Blood on the Streets of Tehran

Who cares? Let them all kill each other. We've got our own problems to deal with. OSAMA can't fix problems . He creates them!

"To the people of Iran: You are rich in culture and talent. You have a right to live under a government that listens to your wishes, respects your talents, and allows you to build better lives for your families. Unfortunately, your government denies you these opportunities, and threatens the peace and stability of your neighbors. So we call on the regime in Tehran to heed your will, and to make itself accountable to you. The day will come when the people of Iran have a government that embraces liberty and justice, and Iran joins the community of free nations. And when that good day comes, you will have no better friend than the United States of America." - President George W. Bush, January 13, 2008.

I love the Repubs and Rightys quoting the FRENCH on foreign policy !!!

whatever happened to those 'freedom fries' days?

anything for a headline

Moderate, thank you for your depth of understanding and, above all, your prayers for those brave young souls in Iran; you cannot imagine how much they need it. We have been deeply touched by the outpouring of support from all over the world.

Actually, Jake Tapper is about the only correspondent left that deserves any respect. He once mentioned that he doesn't go into those briefings on his "knees." I used to believe that, unfortunately, lately it seems he has succumbed to peer pressure as well.

My problem is that I have known some of the most outstanding journalists in this country; in the days of yore. Often, I used to refer to the press as the watchdog of this the greatest experiment in democracy; but alas!

I, too, hope that penetrating questions are put forth, but I seriously doubt any question of substance would be asked.

Kate,

Any one can put out a "strong statement" but what are Germany and France going to do about it? We had 8 years of a mad cowboy and are now fighting two wars. Would you have us fight a third? With the possibility of many nations having nuclear capability due diligence is the obvious strategy.

moderate

btw; Palin 'prays' with witchdoctors
and Jindal performs exorcisms

I would think that one of the lessons from Iran right now is that crazy religious people and politics really don't mix,

regardless of the religion.

Posted by: moderate

Mr. Fructose crystallizes the Repub/Consv./neo-con sentiment much better than I.

re "so I'm not sure why Republicans wanting to support the Iranian protesters surprises you"..

because it's just plain lip service

re" Jindal Cantor Palin Thune Pence..
that's your offering as the future of the Repub party?... more of the same and worse,

Posted by: Fructose
.'And he does not believe it to be true because he is a child of "multiculturalism".
Mr. Obama is a badly flawed man, and one is at a loss to divine what, if anything, is the direction in which his moral compass might point.
In less than three decades we have moved from R. Reagan to B. Obama, and the human race will suffer hugely and at length for the change.

Aryan, I found your comment moving. It also resonates with stories I have heard from some of the Iranian students and scholars I know in this country. I pray for the people of your country and I pray that Mr. Tapper has the courage to ask the president your excellent question tomorrow, or another equally penetrating one.

Wow, XXX, you know a very different group of Republicans than I do. We are a diverse lot, you know, so that doesn't surprise me. Don't remember anyone predicting that the Cairo speech would cause war to break out, but I do remember a few folks grumbling that it would not be helpful in the Muslim world or elsewhere, and I think it remains to be seen if they were entirely wrong or if they had a point. I know I was not impressed with the speech, mostly because the president showed he was not much of a student of history after all.

You conflate Republican and neocon, Republican and conservative-- neither sets of terms are synonyms. Yes,the subset of Republicans who are conservatives is much larger than any other subset of Republicans, but still.

No, I do not recall Republicans en masse calling for the bombing of Iran (I do not count McCain's terrible joking reference, which he regrets). Now, I do know Republicans who are convinced that Israel should bomb the nuclear facilities of Iran if we do not stop the Iranians from continuing toward a nuclear weapon. Again, there are plenty of other Republicans who disagree.

Republicans tend to support those fighting repression and struggling for democratic reform around the globe, so I'm not sure why Republicans wanting to support the Iranian protesters surprises you. "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall." Poland. Czechoslovakia. Georgia. Iraq. We don't want to be "best buddies" with Iran, we wan to be solid friends and supporters of the oppressed people of Iran in their struggle against the tyranny of the mullahs who control their country.

