This from my latest on TIME.com.
Having concluded that President Obama’s outreach has failed to halt Iran’s nuclear program, the final weeks of 2009 find his Administration focused on mustering support for new sanctions against the Islamic Republic. Iran’s rejection of the terms offered thus far by the U.S. and its partners has prompted Obama to largely revert to the Bush Administration’s approach of ultimatums backed by sanctions — with little obvious prospect of producing a substantially different result.
So how did he get here? In a nutshell, he allowed the Washington hawks, in concert with Israel and European hawks such as Sarkozy, to paint him into a corner by setting an artificial deadline on his diplomatic effort, and more importantly, basing them on the same demands as the Bush Administration which Iran had repeatedly rejected. Not only has Iran’s domestic turmoil limited its own regime’s room for maneuver, Iran’s opposition is as vehement as its conservatives in rejecting Washington’s demand that Iran give up uranium enrichment.
So Obama is going down the road of further sanctions, now, but it’s generally agreed that sanctions aren’t going to change Iran’s position. At which point those who set the time-limits on diplomacy will demand that Obama go to war….
The proponents of sanctions don’t care if the sanctions themselves are effective or not. They see sanctions as yet another stumbling block in genuine US-Iran negotiations, and (gasp!) improved US-Iran relations. They also see sanctions as an incremental step towards their real, ultimate goal: a US war on Iran, to serve Israeli interests. No amount of Iranian concessions will suffice because concern about Iran’s “nuclear weapons” is just a convenient pretext, just like “Iraqi WMDs” was just a pretext for war.
You can bet that the Pentagon won’t be among those pressing Obama to start a third war by attacking Iran. In fact, by committing US forces to an Afghan surge, Obama has in effect placed further limits on the scope of US military action that can be undertaken against Iran. For their part, it’s not hard to imagine that the regime in Tehran was pleased with Obama’s escalation in Afghanistan.
Once again, Tony, you’re being rather too easy on Obama, painting him as a dupe of hawkish Republicans and Euros. The truth is, Obama never had an alternative Iran strategy: His cringeworthy ‘outreach’ was never anything of the sort. In essense it was no diferent from Bush’s policy, albeit dressed up with some silly Persian words. What he was basically saying, was, do what we tell you, give up your ambitions in the region, and we’ll let you be our friend. It’s going to take rather more than that to get Iran on side. Obama did not ‘default’ to bush – on Iran, he was always Bush with a subtler turn of phrase.
sanctions…who need them? ahmadinejad does not give a sh… about those sanctions-he is laughting right into obamas face. but innocent people will suffer…must be another solution.
If the US government was a benign force for democracy, most of its members being sincerely interested in creating a country that provided a context in which each of its citizens pursued his or her inalienable rights (like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness), then its leaders could be people who were sincere, not at all consumed with how the public sees them, and not willing to be paid whores for people with huge sums of money.
Unfortunately the US government has become a source for massive payouts to many people, including people who earn their living having more and more weapons all over the world, including many citizens who want the government to be an unlimited piggy bank. And under such a system, no one gets enough money for winning an election without becoming a slave to the people who want the government to be their piggy bank (for funds and assistance in ideological control).
So there was no Clinton doctrine, but Clinton’s expressions of what his masters told him to present. Same with all other presidents, including Barak. They are all whores, who have an amazing capacity to mouth platitudes, and even at times personally believe what they say. But who will never manifest a principled, realistic form of government.
As the famous cartoon character, Pogo, once said, “I have seen the problem and it is us”. Each person needs to get his own act together, and the government will follow.
i like his attitude !
how do you rate him ??
plz rate him here http://tinyurl.com/obamareallysux
It’s going to take rather more than that to get Iran on side. Obama did not ‘default’ to bush – on Iran, he was always Bush with a subtler turn of phrase.;)
free psychic readings
I was just browsing for relevant blog posts for my project research and I happened to stumble upon yours. Many thanks for the excellent info!
You make a great share Tony Karon.
Who Spam comment this web again I will report your website to google to be Deindex.
Tony Karon.
So there was no Clinton doctrine, but Clinton’s expressions of what his masters told him to present. Same with all other presidents, including Barak. They are all whores, who have an amazing capacity to mouth platitudes, and even at times personally believe what they say. But who will never manifest a principled, realistic form of government.
Black Friday Online Deals
Obama solace and encouragement.