Obama’s open-hand policy now becoming clenched fist?

posted at 10:12 am on July 15, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Or, in other words, welcome to 2007, Mr. President.  Joe Klein reports that Barack Obama has decided after eighteen months of his ineffective outreach to Iran that the mullahs really do want a nuclear weapon more than they want peace, love, and understanding.  Suddenly the military-strike option has returned to the table:

In late 2006, George W. Bush met with the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon and asked if military action against Iran’s nuclear program was feasible. The unanimous answer was no. Air strikes could take out some of Iran’s nuclear facilities, but there was no way to eliminate all of them. Some of the nuclear labs were located in heavily populated areas; others were deep underground. And Iran’s ability to strike back by unconventional means, especially through its Hizballah terrorist network, was formidable. The military option was never officially taken off the table. At least, that’s what U.S. officials always said. But the emphasis was on the implausibility of a military strike. “Another war in the Middle East is the last thing we need,” Secretary of Defense Robert Gates wrote in 2008. It would be “disastrous on a number of levels.”

Gates is sounding more belligerent these days. “I don’t think we’re prepared to even talk about containing a nuclear Iran,” he told Fox News on June 20. “We do not accept the idea of Iran having nuclear weapons.” In fact, Gates was reflecting a new reality in the military and intelligence communities. Diplomacy and economic pressure remain the preferred means to force Iran to negotiate a nuclear deal, but there isn’t much hope that’s going to happen. “Will [sanctions] deter them from their ambitions with regards to nuclear capability?” CIA Director Leon Panetta told ABC News on June 27. “Probably not.” So the military option is very much back on the table.

What has changed? “I started to rethink this last November,” a recently retired U.S. official with extensive knowledge of the issue told me. “We offered the Iranians a really generous deal, which their negotiators accepted,” he went on, referring to the offer to exchange Iran’s 1.2 tons of low-enriched uranium (3.5% pure) for higher-enriched (20%) uranium for medical research and use. “When the leadership shot that down, I began to think, Well, we made the good-faith effort to engage. What do we do now?”

This conundrum didn’t begin with Obama’s election to the Presidency.  It began in 2007, when the American intelligence community produced a laughable NIE that asserted that Iran had stopped working towards nuclear weapons in 2003.  America’s allies openly scoffed at the conclusion of the NIE and critics called it a nakedly political move intended to force Bush into inaction on Iran.  Despite the criticism, it worked — and it allowed Barack Obama, among many others, to claim that Bush was too much of a cowboy and a war monger to be trusted with power.  In fact, in the same year, Obama asserted at a presidential debate that he wanted to meet one-on-one with the Iranian leader (although he later denied that he meant Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) without preconditions in order to reach a peaceful settlement of the issue.

What this produced was a three-year window for Tehran to pursue its nuclear-weapon program with little risk of interference.  Obama continued his open-hand rhetoric while grudgingly pursuing more sanctions, while Iran either ignored Obama, lectured him on the primacy of Islam, or gleefully insulted him on the world stage.  Obama’s “smart power” diplomatic team fell for the Peanuts football ploy that Iran has used for the last seven years in exploiting splits in the Western alliance by offering terms and then changing the terms when the West agrees to them.

Now that the Obama administration has wasted more than a year on the same kind of fruitless diplomacy that had already been tried over and over, they have suddenly reached the conclusion that Iran doesn’t want peace; it wants nukes.  And if it wants nukes more than it wants peace, they’re likely to want the nukes for a specific target.  All of this was blindingly apparent in 2007, but Obama somehow figured that starting over from scratch would work, since he was the change that the world wanted and needed.

A military strike is still a desperation move, for all of the reasons that the Bush team argued.  However, the only option worse is an Iran armed with nuclear weapons.  We’ve wasted three years getting back to that same realization, but you can bet that the Iranians haven’t wasted a day of it.


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

Obama is getting rid of our nuclear weapons. Hope he doesn’t sell them to raise money.

seven on July 15, 2010 at 10:15 AM

I’ll know Obama is serious about Iran when he calls them racists. Until then, I expect to see no military action, or any other action for that matter.

Wineaholic on July 15, 2010 at 10:16 AM

Well, luckily, I’m pretty sure Iran would not be so crass as to have been working on its nuclear program while our president tried to woo them, so no harm, no foul. Right?