You need to learn some new names even among high-profile nationally known Republicans. The Republicans are not only the party of CHeney and Gingrich, neither of whom hold office at the moment, but also of McCain, Jindal, Cantor, Pawlenty, Palin, Crist, Gregg, Thune, Snowe, Ryan, and Pence, to name a few. A diverse group, with a lot of great ideas.

This would be a good time to recall the words of Ronald Reagan during the 1982 crackdown of the authoritarian Polish government against the Solidarity movement:

"The struggle in the world today for the hearts and minds of mankind is based on one simple question: Is man born to be free, or slave? In country after country, people have long known the answer to that question. We are free by divine right."

Try, if you will, to imagine such words springing from the lips of B. H. Obama. The thing cannot be done; he is incapable of such an utterance.

Why is he incapable? Because, sad to say, he does not remotely believe that assertion to be true. And he does not believe it to be true because he is a child of "multiculturalism"--the belief that no culture, no government, no people, no nation is in any way better than any other. Indeed, he may not be a child of this nonsense; he may be its embodiment, or in fact its apotheosis.

The world now knows, no matter what Obama has lately said under pressure, that his instinctive reaction to these historic events was to abstain from judgment upon them, in order that he might maintain some sort of potential relationship with the leading tyrant in the drama. That tyrant, he declared, is not very much distinguishable from his opponent nor, more important, from the people risking and giving their lives in opposition to the tyranny.

Mr. Obama is a badly flawed man, and one is at a loss to divine what, if anything, is the direction in which his moral compass might point.

In less than three decades we have moved from R. Reagan to B. Obama, and the human race will suffer hugely and at length for the change.

As an Iranian-born woman who was persecuted by the regime in Iran, I believe I have a fairly good understaning of this regime. My only sin was that I was educated, had my degrees from the United States,was serving my country, and enjoyed a respectable standing in the international arena.

Since this Administration insists on negotiations with the regime of the mullahs in Iran, perhaps, Jake can ask the following question on my behalf.

I have only one question for the "Leader of the Free World:"

" Negotiations require give and take. What are you preparing to offer this odious and brutal regime of the mullahs in Iran? Is it security? Is it economic assistance? Is it sale of arms?

No problem! You will only help them to prolong their miserable hold on a nation that despises them with every fiber of their beings and you will provide the terrorist regime with more arms to slaughter the innocent citizens of Iran.

Thank you very much, indeed!

Many of you have argued that the demonstrators have not asked for assistance from the US and do not want our "interference" in the form of stronger statements of support or supportive actions from our president. I have strongly supported the president's use of cautious but firm language and a low-key approach myself.

So now I have a serious question-- not an attempt to spring an "a-ha" moment on you. It is a question I am trying to figure out for myself as well-- what are we to make of a small number of statements by Iranian activists like Ahmad Batebi and the student identified only as Muhammad on CNN, who have called on Obama to be more vocal and supportive? I am not sure that they represent the majority of protesters in Iran, but in the extremely limited contacts I have had with Iranians in the past week, I am beginning to think this is not as rare as I had thought. Do you think that the strategy the US is pursuing needs to change as the situation continues to unfold? Do you think at this point the protesters still want us to be circumspect or would they prefer stronger demonstrations of support at this point or later in the week, as the strikes begin to spread (it is hoped that strikes will show the size of the resistance, I am told)?

It may sound like nitpicking, but it is not. I have noted a few posters here making statements like " we have to step back and let the other Arab nations take care of this" (example provided by Try the Truth). This is an inaccurate statement. Iran is NOT an Arab state. The Iranians are Persians. There is a big difference. There is ancient enmity between Arabs and Persians. Muslim and Arab are not synonymous.

Ahhh! Custard-gate! Impeach Obama! He's controlling your brains with fluoride! Stop Obama! The US Government forged his birth certificate to make way for the New World Order! "Ice Cream" is a secret symbol to initiate the end times!

