Staying Quiet on Iran Paid Off (Not)!
Share this Article
Twitter
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Stumble
Reddit
Author:
Harrison
Tags:
Ahmadinejad appeasement axis of evil Bush circle of friendship democracy Democrats Diplomacy gasoline rationing hypocrites iran riots iranian election Iraq Liberals Media Bias Middle East Mousavi mullahs north korea ObamaMany people have bought the lie that Obama was “wise” and “smart” and “un-Bush like” by saying little about the events in Iran during last weekend. The argument goes something like this:
If the President of the United States tip toes around the situation and doesn’t say much then the despotic leaders of Iran, who ordered the shooting of innocent civilians, will somehow not critisize the U.S. and we will all enjoy hotdogs on July 4th.
So how did that whole silence thing work out?
From a story on Politico:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad compared Obama on Thursday to former President George W. Bush.
Reacting to Obama’s comment Tuesday that he is “appalled and outraged” by crackdowns in Iran, Ahmadinejad said, “Mr. Obama made a mistake to say those things … our question is why he fell into this trap and said things that previously Bush used to say.”
From Fox News:
“Definitely by hasty remarks you will not be placed in the circle of friendship with the Iranian nation. Therefore I advise you to correct your interfering stances,” Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying.
From The International News:
“After the interfering remarks by American officials regarding the presidential election in our country, the Swiss ambassador in Tehran who represents US interests was summoned to the ministry of foreign affairs,” it said.
“Our protest was handed to the ambassador.”
From Agence France Presse:
“The extent of Western and American involvement in Iran’s internal affairs is now clear,” the Shiite militant group’s deputy leader, Sheikh Naim Qassem, told AFP in an interview.
From Reuters:
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called on Barack Obama on Thursday not to interfere in Iran‘s internal affairs after the U.S. president said he was “appalled and outraged” by post-election violence in the Islamic state.
The quotes could go on and on. What have we learned from this little exercise? Basically that saying nothing that might hurt someone’s feelings in Iran is a no-win strategy because America will be blamed anyway and that, in not supporting the protesters we only help the hardline mullahs in Iran.
Goodness knows not being allowed inyo Iran’s “circle of friendship” is bad enough! I guess after Obama un-invited the Iranians to our July 4th barbeque we won’t be in any “circle of friendship.” Iran will instead enjoy UN food rations with the North Koreans who threaten to launch a missile at Hawaii.
Did you like this article? If so, get new articles every day for free via RSS or Email
Related posts:
17:56
Obama has played this in the most apropos way. To allow the U.S. to be baited into fallout by being aggressive, verbally or otherwise, would be folly. We voted for change and that is what he has given us—new ways to resolve problems.
18:31
There is no way to know what would have happened had he acted differently however, that being said, the excuse that saying more at an earlier time would have produced harsh criticism from Iran is false because it happened anyway and staying silent does not help the protesters. Obama also said he would use the moral authority of the U.S. to advocate change… I’d say the murder of demonstrators and the jailing of dissidents runs counter to the values of the American in which I live.
06:22
Lika anyone cares what that little twerp Ahmadinejad thinks. I will give you this much. I believe the correct initial response of playing it cool was correct. That doesn’t mean that at some point we can’t ratchet up the rhetoric a bit. Certainly we ought to slap that little nut Ahmadinejad down. Obama does need to find some point when he lets some genuine anger show. You need teeth and you need to use them every once in a while.
09:48
Thus far the only “anger” I’ve seen Obama show is the few times reporters have tried to get him to answer questions not covered by the teleprompter.
00:21
To claim “Saying nothing did not work” is to be very disingenuous verging on lies. It was Obama SAYING something that boosted Ahmadinejad and shut up the opposition. What other reaction did you expect from the people of Iran after Obama interfered with the nicely growing unrest by opining about the crackdown on the protesters? US, the common enemy, shifted the balance of power in Iran by giving Ahmadinejad a boost.
Obama should have kept his mouth shut and denied Ahmadinejad the opportunity to drag the US into the debate. If he had just kept his pie-hole shut, the opposition would have not had to take the backseat against Iran’s common enemy and who knows what would have happened.
08:06
You operate under the assumption that the Iranian regime had their peoples’ best interests at heart but, because of outside “interference” they suddenly decided to jail dissidents, shoot protesters, and clamp down on the media.
Were Iran not an oppressive regime to begin with there would have been no need for condemnation.