Obama: U.S. still bearing 'witness' to Iran

He's not pretentious. So what? Why switch players--if your game plan hasn't changed;just to satisfy convention, just to feed the media, just to take a minuscule minute of media coverage away from the media voices streaming in from Iran. It's only been two days; granted purgatory for those on the streets. If anything Obama ran an unconventional camping and won. If anyone should know about the power of modern technology, the power of social networking, the power of letting the people speak for themselves, the power of choosing your moments wisely to his effect---it's this guy; who came of nothing to something by watching and waiting for the right moment. The US can only offer words. So let them be chosen wisely and timely. I did the unthinkable and watched Fox News tonight-- even they made the interesting correlation between his words in Cairo--the world bared witness--- and Iran. Surely not a direct correlation--but phenomenal time frame from one to the other. If anyone knows his game it's this dude in the WH-- who knows how to time his words for greatest effect--Hello Berlin speech?! In the election season, the biggest crisi facing our country were largely domestic(economic)-- no one cared about Granpa McCain in the milk aisle of some mart (they should have!)--they beard witness to Obama--a mere candidate for office--in Berlin--.(He knows how to set a stage) His rivals(Republicans) might want the usual talking points we always offer--that we can't back up with actions--in cases like Iran where we have no diplomacy established. All that does is take the control away from the movement on the streets, and puts in our hands where we are helpless to do anything but wag our finger. Not to mention that the rivals (Republicans) want us to make rhetoric aligned with our visions of democracy in the middle east. The people on those streets just want to null and election, and get an independent body to redo. (A third lot overlapping--wants some social reforms) It's a delicate situation--all we can do is witness. I'm not ruling out that the well oiled machine that got him into office--is more than witnessing. That they are setting a stage--when setting a stage is the least harmful, and the only thing you can do. Ok. Off soap box. PS not all Republicans. Just the ones desperate for future election traction. (It's the economy stupid!)

Obviously those people in the streets in Iran watched Obama's Cairo address.

Now if they only have the institutional memory--revolutionary institutional memory, that is.

Thirty years ago they booted the Shah.

It's not too much to hope they might boot the mullahs as well.

And it doesn't even have to be ideological or anticlerical.

It is just about "where is my vote?"

If only Americans had had the balls in 2000, think of the disasters that could have been prevented.

Our False Prophet appears to have no idea what a golden opportunity he’s passing up… overthrow this evil regime without firing a single shot… get their Armageddon-inspired nuke program off the world stage… and free 30 million people all at one time.

But the boy wonder is too stupid to see it… or somehow just doesn’t care?

And isn’t this what George W Bush told you was going to happen in the Middle East in the wake of Iraq’s liberation?
Maybe that’s why Barack Obama has so little apparent interest in finishing the job in Iran… no matter how much it benefits the US and free world.

That, and the fact that he’s already piled all his chips on legitimizing this vile regime- a democratic revolution at this point would be embarrassing.

http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/

Are these the same people McCain wanted to drop bombs on? I wonder if the Iranians think McCain had bombs that would drop and kill only those who support Imadinnerjacket? How dare him use these protesters as a pawn for his own political use. He needs to STFU.

The turmoil in Iran may well lead to the fall of the Islamic thugs (how could the Prez. give that mullah creditably by addressing him as "supreme leader", of what, a dude who loves to stone and suppress women?) who rule Iran with a oppressive iron fist and the end to the greatest sponsor of Islamic terrorism. What a watershed moment that would be for the world. It would put a dagger into to the heart of the jihadists of terror, as their money, weapons, and sanctuary would be irreparably diminished. No longer would those purveyors of peace, Hamas and Hezbollah, receive unlimited Iranian support for militant activities throughout the Middle East. Think of what that would accomplish for Obama's Mideast peace hopes. Look to our economic future, as oil prices would stabilize and the price of gasoline would be affordable, no longer influenced to go sky high by the whim of despot mullah threatening to cut off our supply. One can look to the seeds of democracy, that America planted in Iraq, as a very important factor in the hearts and minds of the Iranian reformers as they fight to bring the same to their country. How ironic it would be for you Bush haters to realize that his policies may result in a dramatic shift for world peace and stability. Nah, you and the slobbering MSM will proclaim success due to Obama's decision not to "meddle". The "supreme leader" has already blamed America as the hard-liners and state media chant "death to America". So how does that work? And where are all of the liberals who champion human rights? OK for the Gitmo gents but silent, non-meddlers for reformers pitted against severe repression of human dignity and freedom? Those heroic Iranian people, with "hope and change" in their hearts and minds and beatings, imprisonment, maybe even death facing them for speaking out, wait for our support. America need not apologize for meddling in this one.

And now we have another example of why President Obama is so much smarter than the previous president when it comes to foreign policy. The last joke of a president believed in "Invade first, think afterwards".

Remember the Replican talking point of the early 50's,"Who lost China?"?

OK, so you don't remember.

Anyhow, looks like they are at it again: Who lost Iran?

Golden Opportunity blah blah.

Won't work.

What you are witnessing in Iran could be termed "the Obama Effect".

