"Every day Israel faces threats no country should have to endure. America stands with you shoulder to shoulder facing these threats. The United States is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Period."
-- Vice President Joe Biden, in speech in Israel
Great! What's your plan? Because, so far, the world has seen no evidence that the administration's words will be matched with action.
A year in, no amount of tough talk or idle threats from the Obama administration has moved the Iranian regime, which is a year closer to having nuclear weapons.
Why should the Israelis, who have been threatened with extinction by the Iranian president, take any comfort in Biden's words, when there have been no actions to back them up?
Is America really standing "shoulder to shoulder" with Israel? Does Mr. Biden really mean the United States is "determined" -- "period"-- to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons? Or does he mean we're determined "only up to the point where difficult decisions and messy military actions are warranted"?
Tough talk and leadership from the United States used to mean something. No more. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was openly rebuffed recently by Brazil, which dismissed out of hand her entreaty to join the U.S. in sanctioning Iran.
If Mrs. Clinton can't get Brazil to go along with economic sanctions, what possible hope is there to get China and Russia on board?
This country's loss of clout in the world isn't lost on its own citizens: In a new poll by two liberal organizations, Democracy Corps and Third Way, a majority of Americans say their country's respect and standing in the world has eroded since Barack Obama took office.
The poll "provides a wake-up call for President Obama, his party, and progressives on national security," says a remarkably candid statement at Democracycorps.com, adding that "the results are sobering."
Perhaps the reason for that loss of esteem is that the Obama foreign policy is to seek to be liked, rather than respected. When you seek to be respected, you match your words with your actions. When you want to be liked at any cost, you'll say what people want to hear, no matter the truth.
Is that what was at work in Mr. Biden's Israel speech?
During the presidential primary, Hillary Clinton's camp knocked Obama for being all about "just words." Obama responded with a spirited speech quoting iconic American phrases and chanting, "Just words?"
What he doesn't seem to get is that those famous passages from American history mean something because they weren't seen as being empty rhetoric.
And so many months later, he risks having that be remembered as the Obama Doctrine: Just words.
Hillary Clinton also has been reaching out to Syria as she reported before Congress. What did Syria do in response? They invited Ahmedinejad to Damascus where he will meet with Syrian leaders, Hizbullah and Hamas. According to Iranian Fars news agency, a Syrian diplomat said the meeting would be about how to strengthen “anti-Israeli resistance groups.”
Our weakness toward Iran, Syria and the extremists is going to get us in mega trouble. Israel is sending every possible message that they are fed up.
After Biden condemned Israel for moving ahead with more housing in East Jerusalem, while giving praise to Palestinian President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad,Israel immediately announced new settlements in Jerusalem. They are tired of our "reaching out" to Iran and company. We may have to chip through the sand that has turned to glass to get to the oil before long.
The Augusta Chronicle editorial staff (ACES) is full of yellow journalism bellicosity. According the The Augusta Chronicle staff directory ACES is composed of Editorial Page Editor Michael Ryan, Deputy Editorial Page Editor Joe Hotchkiss, and Editorial Cartoonist Rick McKee. I cannot readily determine who sits on The Augusta Chronicle editorial board or how much input the editorial board and The Augusta Chronicle's owner William "Billy" Morris have on editorial content. All Augusta Chronicle editorials like the inflammatory one above are never signed except by the "Augusta Chronicle Editorial Staff".
What exactly is the plan and the action that ACES wants the Obama administration to take toward Iran? Sec of State Hillary Clinton as well as Sec of Defense Robert Gates have been pressing the UN and Iran's neighbors to support stricter economic sanctions on Iran. While Russia has wavered and at times seems amenable to sanctions, UN Security Council member China says flat out NO and states that in their view sanctions are counterproductive.
Michael J. Rosenberg writes in TPMCafe on March 13 that it is clear to him that "Netanyahu and company are only pretending to be worried about the 'existential threat' posed by Iran. If they were really worried, they would not have forced a confrontation over settlements at the time they claim to need America to help them deter Iranian nukes. Obviously, that issue is a fake or they would not have told Obama to go to hell when he will be President for another 3 or 7 years."
Noam Chomsky says that Iran would be crazy not to attempt to build nuclear weapons knowing the U.S.A.'s foreign policy history towards Iran. Nuclear weapons are a guarantee against an Israeli and/or American attack.
ACES LOVES their hyperbole. Here is a feeble attempt to scare Americans about non-existent WMD (like right-wing warmongers did with Iraq) and stampede Americans to vote against Democrats in November. The Chronicle always puts extremist politics above the truth and the best interests of this country. We should engage Iran not attack Iran - verbally or physically.
Even Saudi Arabia and the UAE know something has to be done according to Defense Secretary Gates. "Persian Gulf allies understand sanctions are the inevitable next step in dealing with the threat of a nuclear Iran."
As I said this morning, the US is running out of money and the rest of the world should help. That's the only way sanctions are going to work. China needs to find somewhere else to buy oil.
