself, as this Iranian one, since the clock on Iran’s nukes is about to run out.

then outrage over this piddling 20 or 100 dead Iranians is going to be hard to justify.

Jaibones on June 22, 2009 at 7:41 PM

I agree with you. This is why I have said, since the beginning of this whole event, that the first responsibility The Precedent has is to apologize to the American people for having been such an idiot with his insane desire to unconditionally negotiate with Tehran.

He should back the protesters, not out of any moral issues or calls for a liberty that they don’t want and that The Precedent is busy killing here, anyway, but to keep the Iranian regime off-balance while looking for an opening to take out their nuclear industry – which is job one for the civilized world.

progressoverpeace on June 22, 2009 at 7:55 PM

USS Neville Chamberlain

– Navy Ships Named for Obama

Loxodonta on June 22, 2009 at 6:53 PM

Part of the Quisling class of friendship barges used to ignore human rights violations and affronts to American values throughout the world under the Obama dictatorship.

highhopes on June 22, 2009 at 8:00 PM

Sailing under the white flag.

progressoverpeace on June 22, 2009 at 8:04 PM