Americans could defeat Bushism and throw out the Replicans, so Iranians are emboldened to think they might be able to toss the mullahs.

Maybe it'll turn out like the cow tipping contest at Brigham Young U.

Or maybe Tiananmen Square.

Or maybe the Odessa Steps.

Or maybe the Capitol Steps.

I'm sure CIA has memos on all these alternative scenarios, no?

And just a prescient as those they manufactured in the 1970's

Our False Prophet appears to have no idea what a golden opportunity he’s passing up… overthrow this evil regime without firing a single shot… get their Armageddon-inspired nuke program off the world stage… and free 30 million people all at one time.
Posted by: Reaganite Republican | June 21, 2009 6:28 AM

Yes of course Raygunite. A prime example why the republicans, who have lost the confidence of the American people, don't have a clue when it comes to foreign policy. Thinking with organs involved in their teabagging instead of their minds. First they are going to bomb them into submission, then a friendly word will make all the difference. What a joke. What Iranian doesn't believe America would love to see a regime change? Are you guys for real? The protesters themself say Obama needs to handle this the way he has so far. The republicans would love to see these protesters killed just so they can say, see, what a terrible country. It's all politics to them...they could give a rats a@@ about anyone but themselves and their political agenda.

the president is doing the right thing. we can't fix the world, and we certainly can't fix iran. it's painful to watch but this is how countries progress forward from theocratic dictatorship to some sort of real representative government. these people don't want to be saved - they want to save themselves, which is a painful, bloody thing to do. if the u.s. sticks it's nose into another situation that has nothing to do with us we will lose, both face and people.

this is what bush, cheney and his neocon and republican friends didn't get. if we butt in, we fuel the fires of "see what the filthly americans do..." and that doesn't benefit anybody, including the iranians.

Bill R. (above) is spot on!

President Obama is also spot-on. We elected him more for real results than blood-red rhetoric.

Ahmadinejad is the main and immediate issue. His early departure would be just the first step in untying the knot in the Middle East. We must understand that Iranians want his ouster for reasons different than ours. (I am not especially hopeful.) With him gone, nuclear energy in Iran assumes a different profile.

The optimal official American position is on the sidelines. Our new president has started the rebuilding of United States' moral and political leadership after its demise during the Busheney years. But we have not yet restored that credibility. President Obama is a mature student of statesmanship who understands that his grasp should not exceed the reach of American foreign policy.

But as Americans, we do not and should not remain on the sidelines. We need to demonstrate our active vigil and witness, together with the rest of the world, on a people to people basis. The technology of the "social network" permits and encourages that now, more than ever before.

Nobody's talking about bombing Iran- there's plenty Obama could do that he isn't, and you apologists know it.

And if he WAS doing as he should do... you Obots would be praising that up and down too... that's how love is, crazy like that.

Compare this all to Ronald Reagan's brave and unwavering support for Solidarity in Poland in the early 80's: in collaboration with Pope John Paul and Polish anti-communists, Reagan helped those seeking freedom in any way possible- with money, training, equipment such as radios and stepped-up VoA broadcasting to help liberate those behind the Iron Curtain.

Most importantly, Reagan brought them moral support with consistent public statements that gave the revolutionaries hope.

The Gipper did this not only because of his belief in the cause of freedom worldwide; he also recognized the larger geopolitical implications of peeling the Warsaw Pact away from a weakened USSR bit-by-bit (similar to the effect that a free Iraq and free Iran could have on the Middle East today).

Shamefully, it seems Obama's primary concern is to bide a little more time for the the Mullahs and Ahmedinijad to pull themselves up by their bootstraps... while they beat-down any hope of actual democracy.

Barack's already bet all his chips on legitimizing this vile regime- a democratic revolution in Tehran could be downright embarassing at this point.

Once the Mullahs put a lid on things over there, these thugs can all get back to talking business... just like they do it back in Chicago.

It's so nice that Reagan had the opportunity to collaborate with the main spiritual father of the faith in a deeply religouse country, Poland. Meanwhile,you're argueing how it's unfortunate that Obama has legitimized the regime, and took the ruling religious clerics into consideration; who, unlike PJP2, want nothing do with the west. Faith is a deeper contract than social construct. This is a different animal entirely. I can tell you first had that the moral support of PJP2 did more than your walkies talkies. Unfortunately for Obama, when you undermine the clerics you attack the Middle Eastern Faith; the region. Unlike Raygun, attacking the communists was a good thing for the whole area.

The 'action' of facilitating democracy in Iraq speaks louder than the 'words' at Cairo.

The Republicans are ritght. We must invade Iran immediately. We will be greeted as liberators. Our troops will be showered with flowers and candy. Not a shot will be fired! It will be an easy, quick, and cheap war!

The 'action' of facilitating democracy in Iraq speaks louder than the 'words' at Cairo.

Posted by: North Coast Mike | June 22, 2009 9:51 AM

Yes, we should invade every non-democratic country on the planet and democratize them by force! Who's up for "facilitating democracy" in China?

2003,

Do they have any oil in Iran?

Do you suppose the nascent revolution in Iran was what sent Bibi in to a peace offensive??