LASue on July 15, 2010 at 10:16 AM

PBHO is going to kick Iran’s ass!

Bishop on July 15, 2010 at 10:16 AM

Obama just needs to bow to Amaminnyman and all will be right in the world I am sure.

NotCoach on July 15, 2010 at 10:17 AM

/facepalm

Obama:it’s quite possible that the Iranians don’t want peace and are intent on building a nuclear bomb.
Han Solo: Don’t want peace. I’m glad you’re here to tell us these things. Chewie! Take the Professor in back and plug him into the hyperdrive!

Skywise on July 15, 2010 at 10:18 AM

What? The Iranians didn’t buy the Messiah’s BS?

“I’m gonna have a heart attack and die from that surprise”
~Iago

ladyingray on July 15, 2010 at 10:18 AM

Obama just needs to reach out to them with space rides from NASA…everything will be okey-dokey./

kingsjester on July 15, 2010 at 10:18 AM

Its almost like the Mid-terms are forcing them to put on a tough facade!

rob verdi on July 15, 2010 at 10:19 AM

What nuke program? I thought that just before Bush was going to bomb the f@#k out of Iran. It was determined that the Iranians had stopped their nuke program some time ago.

Caper29 on July 15, 2010 at 10:20 AM

kingsjester on July 15, 2010 at 10:18 AM

LOL

ladyingray on July 15, 2010 at 10:20 AM

Reality Bites. Now will Obama Smite?

GreenBlade on July 15, 2010 at 10:21 AM

Remember after 9/11 when Michael Moore wrote that screed telling al Qaida they should have attacked someplace like Dallas where all the Republicans are, because in Moore’s mind they were the real enemies? Apparently, Obama held the same sort of belief down deep, until the World Cup bombings in Uganda.

All of a sudden, he seems to have realized the terrorists and their enablers in Iran aren’t just some foreign version of another disgruntled Democratic Party special interest group, and that they not only want to kill Americans and others who supported George Bush (41 and/or 43), but also people like him and those overseas who have no connection whatsoever with the evil, capitalist, racist, sexist, homophobic, U.S. conservatives whom until now Barack apparently believed were the root causes for all these problems. (The sad part, of course, is once the memory of the recent atrocity in Uganda passes, odds are 3-1 Obama goes back to his old ways if his core supporters on the left start saying he’s going neocon on them…)

jon1979 on July 15, 2010 at 10:22 AM

Well, at least his presumptuous naivete inspired a generation of equally naive idealists and youth…now, back to reality for the lot of them.

RepubChica on July 15, 2010 at 10:24 AM

Why would we believe anything this professional liar says, either directly or through his surrogates.

The only possible reason he would change policy about Iran is to set the table for a military attack in order to get more support in November or for his coronation in 2012.

Of course, he is capable of anything. He has no more regard for Iran than he has for America. If he concludes that bombing them into the stone age will help him politically, he will do it without a blink.

notagool on July 15, 2010 at 10:24 AM

It’s not impossible to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, just politically and morally untenable in the modern world. Which is great on the one hand. We’ve become very civilized. But on the other we almost guarantee a large-scale nuclear conflict, at a minimum nuclear terrorism, in the not-so-distant future.

And that’s before we start talking about our “friend and ally” Pakistan.

Or all the Arab states sure to go nuclear ASAP after Iran. The Saudis will almost certainly go out and buy a nuclear arsenal.

Similarly, with North Korea nuclear and aggressive, how long before Japan and South Korea decide Obama’s nuclear umbrella is not credible?

Now would be a good place to quote Sun Tzu, Patton, or Machiavelli to reinforce how dangerous a lightworking moonbeam president is to world peace, such as it is.

Beagle on July 15, 2010 at 10:24 AM

Progressive = regressive.

To make progress, comrades, we need to go backwards and re-learn what we knew.

Good Lt on July 15, 2010 at 10:24 AM

PBHO is just another typical neocon, using phantom wmd as a precursor to attacking a peaceful nation for its oil.

I’m calling Cindy Sheehan, the Code Pink women need to get going on this now, I mean RIGHT NOW.

