Powered by WebAds

Sunday, July 05, 2009

Ahmadinejad finds a sucker

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has apparently realized that he has found a sucker in American President Barack Hussein Obama. Realizing that there is nothing Ahamdinejad can do that will move Obama off his desire to 'engage' the Iranian President, Ahamdinejad is now calling for 'negotiations.' He obviously hopes that the 'negotiations' will hold the West at bay long enough for him to complete the development of nuclear weapons (Hat Tip: Memeorandum). But is Obama really a sucker?
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said he wants to engage President Obama in "negotiations" before international media, a semi-official Iranian news outlet reported on Saturday.

Speaking at a meeting of medical school deans, Ahmadinejad said Iran "will soon pursue a new round of diplomatic activity" amid a new position of strength for the Iranian government, the Iranian Student News Agency quotes him as saying.

"I will go to the United Nations and will invite Obama to negotiations," Ahmadinejad said, adding that such talks would be "in front of the international media, not a sit-down behind closed doors in order to talk about matters."
Ahmadinejad's current desire for 'negotiations' is nothing but a ploy to buy himself more time to continue building nuclear weapons. But as P.T. Barnum is known to have said, there's a sucker born every minute. But Obama is not the sucker. The American people are the suckers for having chosen him. And Israel is going to have to deal with the consequences.


At 3:10 PM, Blogger Norm said...

You should know of growing rift (a kind word)between American Jews on this subject. Some of us can't even socialize with the kool-aid drinkers anymore; or I don't get invited to some homes anymore. It's only going to get worse. Many American Jews only care about their own expanding rear ends and have forgotten the meaning of "Never Again".

At 5:43 PM, Blogger Michael B said...

Bingo. I won't mention the first analogy I'm thinking of as the differences are pronounced, though a certain Daladier played his own part in the erosion of clearheaded perceptions and general will. Another, more hopeful analogy comes to mind, c. 1981. In both instances leadership at the topmost level was decisive.

"But Obama is not the sucker. The American people are the suckers for having chosen him. And Israel is going to have to deal with the consequences."

Bingo, again. Yet, ultimately, and to emphasize a certain, more positive vision, the crux of the matter can still be determined by the demos, the hoi polloi, should sufficient numbers come to realize the stakes and apply greater due diligence, vision, again, and will. Nov. '08 is past, but we still live in democracies and a certain qualitative faith can still be decisive, assuming the word hasn't been too cheapened and can still be used to invoke sinew and verve (in the truer and more vital, Abrahamic sense of the term).

A bit of pulpiteering and an unabashed exhortation there, but am not inclined to apologize for that fact.


Post a Comment

<< Home