Obama's Iran Election Ineptitude Worsens Nuclear Threat

Reader Comments
Back to article

The Iranian president has declared his mission and objective. Only a deluded or deceitful fellow would not admit that this man with nuclear weapons would be a deadly combination. Let the free world act decisively and quickly to remove this danger. If we stand idly by, we will rue our deadly procrastination. Let the free world act swiftly with fearlessness against this Iranian Islamist threat to our nations and democracies.
In God we trust.

Dixieland 8:39PM August 14, 2009

Fool! Any perceived foreign influence in support of the reformers will sound the death knell for the movement! That is a weapon that Ahmadinejad would LOVE to use against the reformers! If you knew ANYTHING about Iran and this issue you would know that they don't like foreigners meddling in their affairs, and that the biggest strength of the reformist movement is that it is intrinsically and wholly Iranian! Obama is doing his part to help the reformers by shutting his mouth! And you should too! -MM

MirageMind of NY 11:59PM June 25, 2009

Perhaps Barrack Hussein Obama doesn't want to forcefully contest Ahmadinejad's election for fear Ahmadinejad will bring up Obama's still unverified birth certificate and sealed college records, challenging his legitimacy as president. Which would be amusing since Obama has had a retinue of lawyers on retainer just to circumvent legal queries into his birth certificate.
More than likely though, Obama is taking notes and quite approves of Ahmadinejad's treatment of his country men. After all, post election Obama has admitted his muslim parentage and before the election he remarked that muslim call to prayer is beautiful music in his ears.
My bet is Obama wants to hear more of his favorite music closer to home.

rsassy of OH 6:48PM June 22, 2009

Mr. Obama is President of the United States of America and not of Iran. He is holding the stance of wisdom. Wisdom is power. The wisdom is to walk circumspect as wise redeeming the times. This is a trick of the enemy and they will play their hand the way they desire. He is concerned about the Iranian protestors; but, because he is wise he also knows when and how.
It is amazing to me how the author, Jamie Fly, is trying to set up President Obama to go feet first into this situation by his negative criticism. He feels that his criticism will make him look less of a leader. He has been blamed and blamed for everything; but he continues to stand for what is democratic, just and right. President Obama will do no less this time. Holdfast and believe.

Gloria of NC 1:57PM June 22, 2009

I completely Disagree with you Jamie Fly. It's no wonder the past administration's foreign policy strategies were a disaster. President Obama's is absolutely correct! Any push from Obama will only incite more violence towards the protesters, make it easier for the Ayatollah to blame the U.S. which in turn will make it more difficult for President Obama to negotiate the discussion of nuclear weapons. In fact, I fear it'll be more difficult for Pres. Obama simply because
the Ayatollah in his Friday speach, publicly and falsely accused the west of staging the protesters! As you may already know, Iranian leaders past and present strategically use this tactic to further garner public support, and hatred towards the west when it suits them.
President Obama should continue to be prudent, and recognize that the prodding of the republican and neocons, is a selfish a political ploy and not in the best interst of the U.S.

teri of WA 10:07AM June 21, 2009

The United States cannot be expected to solve the world's problems. We would love to see a free Iran, but the reality is that they must work it out themselves. Here in Taiwan the country was under martial law from about 1949 to 1987 with political opponents jailed, some of whom died in prison. This country, also known as the Republic of China, was a close friend of the United States because it held the China seat of the UN security council. Thus for strategic reasons the US government turned a blind eye to the blatant political oppression that was happening here. If our government had demanded political reform, it would have caused a backlash among the ruling class, possibly destabilized the government, and that usually means a bloody mess. It would have also stunted local democratic development because change would have been imposed from an outside power. The first free presidential election happened when the Taiwanese were ready for it in 1996, and now this country is truly a democracy. Getting back to Iran, Obama can do no more than encouraging freedom of expression. If there is more bloodshed, there really is not much more that can be done without greater and even more bloody unintended consequences. Outsiders can't save Iran, they have to do it themselves. I didn't vote for Obama, but he is showing a deeper understanding of the reality of the situation.

Karl Schulz 9:11AM June 21, 2009

If President Obama wants to show the country and the world that he is different from his predecessor, he should support the protestors in Iran. He doesn't have to send in military aide immediately. He just needs to get off the fence, stop worrying about who he is going to please/hurt, and start reemphasizing America's dream to spread the freedom of democracy throughout the world. He doesn't have to stage a coup, but if the opposition leader is arrested or killed he should support any attempt by the Iranians to do a nationwide strike. Obama needs to do whatever is in his power to help these people. He's the president of the United States of America! A country that prides itself in helping oppressed people who are being ruled by dictators like Ahmadinejad. Yet what does he do? "I'm not going to get the US involved in this..." What the crap?!? He isn't going to support protestors who are being brutalized, but he is going to take his wife on a date with my tax money and pull a few jokes in a speech for a group of TV and radio correspondents? (This last part was done last night about 8:45 or 8:50-9:05 eastern time.) Come on Obama, start acting like the president of America and promote democracy in Iran. If you do, it might help the democratic government in Iraq to stabilize. Then you would have "cleaned up a mess Bush (your and every far leftist's nemesis) started" and you'll get another democratic nation to help you in the war on terror.

Dr. Shade of NC 3:07PM June 20, 2009

History shows that appeasement has never been an effective strategy. Remaining silent while brave Iranians are risking their lives is perceived as yet more weakness. Critics immediately respond by saying that we shouldn't "intervene." There is a difference between not intervening in the election, and making a strong, clear statement about human rights and a right to sovereignty--the very principles upon which this country was built. If we don't speak out when we are witnessing this kind of blatant oppression, when do we?

cici of NY 9:25AM June 20, 2009

Obama was elected because many people thought he had the political courage not only to do what is right but also that which is right but also has a cost. The easiest thing to do here is nothing and let Iran "work itself out" most likely ending with people be run over by tanks. If Obama offered his words of support to the protesters and also went to the American Iranian community as well as trying to get in contact with people looking for long tern change there might be a change that Iran have a Government that better reflects its people. To do nothing is put the blood of everyone that Iran kills in the coming years on Obama's hands. Change is hard so far all we have seen is words and they are becoming less and less valuable kinda like the dollar.

Matt of IA 2:54AM June 20, 2009

Barack Obama is the president of the United States of America. He is not president of the middle east or Iran. This is and should be an internal Iranian issue. No matter who wins we still have to deal with a nuclear arming Iran. The metrics of our diplomacy do not change no matter the outcome. What would change if we spoke of the protests and subsequent crackdowns would be the current supreme leaders ability to put this crisis on us. It would empower him. So we have nothing to gain from speaking of this matter (we still have to deal with a nuclear arming Iran) and we have everything to lose if we do.

James of AZ 1:44AM June 20, 2009