Bishop on July 15, 2010 at 10:25 AM

If it ever comes to a sustained military strike, after we break a bunch of their stuff, can we please try NOT rebuilding it!

WashJeff on July 15, 2010 at 10:28 AM

Get the women and children out of the Iranian pill factories!!! Here comes the worlds greatest WAG THE DOG.

Rovin on July 15, 2010 at 10:28 AM

The bright-line lesson of the past fifty years: Democrats should never have their nasty hands on the tiller of foreign policy and national security.

flyfisher on July 15, 2010 at 10:29 AM

How many months of dithering will it take (like for the afghan troop surge) this time? Will he consult with any military leaders and half-ass the battle plan again in order to appease the left?

If Obama does a pre-emtive strike, I predict alot of our people are going to be needlessly killed. Unfortunatly time has about run out and it’s up to America to save the world from itself once again.

Mord on July 15, 2010 at 10:31 AM

Bishop on July 15, 2010 at 10:25 AM

Dude!

Inanemergencydial on July 15, 2010 at 10:31 AM

anyone else having problems with commenting?

VibrioCocci on July 15, 2010 at 10:31 AM

I think we need another executive order. They have worked wonders so far.

Electrongod on July 15, 2010 at 10:32 AM

Obama rhetoric and Obama policies: the true shovel-ready projects.

BuckeyeSam on July 15, 2010 at 10:32 AM

Thank goodness we have a super smartest president or this could have gone on until it was too late to stop Iran. Boy did we dodge a bullet with Palin as VP or what?

jukin on July 15, 2010 at 10:33 AM

uhhh, I’m so smart that I can talk to people and get to see things my way just because I am so AWESOME. Everyone tells me so, so it must be true!

JamesLee on July 15, 2010 at 10:33 AM

Klein concludes,

Of course, it is also possible that this low-key saber-rattling is simply a message the U.S. is trying to send the Iranians: it’s time to deal. There have been rumblings from Tehran about resuming negotiations, although the regime has very little credibility right now. The assumption — shared even by some of Iran’s former friends, like the Russians — is that any Iranian offer to talk is really an offer to stall. A specific, plausible Iranian concession may be needed to get the process back on track. But it is also possible that the saber-rattling is not a bluff, that the U.S. really won’t tolerate a nuclear Iran and is prepared to do something awful to stop it.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2003921,00.html#ixzz0tlGlr5Xy

If you’re going to bluff, it helps if it’s not obvious to everyone. Absolutely nobody thinks Obama has the stones to even attempt real economic sanctions, much less some complex air campaign and special ops war.

The Left believes in the carrot-and-carrot approach to foreign policy. So our adversaries insult and ridicule them even while getting what they want.

Beagle on July 15, 2010 at 10:34 AM

This is why it was such a terrible idea to make a public declarative statement that “the United States will not allow” Iran to obtain nuclear weapons.

In poker, when you bluff, all you lose is money. In a bar when you tell someone you are going to kick their ass, there often comes the moment when you have to do it.

Obama is pretty much toast.

Skandia Recluse on July 15, 2010 at 10:34 AM

Obama: it’s quite possible that the Iranians don’t want peace and are intent on building a nuclear bomb.

Han Solo: Don’t want peace. I’m glad you’re here to tell us these things. Chewie! Take the Professor in back and plug him into the hyperdrive toss him out the airlock!

Tony737 on July 15, 2010 at 10:35 AM

This idiotic admin had a perfect chance 1 year ago to attempt overthrow the Iranian regime, but they were unprepared and unwilling. First rule of Boy Scouts – be prepared. Their not even fit to be Boy Scouts.

mdenis39 on July 15, 2010 at 10:36 AM

Get your bootheel off of BP and apply it to the mullahs. You don’t need a college seminar to know who’s ass to kick.

Greek Fire on July 15, 2010 at 10:37 AM

Devout Muslims in the Middle East revile the open hand that carries and spreads pestilence. And Obama played the stupid idiot using the “open hand” analogy with those he addressed as his Muslim brothers traveling early in his presidency.

Barack Obama has decided after eighteen months of his ineffective outreach to Iran that the mullahs really do want a nuclear weapon more than they want peace, love, and understanding.

Barack Obama ALWAYS knew that Islamic mullahs really do want to nuke Israel and the USA first and foremost, above all else in politics and real life.