It's all contained in Obama's secret undergraduate book report, encrypted using communist code words. I=The Soviets. Liked=Will. Farewell to Arms=Take over the free world.

His book report title: I Liked Farewell to Arms.

You don't need to be a genius to figure it out.

SClanding . . .

Not a single constructive suggestion - just badmouthing. What would you have the President say or do?

"has a view which is much more nuanced"

The LEFT always has a more "nuaunced" but what isn't nuanced is that it ALWAYS leaves people in the same sorry oppressed state.

The Left talks the talk but that is always where it ends. Why is that?

Exactly the same arguments were used by our nuanced and "enlightened" leftist toward conservatives during the 80's Eastern European revolutions. They argued vehemently against Reagan's overt and openingly anti-communist government actions and stances. Because it was better to just accept "reality" and get along with the Soviets even if it meant the oppression of the Eastern Europeans.

If you are a youngster, you probably think that the Left LOVED Reagan's "Tear Down this Wall" comments and his support of protesters in Germany and Poland. YOU would be WRONG. They had fits and blasted Reagan for being too simplistic and not being more "nuanced". Of course once the Soviets DID fall, leftist switched sides and were a pal of Reagan all along.

There are a ways to support the protesters and only idiots think anybody is talking about sending in 3rd Armor. Interesting enough, French Vanilla custard isn't one of them???

So what will be the end result, Obama and his supporters will get their "nuance" and will preen about how lovely and intelligent Obama is. Not at all like those vile Conservatives. BUT yet again while the LEFT preens and pats itself on its back for his brilliance, a nation of people will AGAIN be left under an oppressive government.

PS. Obama wrote a thesis in college about the evilness of Reagan and why he had to be stopped but listening to him now you would think they had always been buxom buddies.

Republicans and Conservatives are so lost, that they can't even keep track of their own looney tunes rhetoric from one month to another....

some Republican 'end of the world events' that didn't happen...

1) the pirates
2) Georgia and the Russians
3 Cairo Speech, didn't cause all out war

the 'new forward looking' republicans.... Newt, Reagan, Cheney, Bush

a few short months ago Republicans and the remnants of the neo-con crowd wanted to bomb bomb bomb Iran out of existence....
now Repubs want to be best buddies..

if it wasn't so sad it might be funny

"Sad that they are showing more leadership than the One who continues to vote "present"."

Awww, Freepers and their rehearsed talking points are so adorable. "The One". "Present". Now all we need are some cries of "ACORN!" to complete the trifecta.

Too bad that does nothing to help the Iranian people (but somehow I don't sense that helping the Iranian people is what this is really about for the Republicans.)

The overlooked big news today is that the Iranian government is now admitting the ballot boxes were stuffed in as many as 50 cities. Some 3 Million 'extra' votes. Maybe this can be a ray of sunlight in all the darkness. Perhaps a re-vote with outside observers? It could be a start towards justice and reconcilliation in Iran.

Posted by: SClanding | Jun 22, 2009 11:48:57 AM

Again, this is just a paranoid view. Conservatives are beyond reproach, and the wicked LEFT is the source of all evil.

The LEFT.... if there even is such a thing as a monolithic LEFT.... has a view which is much more nuanced than the hateful one you depict.

I think most people that you consider to be on the LEFT simply think that attacking Iran is an ineffective way to achieve your objectives.

The best way, the one that Obama has apparently chosen, is to neutralize the threat that the US represented to the Iranian people. By resisting the right's clarion call for WAR against the Iranian government, the Iranians have been able think long and hard about just what it is that they get out of the current regime.

Under Bush, the Iranians found security in supporting their government's hard-line stance. But now that the threat is off the table, they can think about other things.... like if the current regime is good for anything.

Apparently, this approach is working. But, we have always known that being on permanent war footing is toxic to democracy.... so I can hardly credit Obama for this stroke of genius. Rather, it's just common sense.

Don't hate him for it. Just acknowledge it, and move on. Or else you risk further stigmatizing your party as the party that is opposed to common sense.