How much damage did Barack Obama do to the incipient Iranian revolution—and by extension, to peace in the Middle East and to the U.S. national interest—when he failed to support the Iranian protesters, and instead poured cold water on Moussavi as an alternative to Ahmadinejad? ....See also, Atlas Shrugs, "For the first time in US history, we have a president who hates his own country. A president who is on the side of America's enemies, not on the side of America."
In a situation like this, Barack Obama was not powerless to affect the outcome, as his defenders suggest. As spokesman for the most powerful nation on earth, he was in a position to make a real difference to the all-important psychology on both sides—and that is exactly what he did. But instead of building up the confidence of the protesters (and simultaneously undermining that of the security apparatus) with encouragement and a ringing endorsement of what they were doing, what he actually did was to give comfort to the forces of repression and undermine the confidence of the Iranian people.
**********
UPDATE: Cold Fury links Thanks! Plus, I forget to link a credit to William Warren.
IT'S SICKENING.
ReplyDeleteQuit yer cryin cowpokes....
ReplyDeleteyou'll get to screw something up in the name of a "good ole lynchin" again soon........have now doubt.
Until then
By the way, remember what happened to the Kurds back in 93 when Herbert Walker stepped in tryed to make a difference.....
and got a sh8tload of em killed....?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAnd Geller.....Thanks for showing me THat Link!
ReplyDeletewhat a piece o work.
Dr....you decry the inflammatory, sensational, decrepit remarks and or methodology of the "Left".....
but you link to this "gem"
and expect any dignified response to your musings.....heh heh
I miss Webb's comments, an elevated mud slinging that aspired to decent if not creative conversation......versus this gutter descent of links....which result only in back slappin monologues from the un-shorn fringe. .....citizen soldier, citizen journalist ?
Citizen soldier....I'll have to ask her where her Permanent Party she was.....whaddya you think? Rucker, Campbell, Maybe Liberty or Victory? ...perhaps Starbucks....Nordstroms?
anywhoms...
Cheers
Cracker ... the problem in 1993 was that we listened to the Leftists and realists and left the job in Iraq incomplete, back in 1991 ... instead of finishing it decisively by removing Saddam back then ... or continuing moral and material support to the Kurds and Marsh Arabs until they did the same thing, as GHWB encouraged them to.
ReplyDeleteNo wonder we were met with less than "hugs and flowers" in 2003.
Moussavi is our friend?
ReplyDeleteQuit your whining Cracker. The truth hits to close to home. I suspect that once you get off your knees even you will see the disaster Obama is. Nice attempt at the Race Card gambit though. When all else fails throw pejoratives.
ReplyDeleteRace Card? (eyes roll)
ReplyDeleteRich
Yeh, they say the celebrations in Baghdad as our troops exited recently was more of what Cheney had in mind when we arrived on the scene in 03.
I guess you could say He (Dick) wasnt 100% un-informed, cause backwards counts for Neo-cons, right?. Just like showing up.
cracker ... the only celebrations they would be having without our involvement, would be laced with coercion to celebrate Saddam's birthday ... and the commissioning of some new plastic shredders.
ReplyDeleteDon't forget that following the realist playbook in 1991, played a part in the cool reception in 2003.