Obama and Iran: The Man Who Didn't Bluff

[Big Don]

Obama and Iran: The Man Who Didn't Bluff
Doug Ross EXCERPT:
Little more than a week ago, President Obama again addressed growing concerns that Iran's Mullahs were preparing nuclear weapons for regional attacks. He insisted that more time be given for diplomacy, noting that, "as president of the United States, I don't bluff."

Yet, on May 18, 2009, President Obama was asked about Iran and any deadlines for his “policy of engagement.” He responded: “You know, I don’t want to set an artificial deadline ... We should have a fairly good sense by the end of the year as to whether they are moving in the right direction.”

On September 15, 2009, a deadline issued by President Obama for Iran to come to the nuclear negotiating table was ignored by Iran's Mullahs.

On October 11, 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, "The international community will not wait indefinitely for evidence that Iran is willing to live up to its international commitments."

On October 23, 2009, an Obama-backed UN deadline for Iran to begin drawing down its nuclear stockpile was ignored by Iran's Mullahs.

On November 29, 2009, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said, "Time is running out for Iran to address the international community’s growing concerns about its nuclear program."

On December 31, 2009, President Obama's deadline for Iran to respond to his diplomatic outreach was ignored by Iran's Mullahs.

On January 31, 2010, President Obama's new deadline of the end of the month was ignored by Iran's Mullahs.
END EXCERPT
Gee, this reminds me of all the UN resolutions before the invasion of Iraq...

 

[WC_lun]

A couple of things here. What would you do that he is not doing? Keep in mind the repurcussions of any use of force here. Second, remember that many of the countries against the invasion of Iraq were right.

 

[Makalakumu]

A couple of things here. What would you do that he is not doing? Keep in mind the repurcussions of any use of force here. Second, remember that many of the countries against the invasion of Iraq were right.

Its all just a series of steps that will lead us to another immoral war we can't afford.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk

 

[Bill Mattocks]

A couple of things here. What would you do that he is not doing? Keep in mind the repurcussions of any use of force here. Second, remember that many of the countries against the invasion of Iraq were right.

Bomb Iran's nuclear facilities and destroy them. Period. Nothing else.

 

[Big Don]

Its all just a series of steps that will lead us to another immoral war we can't afford.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk

Yeah, because protecting our allies and interests is clearly immoral.

I'm all for diplomacy, but, when one party (Iran for the morons out there) has repeatedly stated it's wish to wipe Israel, (our ally) off the map, has routinely supported international terrorism for decades, and ignores numerous pleas from many nations practically begging them not to develop nuclear weapons...
That ought to be a subtle hint that diplomacy isn't going to work.
BTW, if your next door neighbor kept talking about how he wanted to wipe out your whole family, how comfortable would you be with his new rocketry hobby?

 

[Makalakumu]

Israel is perfectly able of defending itself against a nuclear armed Iran. If we went to war, it would be hugely expensive and uneeded...and our children will foot the bill for it and all of the wrecked lives that come home.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk

 

[Big Don]

Israel is perfectly able of defending itself against a nuclear armed Iran. If we went to war, it would be hugely expensive and uneeded...and our children will foot the bill for it and all of the wrecked lives that come home.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk

So, you've emailed the President urging him to stop counseling restraint to Israel?
I have, every year since I got email.

 

[CanuckMA]

Israel is perfectly able of defending itself against a nuclear armed Iran. If we went to war, it would be hugely expensive and uneeded...and our children will foot the bill for it and all of the wrecked lives that come home.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk

Must be easy to put my family and friends in danger of being destoyed, all the way from Hawaii. While Israel is capable of defending herself, the cost of engulfing the region in an all out shooting war would be catastrophic for Israel. I, for one, don't want to see half of the Jews in the world in that position ever again.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Israel is perfectly able of defending itself against a nuclear armed Iran. If we went to war, it would be hugely expensive and uneeded...and our children will foot the bill for it and all of the wrecked lives that come home.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk

Not go to war. Bomb their nuclear sites. And nothing else.

 

[WC_lun]

The use of force shuts down any efforts of diplomacy. Perhaps force may need to be used here, but it should be a last resort. We are not to that point yet. Also, any use of force in the area would have some very negative repurcussions. Iran is almost completely alone. However, if we use force, other countries will come to her aid. Can you imagine more coutries using the same tactics as Iran? Like Iran by herself isn't enough of a headache. If you think gas prices are high now, imagine what they would be if we start bombing Iran.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

We are not to that point yet.

When will we be? When Iran finishes moving all their nuclear technology to hidden, buried, and well-dispersed sites? When they product 20% enriched uranium? When they actually do a test detonation? When?

While there is clearly a continuum of choice here, and some would make the decision to move militarily far earlier than others, it is often perceived by many that the 'give sanctions a chance to work' boys are hand-wringers who would NEVER agree that it was time to act. For many, we believe that 'that point' will never be reached for some who just keep moving the redline back to avoid having to do anything.

 

[john2054]

Didn't you learn that you can't afford to fight wars from Afghanistan, Iraq and a generation earlier Vietnam? Geez will you warmongers ever learn?

 

[ballen0351]

i dont think it should be up to us. It should be Israel that decides when and how thay are the ones iran will use the bombs on. When they attack we should support them give them the tooks needed and help if they call for it. Its easy for obama to say wait wait when he knows there is no way iran would send a missle to washington much different threat level sitting in israel.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Didn't you learn that you can't afford to fight wars from Afghanistan, Iraq and a generation earlier Vietnam? Geez will you warmongers ever learn?