What has changed is that OBAMA IS OUT OF TIME.

America’s majority is poised AGAINST Obama’s administration.

Leaders of governments abroad are poised personally AGAINST Obama for his demanding lack of grace in diplomacy.

Iran, along with dictators in every continent as well as the auspices of Russia and Red China, subsequent to the 20th century world wars, have become poised AGAINST the USA regardless of potus ideology or color.

The current occupants in the Oval Office are desperate to connect somehow with the majority of American voters’ public opinion that holds Obama and Holder in contempt under constitutional law.

Obama revealed his clenched fist against whites since the “acted stupidly” ignorant of the circumstances comment against the responding police officer to a possible break-in Ivy League incident. But at home, Obama remains insulated from his loyal opposition.

However, abroad is a different story. For all of his travels abroad during his student days including his first job for what is now The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) part of the Economist Group. Had Obama any practical intuition, he’d have always known that his political agenda was pure crock to achieve pure corruption of power for self interest. Obama just won’t admit his faults.

He is chagrined to face reality abroad, having deluded himself into believing that he could play the Muslim version of the Prodigal Son, still ambivalent about his sense of personal identity trumping the Christian card. His inheritance? Play another Marxist loser like both of his parents. /The higher the rise, the lower the fall.

maverick muse on July 15, 2010 at 10:38 AM

When in trouble, name a IRAN CZAR. ;)

poxoma on July 15, 2010 at 10:38 AM

This is pure politics; Obama doesn’t know anything else. This is so he can tell the morons who elected him that he’s on the job, or as a distraction from another problem.

GTR640 on July 15, 2010 at 10:39 AM

You don’t need a college seminar to know who’s ass to kick.

Greek Fire on July 15, 2010 at 10:37 AM

But you do need a beer summit.

ladyingray on July 15, 2010 at 10:41 AM

Get your bootheel off of BP and apply it to the mullahs. You don’t need a college seminar to know who’s ass to kick.

Greek Fire

He has DHS to tell him, as if he doesn’t already know which US mosques and legal resident followers practice the terrorism that they preach.

maverick muse on July 15, 2010 at 10:41 AM

When in trouble, name a IRAN CZAR. ;)

poxoma

Didn’t bode so well for Jimmy Carter, though.

maverick muse on July 15, 2010 at 10:42 AM

The saddest part of this whole thing is that while obama admired at his negotiating skills, the patriots in Iran were left twisting in the wind when there was a real opportunity to turn that nation around the right way – from within. But all the Left’s “cowboy” rhetoric against Bush, upon which obama based his entire foreign policy, imprisoned him – and the world – in a very costly passivity.

paul1149 on July 15, 2010 at 10:42 AM

Obama: Don’t blame me for Iran. I inherited this problem, from Jimmuh Carter.

Obama doesn’t have the cojones to launch a military attack on Iran. But if he’s backed into a corner, Bibi will do it.

All Obama will have to do is what Bobby Jindal has asked him to do: STAY OUT OF THE WAY!!!

Steve Z on July 15, 2010 at 10:42 AM

Yeah, Lightworker’s ‘support’ for the Green Movement in Iran was spectacularly weak. I think Obama sort of admires the impressive civilian army of Basij and IRGC the Iranian ayatollahs used to suppress the political opposition.

Beagle on July 15, 2010 at 10:43 AM

… so we’re talking about “Wagging the Dog” ?

J_Crater on July 15, 2010 at 10:44 AM

Hmmm… a military strike thought to be one of the worst options for the United States. Sounds like it is right up the alley of Barack Hussein Obama. Mmmmm. Mmmmm. Mmmmm.

CC

CapedConservative on July 15, 2010 at 10:44 AM

He just needs to frame the deabte correctly.

Label the Iranians as ractists. They must be since they are the original Aryans. Make an address to the nation stating that he is going to attack the Aryan Nation. The lefties will be on board.

