His reasons are many. His doesn't want to anger an Ahmadinejad/Khamenei-run government should the current regime maintain its power - he will, after all, have to work with whatever government emerges from this struggle. He doesn't want to use overly forceful rhetoric only to find that he has to ratchet it up further should the violence become drastically worse. He also doesn't want to risk emboldening Ahmadinejad by giving the Iranian president someone to point the finger at.
But most importantly, President Obama recognizes that this decision needs and ought to be made by the Iranian people. It is a fool's errand trying to sway the politics of a nation in the midst of upheaval. We could only make matters worse. And if we really want genuine change to come to Iran - change that will stick - we need to recognize that that change must come from within; as Sen. John Kerry wrote in a NYT op-ed, "Iran’s election must be about Iran — not America."
Obama has expressed all of this without any of the bombast characteristic of his predecessor (see Evil, Axis of). On Monday, President Obama spoke briefly to reporters about Iran, closing by saying,
We will continue to pursue a tough, direct dialogue between our two countries, and we'll see where it takes us. But even as we do so, I think it would be wrong for me to be silent about what we've seen on the television over the last few days. And what I would say to those people who put so much hope and energy and optimism into the political process, I would say to them that the world is watching and inspired by their participation, regardless of what the ultimate outcome of the election was. And they should know that the world is watching.Careful to express that this is Iran's election, Iran's battle, but subtlely showing support for the protesters. Nuanced. Sophisticated. To the point, but full of between-the-lines insight.
And particularly to the youth of Iran, I want them to know that we in the United States do not want to make any decisions for the Iranians, but we do believe that the Iranian people and their voices should be heard and respected.
Contrast that with this comment from Sen. John McCain on the "Today" show:
He should speak out that this is a corrupt, flawed sham of an election and that the Iranian people have been deprived of their rights.In speaking with David Gregory, he advised that the United States should
[...] do what we have done throughout the Cold War and afterwards, we speak up for the people of Tehran and Iran and all the cities all over that country who have been deprived of one of their fundamental rights.To which The Huffington Post bitingly noted,
Ah, yes, because U.S.-Iran relations "throughout the Cold War and afterwards" are such a model of success.McCain is aggressive. Overly-confident. Ignorant of history and of our potential to influence an election that isn't any of our business. We should not be surprised that the man who jokingly, and irresponsibly, mock-sang "bomb, bomb Iran" would desire such decidedly strict language. McCain's sometimes belligerent nature played no small role in costing him the presidency. We should be thankful that America is awake enough to have recognized that the prudence Obama brings to the table is a far more powerful diplomatic tool than the incitable speech of 43 or the failed-44.
And most important of all, we should recognize that by treating Iran and the rest of the Middle East with respect, Obama has already done more to help spur the change we're seeing than either of these men (or the countless other neoconservative war-mongers) can imagine. No more Axis of Evil, no more distrust of Muslims and Muslim culture, no more overt (very overt in the case of Iraq) aggression in the Middle East. Just an invitation for some honest dialogue with a region of the world we have managed only to alienate in recent years. That is progress, that is how you make a difference.
Update:
Shaw has two posts at her blog that complement this very well.
He sure as hell ain't any kind of a messiah, but sometimes I'm damned glad to have Obama in the White House.
ReplyDeleteBrian,
ReplyDeleteI blogged about the same thing earlier today.
Then updated it with remarks from former Deputy Secy. of State Armitage, and former Secy. of State, Kissinger.
Neither of these men is a hero in my estimation, but they do have a lot of experience in foreign affairs.
My blood curdles when I think of what would be happening had McCain won the election.
I second Capt. Fogg.
Thankfully, we have an intelligent, even tempered man in the White House.
ReplyDeleteShaw - I hadn't heard about Armitage and Kissinger. I've got to give credit where it's due - their comments (Armitage's especially) weren't even mild. Republicans-who-say-what-they-believe is a small breed these days - and apparently restricted to people no longer in power.
ReplyDeleteMany thanks, Brian, for this post.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, Obama has been taking a more proactive approach ... quietly in the background. According to reports, the State Department did contact Twitter about postponing a scheduled maintenance shutdown so that the Iranian people would have access to each other, and the world could receive reports from inside Iran.
In other words, an approach that facilitates the cause of reform inside Iran WITHOUT the self-righteous bombast characteristic of neo-con foreign policy.
Also on the news tonight, it was pointed that Iran offered helpful overtures immediately after 9/11. The American response? Bush's idiotic "axis of evil speech" that further alienated Iranians.
Again, I blame our media for this circus. The media reports the talking heads of "he said, she said" ad nauseum while missing the point behind every story.
Exactly Octopus. The Twitter thing is very significant - quiet, behind the scenes, but potentially able to make a difference in Iran (not to mention keep our State Department informed).