Not fight war. Drop bombs on nuclear facilities. Nothing else. I've said that like three times now. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?

 

[elder999]

Iran's nuclear facilities are hardened, and deep under mountains-the best Israel could do is bury the entrances....we have the capability of destroying the ones that we know about, and will for some time to come, but that isn't enough to keep Iran from developing a weapon-those facilities really are likely just the ones that we know about, and real weapons development is knowledge based- we can only try to limit their production of SNM, not their weapons development, which is something we've known about since the early to mid nineties, based on the direction that some of their academic papers took. Since then, they've had nuclear scientists assassinated, and had their facilities control systems penetrated with a virus by someone

"Drop bombs now" is a possible temporary solution, not a permanent one-it will, ultimately, only delay them from attaining their goal. The best bet really is to make it something the regime doesn't want (and it's not clear that nuclear ambition is shared by the religious authorities) and so doesn't try to attain. As it is,they seem to be so intent upon this, my thought is that if we bomb them, they'll just resume their program again-deeper underground and even more in secret-they have most of the means to do so. So, instead of being confronted by a nuclear-armed Iran next year, we'lll be confronted by them in 2020 or so, but nuclear-armed they will be, unless we can change the regime's mind, or Iran's regime is changed.

By all means, though,go ahead: bomb them now, and bomb them often.

 

[WC_lun]

Bill, dropping bombs on Iran's nuclear research facilities IS an act of war. Doing so would lead Iran to do something stupid, like try to shut down the straight of Hormuz. Cutting off oil flow like that would lead to more shooting to open it back up. Also keep in mind how many terrorist Iran has been funding. Start a shooting war with Iran and she will call in her markers with those organizations, creating even more chaos in the region.

There absoluutely is a point where we, or Israel with our help, uses force to retard thier research and development. However, I don't believe we are to that point yet. I do think that intel has been very good in regards to where Iran is at in thier research, so if we have to shoot, it won't be out of ignorance.

 

[ballen0351]

How do you change their minds? The sanctions dont effect its leaders esp when colleges in the US invite irans leaders to come here and give speaches. He knows we are not serious about stopping him and sadly now i believe israel also knows we dont have their back when it goes down.

Iran's nuclear facilities are hardened, and deep under mountains-the best Israel could do is bury the entrances....we have the capability of destroying the ones that we know about, and will for some time to come, but that isn't enough to keep Iran from developing a weapon-those facilities really are likely just the ones that we know about, and real weapons development is knowledge based- we can only try to limit their production of SNM, not their weapons development, which is something we've known about since the early to mid nineties, based on the direction that some of their academic papers took. Since then, they've had nuclear scientists assassinated, and had their facilities control systems penetrated with a virus by someone

"Drop bombs now" is a possible temporary solution, not a permanent one-it will, ultimately, only delay them from attaining their goal. The best bet really is to make it something the regime doesn't want (and it's not clear that nuclear ambition is shared by the religious authorities) and so doesn't try to attain. As it is,they seem to be so intent upon this, my thought is that if we bomb them, they'll just resume their program again-deeper underground and even more in secret-they have most of the means to do so. So, instead of being confronted by a nuclear-armed Iran next year, we'lll be confronted by them in 2020 or so, but nuclear-armed they will be, unless we can change the regime's mind, or Iran's regime is changed.

By all means, though,go ahead: bomb them now, and bomb them often.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Bill, dropping bombs on Iran's nuclear research facilities IS an act of war. Doing so would lead Iran to do something stupid, like try to shut down the straight of Hormuz. Cutting off oil flow like that would lead to more shooting to open it back up. Also keep in mind how many terrorist Iran has been funding. Start a shooting war with Iran and she will call in her markers with those organizations, creating even more chaos in the region.

Nuclear weapons in the hands of Iran won't cause chaos? Hmmm. When I consider the alternative, I opt for plan A.

There absoluutely is a point where we, or Israel with our help, uses force to retard thier research and development. However, I don't believe we are to that point yet. I do think that intel has been very good in regards to where Iran is at in thier research, so if we have to shoot, it won't be out of ignorance.

Well, you say there is a point, but in practice, I find that most anti-war people never agree that 'the point' has been reached. They'll just keep retreating forever until someone else finally makes the decision, then criticize that person or group. Oh, there's 'a point' alright; it's just that it's imaginary and we'll never get to it.
l

 

[elder999]

Bill, dropping bombs on Iran's nuclear research facilities IS an act of war. Doing so would lead Iran to do something stupid, like try to shut down the straight of Hormuz. Cutting off oil flow like that would lead to more shooting to open it back up. Also keep in mind how many terrorist Iran has been funding. Start a shooting war with Iran and she will call in her markers with those organizations, creating even more chaos in the region.

Iran, as I've pointed out elsewhere, tried to block the Straits of Hormuz several times during its war with Iraq. They were not successful-it is largely an empty threat.

 

[Big Don]

How do you change their minds? The sanctions dont effect its leaders esp when colleges in the US invite irans leaders to come here and give speaches. He knows we are not serious about stopping him and sadly now i believe israel also knows we dont have their back when it goes down.

Sanctions do NOT work against Iran, we should have learned this as a nation in 79 with Jimmy Carter.