But they won't and have no reason to. Iran is not threateneing them, only us, consuming our energy while the Chinese focus on their economy. China may have the wiser course. Let Iran do what it pleases but let it know that if it even launches a conventional attack against Chinese interests, that China will bomb it into paste. We should follow their example and quit spending time and money on whether Iran gets nukes. Iran is going to get nukes. They have to because it's the only thing that earns you respect in the super-power circles. They have to because Israel has them and Israel has a human rights record right up there with China and Iran.
The better course of all would be to pump money into our academic physics departments and drive more experimentation with new energy. We give more money to places like Pakistan to placate them that we do to universities to find new energy sources that don't involve oil. We do that and oil goes to $5 a barrel and everyone in the middle east starves to death. Problem solved.
Not threatening Israel???
Ahmadinejad said Thursday, "the Palestinians and the nations of the Middle East will be rid of a 'bad omen' once Israel is annihilated."
And..."Israel, a foreign presence and a 'Western prodigy' in the region, had “reached the end of its road,” Ahmadinejad told supporters in southern Iran in the same speech.
words...words....words.....who wrote this piece? (it sure would be a lot more interesting if it gave at least one suggestion on what should be done in regards to iran)
It's not the place of the ACES to advise in an editorial that merely comments on actions taken by Obama and his staff. What this says is that the tough talk offered by Biden is in direct contrast to the actions of Obama. It comments on the loss of respect the U.S. has suffered since Feb., 2009. It comments on the tin ear appreciation Obama has for empty words and it comments on the fact that aggressive and threatening middle east countries are in no way influenced by the now tooth-less giant. The result of the position this country has been put in by the current president is not a good one, from either a domestic policy perspective or a foreign one. There's a very strong potential for these heretofore empty words to be tested.
It is apparent that this administration is not willing to advance the cause of Irael and instead is trying to dictate policy to a soverign nation. The US at present is in no position to dicate to Israel or any other country what it should do. Israel should start feeling that the US no longer has its back.
I for 1 will not send my son to fight another war in the middle east, we have 2 wars going now and do not have the resources for a 3rd war. Talk is cheap, who will send their childeren and money for yet another war in the middle east.
Finally, The Chronicle provides a link to back up its claims...too bad it doesn't. "Despite Dropping Ratings, Obama Gets Some Solid Marks on National Security" is one headline. "While his overall approval rating stands at 47 percent (down 1 point from Democracy Corps’ January survey), more than half of all likely voters approve of the president’s handling of Afghanistan (58 percent), national security (57 percent), “leading America’s military” (57 percent), “improving America’s standing in the world” (55 percent), fighting terrorism (54 percent), and Iraq (54 percent). These are strong figures at a time when America is fighting two wars abroad and continuing to face an active terrorist threat. " The article is about how Democrats can improve their message regarding national security. "A 69 percent majority – 9 points stronger than the strongest Republican narrative on terrorism – feels more confident about Democrats on national security as a result of this message:
Democrats say: “Since the day Obama took office, we’ve stepped up the fight against terrorists. Using our Special Forces and Predator planes in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Yemen, we captured or killed hundreds of al Qaeda’s fighters and affiliates in 2009, far more than in 2008. Just last week, US forces helped capture the Taliban’s top military commander.”
The editorial says:
. . . a majority of Americans say their country's respect and standing in the world has eroded since Barack Obama took office.
That majority of Americans is correct.
The editorial says:
In successful foreign policy, America must be respected.
I don't think this sentence means very much. Respected by whom? Let's say, for example, that America's foreign policy were not respected in Botswanna, but that China did respect it. Would it be successful or not? What really counts is not that all countries respect our foreign policy. What counts is whether or not most Americans respect American foreign policy. Foreign policy cannot please everyone, and if it does not please you, you likely will not “respect” it. Does anyone really care whether Iran respects American foreign policy?
Vice President Joe Biden says:
The United States is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
What Joe Biden does not tell us is the rationale behind the statement. Why should one nation care what another nation does within its borders? Iran's having primitive nuclear weapons poses no threat to anyone. Remember, we dropped two primitive nuclear weapons on Japan and Japan is thriving today. Iran would have difficulty deploying a weapon even if they were to build one. I say, let Iran waste its talent and money on building a weapon. The boys need their toys.
Excellent point Ga Values. I also wonder how much respect we gained as a nation for our handling of the invasion and occupation or Iraq? Had our military had the support it deserved, the entire action would have succeeded at a tenth the cost in lives, dollars and time. Instead, a meddlesome senile bureaucrat was turned loose to micro-manage and bungle the entire enterprise from its fraudulent beginning.
Say what you will, but Obama actually does support our troups and officers. Bush's best contribution was replacing the worst secretary of defense in U.S. history with one of the best. And Obama had the wisdom to keep him.
Maybe Brazil does not want to support sanctions against Iran because Iran is no threat to it. Since Iran is no threat to us, maybe we should stop caring as well.
Nuclear nonproliferation starts at home. Let's start getting rid of the Trident submarines based at King's Bay in St. Mary's, GA. http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/man/uswpns/navy/submarines/ssbn726_ohio....
