Officials: Khamanei Speech Will Not Change White House Stance

Will Not Change White House Stance? What stance? That he’s gravely concerned about voter irregularities? That’s not a stance, that’s a weak willed wishy washy nothing of a never been. That’s voting present.

The president is pursuing a “foreign policy that advances our interests rather than a foreign policy that makes us feel good about what we’re saying,” a senior official said,
========
What a strange dichotomy.
I like to think it is in our interest to make people who are daring to have a voice against oppression feel good about themselves.

“I hope that the leaders will not go beyond the point of no return,” French President Nicolas Sarkozy told reporters in Brussels. “When we see results that are so incoherent, a Europe that keeps its mouth shut would not correspond to the values we consider to be European.”
The White House insisted that other Western officials making such comments didn’t undercut the point of their push to avoid letting the U.S. being used as a foil since the U.S. has a unique role in the “Iranian narrative,” having played a role in the 1953 coup of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddeq, helped to prop of the Shah of Iran for decades, and having called Iran part of the “Axis of Evil” in 2002, which many analysts say helped elect hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005.
I am embarassed and disguested that our president is such a pantywaist and apologist that the FRENCH are coming out more strongly for democracy and calling out the hoax that Iran’s elections have always been, than the POTUS. He is doing grave harm to the interests of the United States in destroying our credibility as a country that encourages and supports freedom and democracy everywhere.

talmag says: “Deep down he feels their pain and anyone with any sense knows that.”
How do they know that? He has not said anything that would lead them to that conclusion. What he has said supports the regime and their rigorous debate in these “elections.” They should assume, correctly that the POTUS does not care about their demonstrations, which now are more about protesting the regime and not just the elections. The POTUS views the protests as a distraction and a delay in his attempts to meet with Khameinei’s puppet. This is about the POTUS and his desire to look good to the muslim world by showing he is willing to talk to them, no matter the cost, and it will come back to bite him as people are seeing how cynical and pathetic he really is.

I hate to break it to Obama, but even if Ahmadinejad and Khamenei manage to put down this uprising, and I expect they will with great force and lots of bloodshed, they will not agree to forgo nuclear weapons. Obama gains nothing by his silence, and loses quite a bit in the eyes of the free world. It’s sad when the President of France takes the lead in matters of freedom and liberty.

Hmmmm
Wonder what the republicans would have said if the Iranians would have revolted against hanging chads in Florida and the Supreme Court selecting Bush as our 43rd president?

Omentum, you still seem to think this is just about an election? This is about regime change. The people are fed up with the mullah’s and want change. We are being silent when we could be not only providing moral support, but also providing communications assistance and firewall busting assistance in order for the people of Iran to get the word out about how many people are being arrested and killed and for them to be able to coordinate this revolution. Thinking is right, we did encourage the uprising against Saddam and were wrong for not helping them militarily. We are not going to help in Iran militarily, but we should with the things I talked about above. Doesn’t the left still care about encouraging democracy and freedom worldwide?

Thank you Jake. I guess not every reporter sees rainbows and unicorns when Obama speaks.

Jason,
Are you enroute to the military recruiting station ready to take up arms and go into Iran? This is not some video game you are watching. This is a REAL situation with REAL lives at stake. Our military is already strewn throughout the world fight wars and N Korea is posing a threat exponentially higher than in IRAN.
Last time I checked America fought its own civil war and every other internal conflict we have had without international interference.
To see your point, Obama sides with the folks having peaceful protests and will continue to do so. Don’t get upset if he don’t go in guns ablazing like old dubya used to do.
regards

“This is not about us, it’s about them,” said a senior administration official
No no no – it’s about getting the best sound bites for the next election! Forget about what is best for the protesters, don’t waste time learning from the 2003 revolts, or pay attention to how the entrenched leadership is trying to paint the demonstrations as ‘Western meddling’ to motivate the army to kill their own kids.
The important thing is that the GOP can take the risky position of criticizing the Iran theocracy and get some good soundbites for 2010.

