Bush's Knessup
George W. Bush badly wants to keep his presidency relevant. Nobody seems certain why, but he found a sure fire way to do so: Inject himself into the presidential campaign in an address before the Israeli parliament marking the commemoration of the state's 60th anniversary.
White House press secretary Dana Perino barely earned her salary with a laughable denial of any implied swipe at Senator Barack Obama's foreign policy platform, as there is no mistaking what her boss was trying to do when he went right to the heart of Israeli security concerns mocking those who "believe we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along."
First, dispense with the nonsense: Senator Obama has never said that he would negotiate with terrorists.
What he has said is that he supported direct and unconditional talks with the leaders of Iran and North Korea. This was last July and in the past year he has expanded his argument maintaining that talks should be predicated on a "carrot and stick approach" that exerts pressure through a concerted measure of diplomacy backed by the force and support of international alliances.
Iran, the most contentious player in the extreme wing of the Arab-Israeli conflict through their patronage of Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, is certainly a case in point.
Senator Obama advocates and has rightly pushed for crippling Iran's infrastructure through heavily backed economic sanctions, including mandates that companies based in Russia and France divest from their multi-billion dollar refinery operations should Iran continue on its present course: financing its Israeli terror operations by proxy; pursuing its nuclear ambition; supporting its Shiite alliances in Iraq.
Iran has no capability to fully convert its oil supply into refined fuel to meet national demands and without gasoline they can't do much.
It's a smart, tough, and effective means of directly managing a relationship to bring Tehran to the negotiating table, one that pales in contrast to the panicked talk of regime change channeled by an administration through indirect communication via the media that almost put US troops in the crosshairs of further attacks last year in a region that will remain on the brink of destabilization for years because of actions launched under our current president.
There is of course one significant problem that Senator Obama's approach faces. In the past seven years the US has so isolated itself through a "Doctrine of Preemption" no one will listen to us.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
"Iran, the global leader in state sponsored terror" - haha, stop, my sides hurt. What BS: the US is the global leader in state-sponsored terrorism clearly. Last I heard Iran wasn't occupying anybody, overthrowing elected governments around the world and installing dictators, or threatening to nuke masses of civilians in certain countries upon the basis of possible future acquisition of technology said countries are quite probably not even pursuing.
The article says Iran doesn't have the capability to refine oil to gas, can some one explain to me how this makes any sense? Iran, home of Zarathustra, can't change oil into gas?
They have been dealing with fire plumes on thier land since time began and they can't make gas?
Simple - you need refineries, and they don't have any. It's more cost effective to outsource this process.
Analogy: IBM's (etc for other Amer. tech companies) call centers are in India - its cheaper.
Gas is a frequent byproduct of oil drilling.
GasOLINE takes a refinery.
Oil exporters usually ship raw crude.
bush has done nothing BUT appease North Korea and Libya (remember Lockerbie?) by giving them _________________ (fill in the blank - food, fuel, absolution) in order to get a headline showing how successful he is in his "war on terror" --
BUSH HAS DONE NOTHING BUT NEGOTIATE WITH AND APPEASE TERRORISTS --
it really hurts my brain when i try to comprehend the megalomaniacal hypocrisy of everything that eminates from bush's upper orifice ...
I want to know why Israel is allowed to lay waste to every international law and convention without criticism and their "enemies" are not entitled to raise a hand in their own defense?
I want to know why each year US aid to Israel gives $1500.00 per capita while cutting programs in the US due to "funding"? Why on earth are American taxpayers forced to give billions of dollars yearly to Israel when our own people are homeless or soon to be, have no jobs, and no healthcare?There is no justification for forcing the U.S. public to pay for health care,education, and housing for the Israelis while our own people go without.
I want to know why media shields us from Israeli atrocities? The rest of the world believes that the Israeli treatment of Palestinians is Nazi-like in many respects.
I want to know why it's a damn shame that American politicians are selected, not on their commitment to the best interests of America, but by vowing to put the interests of a foreign nation, Israel, first ?
amen amen amen. it is about religion pure and simple. and most americans are not the brightest bulbs on the planet. take a drive thru the south and midwest than you will understand why they are the red states.
You are quite right with the comment that the continued devotion to Israel is about religion. Most ot the evangellicals believe that according to the Bible, the land of Israel is where Jesus will be returning, it is where many things are falling into place to bring about Armageddon and of course the warm-up act of the Rapture. So it is a biblical imperative that Israel be defended at all costs, so all the "believers" can catch the "Rapture-train" to heaven before the onset of the Tribulations (meant to be enjoyed by all the "non-belie
betz55 -
short answer to why?why?why?:
the systematic disenfranchisement, disempowerment and destruction of the american middle class, necessary for the completion of the fascist, bushco/neocon dream of a "New America" (PNAC)
Oh, how far RIGHT we've become.