Cain, Hussein needs to hire you as his adviser on the Far East. You have as much understanding of those people as he does. Which is none!
Biden said Iraq is on the verge of becoming a democratic nation an historic event. Of course he was giving Obama the credit.
AFadel does make an interesting point. It is hypocritical for the U.S. to try to prohibit another sovereign nation from doing something that the U.S. does. If we can build nuclear weapons, then Iran and Israel should be allowed to do the same, as well as Pakistan and India. Nuclear weapons don't kill people; people kill people.
chacush, you could refer to Iran as Middle East or, as the French do, the Near East. No one refers to Iran as "Far East".
BTW, chacush, the subject of this editorial is Iran not Iraq. But as long as you are on the subject of Iraq:
"Who Would Want Credit For Iraq?" by Daniel Larison | The American Conservative | 07 Mar 2010 |
http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2010/03/07/who-would-want-credit-for-iraq/
a naval blockade would be my 1st choice of action, hit their oil refineries--5 minutes to knock them out with f-16's. maybe that would get their attention without having to start a full scale war.
A N O T H E R...T R E A S O N O U S...E D I T O R I A L....
From the Augusta Chronicle Likud Party.
Even the W administration refused tp back Israel on bombing Iran.
Now this paper's editorial joins the Talk Bombers in siding with Likud versus America.
Thanks traitors!
Is this the same speech where Israel announced that they were going to build 1500 settlements in the forbiden zone? Btw the Arny Times headline was " Military to reduce physical training in Basic training", now when you couple that with the fact we now allow grandparents to enlist, I would be very careful about any threats I would make. Especially if I had a country that was full of young people not willing to fight for the country. Think about it.
JHRC--since you, orgpsych, grouse, lilyflower68, socialism4u--constantly gripe about ACES, maybe you should go hang around the NEW YORK TIMES. did you know their "news" each and every day is twisted around into an editorial ?? saw that on fox news-so it must be true.
"online comments need editing"--by peter scheer. in the s.f. chronicle today. should be required reading for all people who like to post here. excellent article, by the way. explores the legal aspect of modern times.
For what it's worth here's the link to today's column by Peter Scheer in The San Francisco Chronicle online that wyochuck cited. It bears no relationship whatsoever to the editorial above and has no particular bearing on any of the comments made thus far that I can tell.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/03/15/EDVQ1CEV1I.DTL
Cain, just before writing my comment I was writing an email to a friend about a subject in the Far East so I was still thinking Far East. I believe history will judge the freeing of millions of people from a murderous dictator as good thing. I’m sure Barack Hussein will take credit for it.
chascush, the consensus among historians today is that the U.S. long war in Vietnam was a mistake, but anyone who tried telling that to American war hawks in the 1960s and early 1970s was labeled unknowledgeable, unwise, and unpatriotic at best. Even today there are die-hard militarists, many of them Vietnam veterans, who claim the U.S. could have won in Vietnam if only we persevered and waged a still longer war and killed even more than the 1.5 to 3 million people we killed in southeast Asia.
History will judge whether or not President Bush made a wise decision to invade Iraq, but it isn't looking good for Bush at this point in time despite Cheney and Rove's efforts to rewrite history. Saddam Hussein was overthrown in about 6 weeks, captured in about 9 months, executed more than 3 years ago, yet American troops still remain in Iraq and will be there for years to come whether they are classified as combat troops or support troops. Killing tens of thousands of Iraqis to capture 1 man doesn't make sense to me, and, more importantly, it does not make sense to the vast majority of Iraqis. Biden is a fool for trying to claim any credit for the ongoing U.S. fiasco in Iraq.
Israel is America's client state in the Middle East, and resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the sine qua non for peace in the Middle East. IMHO Obama should have already closed Guantanamo, already withdrawn all U.S. troops from Iraq, never have made the awful decisions to escalate the U.S. war in Afghanistan and expand the air war in Pakistan, engage with Iran on a personal level, and dedicate all his attention to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict instead of getting sidetracked on health care reform.
Obama should have leaned hard on Israel. The Zionists perceive him as weak. Obama's only chance at rehabilitating his presidency and leading the world is to lean equally hard on Israel as he leans on Palestinians and on Iran. He must let Israel know in no uncertain terms that their decision to expand settlements in East Jerusalem is unacceptable.
Bush let Israel run wild. Obama must find the strength he needs to take a tough, even-handed approach, but he cannot try to militarily dominate Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan in the name of self-defense while at the same time denying Israel the right to militarily dominate their region of the world under the same bogus claim of "self-defense".
Isn't it funny that the Obama administration was supposed to fix our standing in the world community? Like everything else he has promised he has failed to deliver. You can't make the world love you and why should you? We are called to act in a way of compassion, integrity and for the good of the American people and then let the chips fall where they may. As far as Israel is concerned, jmpo, but I believe that they are God's chosen people and we are to treat them with special preference. Most of all be available to assist them if attacked. God will bless us for doing so. No group of people have endured more oppression than the Jews, and yes sometimes they brought it upon themselves and sometimes not.
The Augusta Chronicle ©2012. All Rights Reserved.
