19 June 2009

Obama: We should refrain from attacking the mullahocracy...

...because I don't wanna fuck up my pursuit of diplomacy with the tyrants...err, mullahs...

One argument against Obama making a stronger statement about the murderous regime in Iran is the US track record on Middle East politics. Somehow, those who are toeing the Ayatollah Khamenei line that the US, the UK, and teh Jews believe that what has happened in the Middle East as a result of the spread of democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan is because President Obama rode in on his magic unicorn and spread pixie dust and gumdrops everywhere (and Keith Olbermann hates historical revisionists...). Unfortunately for the mullah supporters, mostly those on the anti-Bush Left, what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, as a result of Bush foreign policy, is the reason the Iranian mullahs are now feeling threatened as never before.

The demonstrations in Iran started out as a protest against the rigged election, where the "results" pointed to an unpopular president being reelected. Because the mullahs see the handwriting on the wall, as evidenced by the hundreds of thousands of protesters in the streets, they rely on their old bag of tricks, blaming the West for forcing them to crack the heads of, beat, and kill supporters. Even anti-US liberals should see this smokescreen for what it is, but they're still being duped by the Obama-koolaid. What happened in Iraq in 2005, spread across the Middle East and instead of bitching about "imposing" democracy on an "unwilling populace," a populace who was more than willing to risk death to turn their fingers purple, they should have championed the spread of freedom to people less fortunate than those in the West.

David Ignatius believes Obama was right in speaking carefully in the first week of this protest, but he is now, along with Vice President Joe Biden, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and several senior Obama officials, calling on Obama to strike a more forceful tone with the mullahs and put his desire for talks on hold. The more Obama misses the point in this, the harder it will be for him later, because if he continues to press for a cessation of the protests in order to start his talking, he will appear to support the oppressors and the Iranian electorate will then fulfill liberals dreams that the Iranian people hate the United States (so much for being the "healer" of the world, eh?).

This should, once and for all, change the opinion liberals have about "smart power" and "diplomacy." No matter how many times Obama wants to talk to the Iranian mullahocracy to coax them into giving up their nuclear program, the Ayatollah has said the nuclear file is closed. Obama has nothing to lose if he strikes a more forceful tone against the oppression, but he has more to lose if he stays silent and the Iranian regime falls...

Jed Babbin believes different...that Obama should keep his yap shut. Not because he agrees with Obama that the US should not meddle, but because Obama's views are incongruent with the protesters...

Have a great day...

No comments:

Post a Comment