That leftist radical Obama's defenders have this to say about his approach to Iran:
"Senator Obama advocates and has repeatedly pushed for crippling Iran's infrastructure through heavy international sanctions, including mandates that companies based in Russia and France divest from their multi-million dollar Iranian operations
Ummmmm....
Given that our CIA overthrew Iran's democratic
Better that Obama would apologize for the CIA's largesse under Ike, than trying to destroy the infrastructure in a country that so many average Iranians depend upon for their health and their livelihood.
Whatever happened to peaceful coexistence?
Maybe Obama doesn't hate the Iranians QUITE as much as the Bushies, but I don't see any model behavior towards other cultures in his actions.
True for ye, joebhed!
I'm among those who remain undecided, but recognize that Obama is far superior to the competition in intellect and character. I have been having a continuous dialogue with someone who is usually a skeptic, but who has been attracted to Obama more and more enthusiastically.
My interlocutor responds to points like the ones you made by defending Obama on the grounds that he is walking a very thin, high wire in trying to become the first president of color; thus, he wisely avoids being drawn into any "camp" that will allow his opponents to discredit him. Naturally, this defense is linked to my friend's conviction that Obama is actually more progressive than he can admit, and that Obama will demonstrate this after he takes office. Or, alternatively, that Obama is flexible or open-minded enough to be "pushed" by progressive (fka "left"ish) constituencies.
It truly comes down to a matter of faith, in my opinion. I remember well that progressives had the same reaction to Bill Clinton, especially because his first campaign took place in the festering shadows of King George I's reign. Unfortunately, the few bones Clinton tossed leftwards were ground into bone meal-- e.g. Lani Guinier, gays in the military, single-payer health care.. The rest was all corporate-friendly Hollow-State initiatives.
Perhaps Obama really IS different. I hope so too. But I don't "faith" so, so to speak.
George W. Bush is a collossal failure, his failures will reverberate around this planet for generations. People not yet born will suffer because of the decisions this man has made, children around the world and in the USA are suffering now because of his refusal to change and lack of compassion. The planet itself is in worse condition now than when his decidership took over and gave the keys to our environment to his buddies in Texas. Our infrastructure is in decline, Our children are not getting a good education, our veterans are being ignored and we have no energy policy.
We are not better off now after seven plus years of this miscreants leadership. We are not more secure, or even as secure as we once were. We are not respected around the world but feared of instead. We all have been demeaned by George W. Bush, he has embarressed us with his shallow partisanship and shortsitedness regarding everything. He has earned his spot in history and we have earned ours by re-electing him.
WELL SAID!
"We are not respected around the world but feared of instead." Sorry, after living outside the US, for many years, I don't think we are "feared", it is more like we are ridiculed and looked at with dislain and disbelief for voting for Bush not once, but twice... It is really sad that all that goodwill, respect, admiration to America, evaporated almost completely in the past seven years of Bush Presidency
Iran?
I thought the implicit reference was to Hamas and Hezbollah.
Hamas stated they would like for Obama to become president then Mc Lame stated Obama said he would talk to Hamas.
And Bush got a reality check today in Saudi Arabia today when the refused the increase of oil and they informed him they were disappointed in his actions when delivering his speech and comments he made....
Sucks to be Bush...sin
As if Hamas doesn't understand reverse psychology and how to play the MSM like a fiddle.
Or that we shouldn't believe OUR OWN National Intelligence Estimate.
Two paragraphs before the referenced comment lists Iran with others in the issue.
"
And that is why the founding charter of Hamas calls for the "elimination" of Israel. And that is why the followers of Hezbollah chant "Death to Israel, Death to America!" That is why Osama bin Laden teaches that "the killing of Jews and Americans is one of the biggest duties." And that is why the president of Iran dreams of returning the Middle East to the Middle Ages and calls for Israel to be wiped off the map.
"
http://tin
It isn't clear that the Pres of Iran actually said what some seem to think
http://tin
Got any references out there? Never sure what to believe these days.
Thanks.
Another aspect of all this: Bush treated the Knesset as a US state legislative chamber, or parliament house in a US territory when he dragged domestic politics into that venue. That's insulting.
You write "Iran, the most contentious player in the Arab-Israeli conflict, is a case in point".
First, Iranians aren't Arabs.
Second, the Palestinians are CLEARLY the most contentious player.
How Bush's outrageous comment becomes a vehicle to bash Iran is beyond me.
Posing as a critic to push an agenda is tiring.
Arab/Persian - Israeli conflict?
Islamic-Israeli Conflict?
Just as an aside... Worth remembering that Iran, under the Shah, once once an ally of Israel against their mutual enemy, Iraq.
Yes, and as another aside, prior to the brutal dictatorship of the Shah, Iran had a democratically elected leader named Mossadegh. Until, of course, British Petroleum asked the CIA for help in toppling that government and installing the Shah because Mossadegh wanted to renegotiate their oil deal on terms more favorable to actual Iranians. Now, how's that for "spreading democracy" in the Middle East?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