WashJeff on July 15, 2010 at 10:45 AM

This idiotic admin had a perfect chance 1 year ago to attempt overthrow the Iranian regime, but they were unprepared and unwilling. First rule of Boy Scouts – be prepared. Their not even fit to be Boy Scouts.

mdenis39

Your right. They’ve done everything they can to destroy the BSA. But that’s because these bozos ARE fit to convert all boys and girls clubs into Obama’s own personal army of brainwashed Marxists, already in control of public and IVY LEAGUE PRIVATE education.

maverick muse on July 15, 2010 at 10:45 AM

The mullahs have already begun a crash-course program of building golf courses around all their nuclear sites, there is no way PBHO would ever allow bombs to fall on a driving tee or perfectly manicured green.

Bishop on July 15, 2010 at 10:47 AM

Michelle Obama’s ‘get kids fit’ program will indoctrinate them as Socialists.

maverick muse on July 15, 2010 at 10:47 AM

There’s a election coming up in a few months. Got to fool the suckers again that Democrats are tough guys. Works every time with a large segment of voters. After the election, they go back to being peaceniks. Repeat in 2012.

Hummer53 on July 15, 2010 at 10:47 AM

here’s to the smatest mf’er in the universe! Salam alaikum!

elifino on July 15, 2010 at 10:49 AM

“This is the waiting period we have been waiting for.”

fogw on July 15, 2010 at 10:51 AM

Bomb Iran ? Just in time for our elections? Hmmmm

CWforFreedom on July 15, 2010 at 10:53 AM

Pfff…..2010 tuff-guy election rhetoric…
Captain Kick-Ass and all.
And don’t forget Sheriff Joe Biden as back up.

albill on July 15, 2010 at 10:55 AM

The real thing is not to go after the nuclear facilities, but to go after the mullahs & the Iranian government. Most Iranians are fed up with their government (kind of like Americans) and want a replacement. Do air-strikes against Dinnerjacket & the mullahs and the Revolutionary Guard leaders. Take them all out and replace them with a more moderate government.

rbj on July 15, 2010 at 10:55 AM

The Iranians better really be scared if a blue dress shows up somewhere.

Jaynie59 on July 15, 2010 at 10:56 AM

A military strike is still a desperation move

But you’d have to admit, it WOULD finally get the attention of the mullahs. It would not have to be a 100% ‘successful’ strike. Nor would it have to be a nuclear strike. Just the fact that a strike was made would be a game-changer.

The fact that Iran has been supplying IED’s in Iraq would be reason enough to start a shooting war.

But then we’d have to have a nation and a leader willing to go down that road. AND WE DON’T. So we’ll do NOTHING and wring our hands as was done in 1938-39

GarandFan on July 15, 2010 at 10:56 AM

He just needs to frame the deabte correctly.

Label the Iranians as ractists. They must be since they are the original Aryans. Make an address to the nation stating that he is going to attack the Aryan Nation. The lefties will be on board.

WashJeff on July 15, 2010 at 10:45 AM

Persia became Iran in 1935 due to the popularity of a certain kind of progressive nationalism which was all the rage in Germany at the time. The idea conveyed by the Persian ambassador to Germany back to the Shah.

But good luck finding out that little factoid on the Internet. Somehow Iran’s 1935 (to present) fanboy man-crush on Hitler isn’t mentioned much these days.

But if you look at HAMAS and Hizballah, both Iranian proxies, it’s obvious not much has changed. They still do the salute, read Menn Kampf (My Jihad in Arabic), and name their kids after famous Nazis.

Beagle on July 15, 2010 at 10:57 AM

Obama has no clue and bounces around like an atom in free space. He will say and do anything to protect his fragile ego and his warped, inflated opinion of himself. Furthermore, none of his incompetent and irrational behavior have the slightest positive impact on this once great Republic.

rplat on July 15, 2010 at 10:59 AM

This idiotic admin had a perfect chance 1 year ago to attempt overthrow the Iranian regime, but they were unprepared and unwilling.

mdenis39 on July 15, 2010 at 10:36 AM

Absolutely – he helped the mullahs keep their boots on the necks of the Iranian people just so he could continue to extend his ridiculous open hand to them.

Thanks to Obama’s pathetically feckless naivete, we’re back to square one and now the Mullahs’ previous level of nuclear threat capability has been squared.

Just brilliant, Barry.

leilani on July 15, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Bishop on July 15, 2010 at 10:25 AM

Well, that one was certainly baited.