ReplyDeleteJuan Cole taught me about the support from Iran after 9/11. With what's going on in Iran now, it's easy to see how much like us Iranians are.
Perhaps this is more telling than anything McPalin has to contribute. It comes from an Iranian-American girl visiting family in Tehran (via Twitter):
ReplyDelete'Arguably, it was Barack Obama who brought down the virtual wall between Iran and the West with his conciliatory and hopeful Nowruz (Iran's New Year) message on YouTube. I looked on as my friends and family watched his message with adoration in Tehran. "Why can't he be our president", one aunt gushed. It hit a chord, mainly because it made Ahmadinejad look foolish" '
I was all ready to agree with your post, which if you know me, isn't something that occurs very often till I got to the bottom and some of the comments that resulted.
ReplyDeleteI think Obama's reaction is appropriate under the circumstances. Even though I am not a fan, he handled this with the delicacy it needed. I was agreeing with you through most of the post and thinking to myself that finally we were on the same page. Unfortunately it didn't last long. I know you don't write to please me, but maybe if you focused on the positive without bringing the negative into it, more people would actually take it seriously.
What bothers me is why did you have to go and put McCain, and Bush down in the process. No wonder Libs and Conser can never come together on anything. We are so busy tearing each other apart.
I have no love for either McCain or Bush but by putting them down it's just drains any positive debate that I could offer. It's tedious and what good does it do?
"or the countless other neoconservative war-mongers"
Statements like this are the whole reason there is such a gap. Even someone like me who is constantly trying to reach across the line (which draws criticism from the extreme right) grows frustrated when reading this.
Octo, Rocky, Respac3, TAO....I know you all very well and respect you, but I just don't think I can keep coming over here to defend conservatism time and again. I'm getting burnt out trying to find the positive and the things that bring us together, when some posts do nothing but focus on the negative. Take care, I wish you all well!! <3
Well, it will be a shame if this blog loses Jennifer, because she is a pretty even handed sort. Personally I disagree with many of her positions (legalized prohibition of abortion, religion in goverment and schools, anti immigrant, etc.), but at least she makes less-than-shrill arguments.
ReplyDeleteJennifer, I certainly did not mean to offend. I think we may have misinterpreted some of each others comments, and for my part in that, I apologize. I welcome different view points and think comments like yours are important in order for all of us to learn.
ReplyDeleteBut I do take issue with some of your specific points. I see this post as a positive one. Most of it is about the good that Obama has done. I also don't think that negativity is a necessarily bad thing, though it can certainly be overdone.
More important though, I don't see how criticizing McCain or Bush (especially McCain as he's a sitting senator) is inappropriate in any way. The reason for critiquing Bush and McCain is to build knowledge, create an understanding so that we - as a nation - don't make the same sort of mistakes that Bush made and that McCain is now making.
On the war-mongers comment, I can see what you mean. It has the effect of lumping together people without specifics, though I think it is true that there are many neoconservatives who agree with McCain. It was the neoconservatives who orchestrated Iraq, after all.
In any case, I think there is a valuable discussion to be had, and I hope you will not give up on the Zone. And do not feel as though you need to defend conservatism - your opinions are just as valid as those of anyone else.
Sigh.....Thank you both for your comments, even your sort of compliment, mule breath. (actually I am for separation of church and state too) I recognize that not everyone has the same faith as I do and to choose one over the other isn't right. Shocking, I know! If you read my last post I might just surprise you. :-)
ReplyDeleteBrian....sorry if I went a bit overboard, it's just been a hard night and I wasn't in the mood to deal with anything negative. (probably not the best time to go to a liberal blog...LOL) I don't know you personally but like the others here, I respect our differences and I also feel the respect you've given to me. :-)
I understand your point about McCain and Bush and learning from their mistakes, sometimes it's just overwhelming visiting sites and always finding myself defending things. There are a lot of things I don't like about Bush and McCain but sometimes my defenses go up when they are constantly put down (without merit). So even those with merit, like yours, I may overreact just a little bit. Emphasis on little, of course. :-)
Maybe a bit hypocritical, if I am honest, because I am sure you can find a post somewhere where I put down Obama.
The war monger comment I still take you to task on though, because there are always radicals but they are truly the exception! :-)
I'm not sure if I could have stayed away anyway, it lasted all of what, 20 minutes at most! LOL
Knowing you respect my opinion though goes a long way. I really try to keep an open mind and judge on what is written, not what is expected as a conservative.
I'm not convinced that the "honest dialogue" is going to garner their respect. For terrorists that want all infidels to die, I think that no amount of words will make a difference. If we let down our guard too much we put ourselves in jeopardy. I guess only time will tell.
Jennifer, I acknowledge what are saying. Just today I was having the same argument at Shaw’s forum. In fact, in the comment thread under this post, I mention you and Pamela as being friends of The Swash Zone and stated my reasons for saying so.