The President of the United States, whoever he is, should always speak up for democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of oppression from government, and tolerance of other people and religions.
Obama is more concerned of upsetting the religious dictators of Iran than speaking up for the people wishing to have strive for the democratic foundation of the United States.
Hope and change for the U.S. right Obama?, but not for Iran.

Omentum, you aren’t reading my posts very well are you? I said that we should not go in militarily. Pretty simple. What we should do is help the Iranian people communicate with each other and the outside world by attacking Iran’s firewalls, (that would be with a computer not a tank, if that’s where you were confused) and helping broadcast reports into Iran. It would also be the least that we could do if our president were to offer support directly to the revolutionaries instead of pandering to the current regime. Obama thinks it is all about him, the sad part is he does not see how this is really harming his image in Europe and the rest of the world where freedom is valued.

Doug, you shouldn’t care about the bad guys in Iran, they are going to blame us no matter what. We should be giving material to the people fighting the regime in the form of encouragement and moral support at the very least.

Jason:”We should be giving material to the people fighting the regime in the form of encouragement and moral support at the very least.”
Just like Bush did in 2003? How did that turn out by the way?

By the way, even if it was not different than 2003, Why the hell should we ever be in a position of not speaking up for our principles? We should never back down from our belief that all peoples of the world deserve true free elections, not the rigged elections that Iran has held every year since Khomeini has been in control.

Jason:”This thing is bigger because in 2003 the regime at least paid lip service to fair elections”
I hope so, but go read some of the coverage from 2003 – the scope and breadth is very similar. The only difference this time is that there are establishment figures siding with the students. Figures who gleeful shout Death to America and mean it. Why are they willing to stand with the protestors this time?

Posted by: jhw539 | Jun 19, 2009 3:22:05 PM
I STAND CORRECTED

Yes, yes this is definitely the right approach. I’ve read, “How to Influence Friends and Make People” and it’s what O’B is doing only at country level!
Those that hate you should be treated with the utmost respect. The family of these people that are actually on your side, must be ignored. Your friends and those with like minds (Europe, Israel) should be insulted and ordered to do things that are impossible for them.
Harmony will result.

There is nothing to gain here by coming out against the Iranian leadership. They play us like a fiddle over nuclear arms – what makes anyone think that by speaking out against them we are going to have any positive effect?
If we come off strong against them, it will hamper negotioations down the line and buys us nothing.
Look where hard line positioning got us with NK.

“Our interests” should include
supporting freedom and democracy
around the world!
It isn’t in our best interests to
support the tyranical regime run by
Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs.
They continue to push their nuclear
agenda so I fail to see the downside
of making a statement in support of
free and honest elections and
peaceful dissent!
This administration is weak and
clueless when it comes to foreign
policy!
Jimmy Carter must have been
President Obama’s hero.

Mousavi or Ahmadinejad really doesn’t matter as they are not the real power and control in Iran,
that’s why all this rhetoric is meaningless, supporting the protesters in the street is one thing,
but the presidency of Iran is a figurehead position.
so unless the Mullahs, & Ayatollah, are thrown out, same folks run the country

so I fail to see the downside
Posted by: reaganfan
here,…. you are sadly all too truthful

Obama, you are stupid!! You have NO idea what being an AMERICAN PRESIDENT stands for! You need to come out forcefully for democracy for those innocent Iranians shedding their blood for freedom, and you sit back and do nothing. You are a disgrace to the highest office in the land!The innocent iranians are reaching out to our ideals, and you (as always), do NOTHING! But what can we really expect from an egotistical, narcissistic person??? You are supporting the Mullahs instead of democracy.You make millions of Americans sick! You will not be able to handle what’s coming your way from your own country this summer! There are going to be massive protests here against you & the corrupt Congress! You are also VERY WEAK on foreign policy!