What if Obama has a plan for Iran?
From time to time, critics and even friends of the president have complained vocally about the seeming disarray or fecklessness of the administration’s handling of foreign policy. Words like amateurish, immature, and incompetent are bandied about; what’s needed, we’re told, is less ad-hoc fumbling, more of a guiding strategic vision. Most recently, Leslie Gelb, a former government official and past president of the Council on Foreign Relations, has charged that “the Obama team lacks the basic instincts and judgment necessary to conduct U.S. national-security policy,” and has urged the president to replace the entire inner core of his advisers with “strong and strategic people of proven . . . experience.”
One sympathizes with Gelb’s sense of alarm, but his premises are mistaken. Inexperience is a problem in this administration, but there is no lack of strategic vision. Quite the contrary: a strategy has been in place from the start, and however clumsily it may on occasion have been implemented, and whatever resistance it has generated abroad or at home, Obama has doggedly adhered to the policies that have flowed from it.
In what follows, we’ll trace the course of the most important of those policies and their contribution to the president’s announced determination to encourage and augment Iran’s potential as a successful regional power and as a friend and partner to the United States.Read the whole thing (it's quite long).
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 6:57 AM
3 Comments:
President Obama does not have a "plan." What he does have is a philosophy... It comes in three parts
1. Big - Big Government, big banks, big unions, if it's big, really really big he usually likes it.
2. Hate - President Obama is really full of hate. Beginning with hate for America, but extending to it's allies.
3. Oh shut up - If you try to criticize him or his policies, you're called a racist, and then the apparatus comes after you. The DoJ, the IRS, the NSA all have been turned into powerful, political weapons.
Insuring that Iran has the capability of producing and delivering nuclear weapons suits the President just fine. It fits into his philosophy quite well. And, if a few million Jews and a few million Americans get killed in the process, he's not concerned at all.
the article refuses to follow its own logic; shying away from the obvious; having gone on for paragraphs and paragraphs about Barack's secret agenda to reach entente with the Iranian leadership, the article weakly indulges in a volte face to opine that the President was surprised Iran's mullahs link rapprochement with continued nuclear development (and by implication, weaponization).
hardly likely. let's take the front 2/3 of the article at its word and draw a far more likely conclusion: Obama is not accidentally but purposefully if inelegantly enabling Iranian hegemony and Iranian nuclear weapons--if not sooner than later.
a man who lies fraudulently and hysterically for half a week that Bibi "spit in our faces" while explaining away Islamist terrorism dispassionately--this is the same man who never ever mentions Iranian sponsorship of terror, subversion of its neighbors, or deployment of barrel bombs against population centers, while step by step, under cover of diplomatic confrontation, systemically dismantling the sanctions regime. there is a pattern and the pattern can't be so blithely waved away to avoid unpleasant meditations on how the American electorate has twice elected what behind all the abstruse argy bargy of electoral lines of lines of force and fluid tectonics of the great American oligarchy is a Manchurian candidate. think sleeper..or if you will, what if we had elected Henry Wallace? or, come to think of it, Alger Hiss?
Two words: Valerie Jarrett
Iraninan born
Post a Comment
<< Home