ReplyDeleteWhat prompted my remarks were these posts by a blogger named SarahG and a blogger named Bluepitball. At Shaw’s forum, SarahG left a comment that refered to us as “dumb ass” and “F'ing Libtards!”
Here is what of readers of SarahG and Pitbull said about Shaw, for instance:
LL: “Never roll in the mud with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig enjoys it.”
SarahG: “You [referring o T101] and your Potty mouthed Girlfriend had your chance, now you can go shove your head where the sun don't shine.”
SarahG: “Screw her and the PIG she rode in on.”
Looper: “You Ms. Shaw are a LYING HYPOCRITE!”
figleaf: “Lib bloggers suck”
IAGNB: “[describing Obama] obuma, Chicago street hustler, crook, phony, fraud, lie, dork, debt maker, etc.”
David: ‘"Stuck On Stupid" Libturds …’
It’s My Choice: “Liberalism is a serious mental disorder …”
Get the picture. What you read here is NOTHING compared to the juvenile and hateful invective hurled at us. It is a natural impulse to want to throw this stuff back in the faces of those who hurl it at us.
Jennifer, you know I have been arguing the cause of Internet civility for several months. When the bullies ganged up on you, I came to your defense. Pamela and Rocky and I have joined forces in this effort, but I don’t see any reciprocity in kind. Not that I am making an excuse for endless finger-pointing, but today I have reached a saturation point.
Maybe I should quit blogging and take up knitting.
Octo.....
ReplyDelete" but I don’t see any reciprocity in kind"
Was this to me or just in general? I wasn't sure how to take that?
The urge to quit is always there and there is no sense of progress for me because the moronic insults from moronic, self-styled "conservatives" never lets up.
ReplyDeleteNotice that I said self-styled, since such behavior isn't conservative, but they've taken it on as a cloak to cover the infantile barbarism and militant ignorance.
That's easier to live with though, than the insistence that it's all justified by the fact that we criticized Bush and his administration for lying, cheating, stealing and terror bombing and invasion of Iraq. This rabid meanness and unrestrained insult IS NOT OUR FAULT, whether or not we are angry about it or have in turn insulted them. It's a strategy and being polite and conciliatory validates that strategy. Indeed if we had been more vociferous years ago, it may never have got to this point.
Jennifer: “Was this to me or just in general? I wasn't sure how to take that?”
ReplyDeleteThis is an expression of frustration in general, not specifically directed to you. Nevertheless, why should I be expected to swallow this abuse, still act the role of polite and respectful Octopus … while stuffing my feelings? Is this fair?
Captain Fogg says (above): “Notice that I said self-styled, since such behavior isn't conservative …”
Jennifer, Captain Fogg is 100% correct in characterizing these people as self-appointed abusers, not necessarily as conservative. We don’t view them as “conservative,” but we do perceive them as abusive, predatory, and character-disordered.
I do need to make myself clear about one issue raised here. Why should I, in the interest of partisan civility, be expected to put my core beliefs on the shelf? Have I ever asked you to put your core beliefs on the shelf? Have I ever asked you to be somebody other than Jennifer? Should I be someone other than Octopus? Should I censure my own articles and comments to please everybody? Friends do not necessarily have to agree; all that is required is that they be faithful in their friendship.
When you me questioned me, for instance, about certain articles I have written, have my answers been less than polite and respectful? Have I ever been dismissive? Did I take the time to include links and references in my responses to you? Please do not think I have ever taken you for granted.
Octo....I have never picked up for any of these posters that attack you and the others here. In fact I am always commenting that we have to stop the attacks and find common ground. I believe I did a post on it on my palace blog. I disabled comments because I knew I would get the same crap from the ignorant posters that you are and did. I condoned it, little good that it did.
ReplyDeleteI just recently got back into blogging land and am appalled at the personal attacks that I am seeing. I don't expect you to sit and take it, and I'm not sure why you would even think that. You have EVERY right to vent as needed but knowing you, I don't think you would stoop to that level.
I don't expect you to to change for me, frankly I like you just the way you are. :-)
On the same note though, I still feel the need to take you or the others to task on things I don't agree with. If someone lumps us all together, then I feel the need to show them the light, so to speak. :-)
I already apologized to Brian for going a bit overboard, and I do realize that this is a liberal site. Of course I don't expect you to change to please me and I realized that about ten minutes after I wrote that comment.
I would never think that you took me for granted, I know better than that. Sometimes it's just hard going to a liberal website and reading their posts against things I believe in and desperately trying to find the right things to say.
I find myself in middle ground and to be honest it's an uncomfortable place to be. Basically whatever I say I have either one side or the other complaining and sometimes it's hard to find the footing.
I certainly never meant to change any of you or in any way condone what the others are doing or saying. If I came across that way I am sorry.