Count to 10 on July 15, 2010 at 11:08 AM

The 2007 NIE was one of most blatantly dishonest and damaging reports ever produced, even by their own low-bar standards.

This probably is the “Green Light” the Israelis need to do the dirty work for us.

Shameful.

Bruno Strozek on July 15, 2010 at 11:12 AM

The only possible reason he would change policy about Iran is to set the table for a military attack in order to get more support in November or for his coronation in 2012.

notagool on July 15, 2010 at 10:24 AM

Get the women and children out of the Iranian pill factories!!! Here comes the worlds greatest WAG THE DOG.

Rovin on July 15, 2010 at 10:28 AM

Just what I was thinking. A 2010 or 2012 October surprise.

BowHuntingTexas on July 15, 2010 at 11:14 AM

Isn’t the general belief that Iran wants nukes to destroy Israel (and bloody some part of the US) either directly or through terrorist surrogates? If so, I don’t believe Obama truly wants to stop them as long as he can be assured the Iranians won’t nuke him personally. Like his Muslim masters, Obama hates Isreal, quite possibly enough to want to see them destroyed. He just doesn’t want his fingerprints on it. A US-led strike on Iran’s nuclear production would prove me wrong and I’d be happy to be proven so.

Extrafishy on July 15, 2010 at 11:15 AM

The bombs should have fallen five or six years ago. I gave up believing some meaningful action would be taken long ago.

burt on July 15, 2010 at 11:15 AM

Once Iran nukes one of our cities or one of Israel’s, expect Øbama to enter into much more forceful talks. Actually attacking a nation bent on your nation’s destruction is off the table for the smartest guy in the room.

Mojave Mark on July 15, 2010 at 11:17 AM

Sorry, Isreal = Israel

Extrafishy on July 15, 2010 at 11:17 AM

I am sure the Iranians are making wee-wee in their undies at the very thought of what Kaptain KickAss could do to them.

Right!

pilamaye on July 15, 2010 at 11:22 AM

Just what I was thinking. A 2010 or 2012 October surprise.

BowHuntingTexas on July 15, 2010 at 11:14 AM

Oh, sure. But, Bibi is holding 3 aces on this deal. Israel knows Scooter’s motives and can make him look really bad if they take the initiative. They know his approval numbers are way down with American Jews. OTOH, the wild eyed lefties will bleed from the ears if Scooter does make a military move. Scooter is in a box.

a capella on July 15, 2010 at 11:23 AM

Once the November election returns the GOP to leadership of the House the entire 2007 NIE process needs to be investigated. As New York or Washington may well soon lie in smoldering ruins we will all want to know how and why the process resulted in such an enormous wrong.

MTF on July 15, 2010 at 11:26 AM

Truman’s dilemma about Japan was the same. Do we have the testicles to arrive at the solution.

chemman on July 15, 2010 at 11:26 AM

The Obama administration often’thinks’ itself out of action.

jeanie on July 15, 2010 at 11:28 AM

The ultimate irony will be when terrorists nuke an American city using materials carried across the Mexican border Scooter refuses to protect. Just throwing Big Sis under the bus won’t suffice on that one.

a capella on July 15, 2010 at 11:28 AM

Maybe Obama consulted with his muslim buddies, outside of Iran, that are getting very concerned with a nuclear Iran at their borders.

docdave on July 15, 2010 at 11:29 AM

Obama asserted at a presidential debate that he wanted to meet one-on-one with the Iranian leader (although he later denied that he meant Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) without preconditions in order to reach a peaceful settlement of the issue.

Did he really deny that? What a stinking liar.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSFSUbMWenU
It showed AckMyDumbJihad’s bearded mug when Obama was asked if he would meet in his first year with him. Obama said, “I would!”

itsnotaboutme on July 15, 2010 at 11:30 AM

a capella on July 15, 2010 at 11:28 AM

Tin foil hat on: Has the ‘won’ colluded with the terrorists for an October surprise?

chemman on July 15, 2010 at 11:31 AM

Watch Obama now surrender us to Iran. After all….we deserve it. We’re spoiled, selfish, evil, vile, and in desperate need of being knocked down a peg, or 10.

capejasmine on July 15, 2010 at 11:33 AM

The criminals that put together the politicized 2007 NIE are still on the job. We need a Congressional investigation next January to root out those that put it together. They should not be employed ever again in the federal government.

