Comments on: A Telling Response

By: Joseph Kellard

Joseph Kellard — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 01:55:53 +0000

Richard wrote: “Even despite Obama’s weak response Iran is still accusing the US of ‘meddling’ in it’s election.”

It’s because of Obama’s weak reponse, in which he said he didn’t want to “meddle” in Iran’s elections, that Iran is accusing the US of exactly that. He left the door ajar and they used his own words to push it wide open.

By: Bill Brown

Bill Brown — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:49:59 +0000

Here’s a great editorial cartoon that captures Obama’s response:

http://furiousdiaper.com/?p=1620

By: Richard

Richard — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:04:36 +0000

Even despite Obama’s weak response Iran is still accusing the US of “meddling” in it’s election.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ML_IRAN_ELECTION?SITE=WYCHE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

By: Myrhaf

Myrhaf — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:27:01 +0000

As Muslims, the Iranian people ideologically helpless — a little like American conservatives, who are disarmed by altruism. But there are a lot of Iranians who yearn for freedom, in however compromised a form. When you are ruled by a regime that stones women to death for adultery, it doesn’t take much love of freedom to oppose such a dictatorship. I heard a report once that Iranians have secret disco parties in their homes, where they dress and act like westerners.

All the Iranian immigrants and their children that I have met here in California are secular.

Betsy, you’re right. Obama will get tough on Israel. Of course, he saves his real toughness for American big businessmen. If you create wealth, Obama snarls and dictates how much money you make; if you’re a dictatorship that shoots people in the street, Obama kisses your ass.

By: Betsy Speicher

Betsy Speicher — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:00:52 +0000

“America must not push around smaller nations.”

… unless it’s Israel.

By: Joseph Kellard

Joseph Kellard — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 03:28:57 +0000

I agree with Madmax. But, to put it more fundamentally, what does the opposition stand for in Iran? I have not read or seen much about Hussein Moussavi, who ran against Ahmadinejad and had the election stolen from him. I have heard and read that he is “conservative,” which I understand means, in the context of Iran, he is at least sympathetic to the ruling mullahs — the real power in Iran. This means he would be just as much a puppet to the regime as any “president,” including Ahmadinejad.

While I enjoy seeing the protestors cause unrest in Iran, in this case over the obvious voter fraud, I long ago lost any sympathy for the Iranian people. They’ve proved themselves to be very ineffective in creating any real, substantive ideological or political change, and I don’t think they have much of an inkling as to what is freedom is or what is required to get it.

That the president of France is siding with the protestors, while Obama is, at best, fence sitting, is deeply troubling. This is telling because, even if the opposition proves to be not much better than what exists now, that the president of the United States won’t side with them, even on the issue of obvious voter fraud, is just another example of his appeasement of the regime.

By: madmax

madmax — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 03:02:31 +0000

Agreed as to Obama. But what is to be made of this Iranian people’s revolt? Is it about freedom? What do Iranians know about freedom? If they could, would they replace one set of dictators with another? Are they willing to see Islam demoted in cultural influence and to see a secular-only government? Somehow I have strong doubts as to that. Its terrible to see people slaughtered as is happening in Iran. But I’m not ready to say that the Iranian people are deserving of much sympathy.

By: Myrhaf

Myrhaf — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 01:17:06 +0000

Noted. Thanks, Chuck.

By: Chuck

Chuck — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 01:08:58 +0000

“In cloudcuckooland, only America — and maybe South Africa and Israel — are capable of evil. ”

You left out Taiwan, the renegade Chinese province.