slickwillie2001 on July 15, 2010 at 11:34 AM

Thank God we endless amounts of money and political will.

abobo on July 15, 2010 at 11:35 AM

Tin foil hat on: Has the ‘won’ colluded with the terrorists for an October surprise?

chemman on July 15, 2010 at 11:31 AM

Hell, I don’t know. I don’t want to think like that. But, I keep remembering all those funky, hard to trace campaign donations. I just don’t want to believe he would do something like that.*head firmly thrust into hole in sand*

a capella on July 15, 2010 at 11:38 AM

There was never any doubt in my mind that the Mullahs were working on nuclear weapons and would not give that up regardless. That was back in 2005 when Tehran was given a sweet deal by the Europeans and reneged on it as they’ve done for all subsequent agreements. As for Obama, what do those with narcissistic personality disorder do when they become unpopular? Punish those who refuse to recognize their brilliance. That usually means, for those who have the power, war.

NNtrancer on July 15, 2010 at 11:39 AM

All of this was blindingly apparent in 2007, but Obama somehow figured that starting over from scratch would work, since he was the change that the world wanted and needed.

No…uhbuhma wanted to get elected …end of thought process…

winston on July 15, 2010 at 11:42 AM

More bluster with smoke and mirror toughness -or is that racist?

Don L on July 15, 2010 at 11:45 AM

“What has changed?”
Al-quaeda showed their racism, that’s what.

mrt721 on July 15, 2010 at 11:46 AM

Iran’s entire agenda is to nuke Israel.No if ands or buts.They have no other purpose.They know they will be condemned by the world but they also know they will be heroes to the Muslim world forever.They have nothing to lose with Oblamer in office.

docflash on July 15, 2010 at 11:50 AM

As I’ve said…this could be a very hot summer

Ragspierre on July 15, 2010 at 11:57 AM

Take them all out and replace them with a more moderate government.

rbj on July 15, 2010 at 10:55 AM

Sounds reasonable, at least as a first strike should combat erupt. But given warfare, failing to remove their nuclear weapon capacity would be foolish to say the least.

I don’t think that the educated moderate Iranians, devout and non-practicing Muslim accompanied by non-Muslim Persians, have given up their hope and desire to destroy the theocracy in power and THEMSELVES establish governance NOT beholden to Sharia Law.

The Persians are perhaps much more highly educated than Americans, traditionally so. They would accept American aid, but certainly not American directed nation building.

At this point, the Persians need to organize their new government outside of Iran just like Khomeini did in Paris, outcast by the Shah who in revolutionary turn was outcast.

Were war to erupt, even given “victory”, America would fair as badly in Iran as is happening in Iraq, particularly since the mullahs of those countries are united against the US, and have removed their native indigenous populations of Jews and Christians who no longer exist, as in Dafur.

Unless the Iranians create their own government independent of international or Sharia pressure, WE can’t nation build for them, though we CAN install a democracy by either force or negotiations. However, as soon as we relinquish control, as in Iraq, the government resorts to traditional Sharia torture and atrocities against human rights in prisons where any opposition is sent and condemned to death.

Radical Islam must be destroyed. We can do that. But can we deal with the fallout? Particularly, can we weather the effort to take down the Iranian theocracy after Obama has enabled them with nuclear weapons and access to American destruction both on the battle field (rules of engagement) and also most particularly enabling Islamic terrorism within America itself because of Obama’s dhimmiwit Policy = Obama’s dysfunctional Doctrine.

maverick muse on July 15, 2010 at 12:11 PM

What if he orders it and our military pulls it off?

Limited shock and awe, lots of special forces taking out key revolutionary guard leaders and government political movers and shakers. The Greens come out and take over and declare us a new/old ally?

Dems sweep in November?

WitchDoctor on July 15, 2010 at 12:15 PM

maverick muse on July 15, 2010 at 12:11 PM

I don’t disagree with your hypothesis, but unfortuantely, we don’t have the time. We’ve squandered our time buffer and Scooter dropped the ball on the Iranian uprising after the elections. Something has to be done pretty fast, even if the chances of success are less than they would have been. Once they’re nuked up, all the negotiation parameters change. The whole ME will be doing the same thing while Pakistan and India play high stakes poker with each other.

a capella on July 15, 2010 at 12:21 PM

If this is at all serious, Obama better get off his skinny @ss and secure the southern border instead of playing politics with it.

ProfessorMiao on July 15, 2010 at 12:28 PM

I’m wondering if the meeting between Obama and Netanyahu has anything to do with this. A lone Israeli attempt that cannot succeed would be worse for America than an American (or joint) effort that does.

ProfessorMiao on July 15, 2010 at 12:30 PM

If only The President – Leader of the Free World, had supported the people inside Iran who were protesting the power grab during the last election…..if only The President would speak out on the illegitimacy of the fraudulent election, that resulted in Imadinnerjacket retaining power…if only the President would speak about the treatment of the Iranian people…if only.

The remedy to the stone age theocracy in Iran becoming nuclear armed is the citizens of Iran rising up inside Iran, and throwing them off their backs.

Dr Evil on July 15, 2010 at 12:33 PM

Well… dumbass obama had a chance to overthrow the regime by supporting the green movement, but he willfully chose to turn his back on democracy and ignore the movement, while thousands died, were jailed, and disappeared.

ThomasB. on July 15, 2010 at 12:34 PM

Why are strikes on the leadership of Iran itself totally ignored? That option is totally off the table for some reason.

We dont need to strike the nuclear facilities or military / industrial infrastructure. We dont need massive formations of M1 and M2 tanks.

Let me go off on a tangent before I get to my main point: I would love to see our combined air and land forces mobilized to decimate the Iranian Army / Air force, and IRG, which we are fully capable of. What are we so scared of? Another insurgency? Iran is the root of insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have them surrounded. They are the problem. They say they want a war with us, lets give them one. Total war. Blitzkreig through the entire country levelling any kind of military / commercial / industrial elements. Send them back to 1910. There is something to be said for total destruction of your nation. Ask Germany and Japan. Now the worlds leading economies and our strongest allies. You can even ask Iraqis how much respect they gained for the US after the surge strategy and the gloves came off. You and your family huddle in your bathroom and eat rats for months because Apache gunships are lighting up anything that moves.

Combined allied operations against Iran would look like Desert Storm circa 1991. Highways of death, entire armies destroyed or surrendered. The good ol days when a country acted up and got destroyed.

But now my point is this, since apparently nobody wants to fight another war, send an ultimatum to the Iranian leadership similar to the ultimatums that were sent to the Japanese before the atom bomb. Basically surrender or die.

Of course they will reject it but they will be in hiding for several months. When they think the coast is clear, send all 19 B-2 Stealth Bombers with bunker busters, along with all available stealth UAV assets (yes, we have stealth UAVs) on surgical strike missions on all leadership persons and locations in Iran. Shock and Awe but not against infrastructure. Only leadership. No warning, no troop build up, just decapitating strikes.

Trust that new leadership or resistance would not sprout up to take their place and be even more defiant. They still have electricity, they still have their country, only the bad actors got dispached, so why be upset? They stole the election from you, they were bad, you be good and youget to run your country. I would expect an entirely new Iran that opens its facilities to inspection and compliance with all the normal nuclear institutions of the world.

All of this is well within our means.

dip it in cider on July 15, 2010 at 12:39 PM

VRWC. Dick Cheney has taken over Barack Obama.

antisocial on July 15, 2010 at 12:41 PM

Oh bull$hit! Obama is looking at 2010 and giving the demrats an issue to get behind. The day after the election he’ll be back to taking it up the @ss from the Mullahs!

csdeven on July 15, 2010 at 12:45 PM

That’s just what we need….another stupid war in the mid-east…
Apparently we don’t learn from our mistakes.

RightXBrigade on July 15, 2010 at 1:00 PM

Talk loudly but carry a soft stick.

Dhuka on July 15, 2010 at 1:00 PM

Take them all out and replace them with a more moderate government.

rbj on July 15, 2010 at 10:55 AM

This is the mindset that ruined the Republican Party.

RightXBrigade on July 15, 2010 at 1:02 PM

Obama’s open-hand policy now becoming clenched fist?

More like a limp wrist, but what else is new?

greggriffith on July 15, 2010 at 1:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2