Obama 'Moved' by Iran Images

[Pathfinder]

"White House says president believes regime is being 'held accountable' by protesters, plans to discuss unrest at Tuesday press conference"

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/22/obama-meets-press-critical-juncture-presidency/

Everybody now . . .

"Mañana, mañana, mañana is good enough for me."

Lameoid illegal alien, the whole world has been waiting for a week now, the people of Iran have been waiting. Anyone wanna take bets on what he says tomorrow? Probably something like "Well, gee, both sides are right, we need to be fair and balanced here, blah blah blah"

[alfack]

Meh, the only thing he is really moved by is his reflection in the mirror.

[fightingquaker13]

Actually, how to respond to Iran now is serious question. Lets leave the politics aside and think about this one.Against us you have Ayattolahs who hold power, but learned pragmatism in the war vs Iraq. You also have Abedianajad who has drunk the Kool Aid and believes his own noise, but doesn't hold real power. Their base are ignorant farmers and the poor who get paid off by joining official militias. On our side are the mddle class and the educated and the pre-revolutionary generation who have good memories of America. If they take over, the threat from Iran is gone. The more threatened the nation feels, the more they will close ranks behind the government as the Iranians are a very proud and nationalistic bunch who will remind you Ur and the Persian Empire at the drop of a hat. The question is, how do we encourage whats going on without making it seem like the protestors are just US tools which is what government is trying to brand them as. Say to much, you undercut them, say too little, you abandon them. This is an opportunity to solve the Iranian problem peacefully, if we do it right. Thoughts?
FQ13

[CJS3]

If he'd get more fiber in his diet, he wouldn't have to wait a whole weekend to get "MOVEment".

[tombogan03884]

Actually, how to respond to Iran now is serious question. Lets leave the politics aside and think about this one.Against us you have Ayattolahs who hold power, but learned pragmatism in the war vs Iraq. You also have Abedianajad who has drunk the Kool Aid and believes his own noise, but doesn't hold real power. Their base are ignorant farmers and the poor who get paid off by joining official militias. On our side are the mddle class and the educated and the pre-revolutionary generation who have good memories of America. If they take over, the threat from Iran is gone. The more threatened the nation feels, the more they will close ranks behind the government as the Iranians are a very proud and nationalistic bunch who will remind you Ur and the Persian Empire at the drop of a hat. The question is, how do we encourage whats going on without making it seem like the protestors are just US tools which is what government is trying to brand them as. Say to much, you undercut them, say too little, you abandon them. This is an opportunity to solve the Iranian problem peacefully, if we do it right. Thoughts?
FQ13

 You can't leave politics aside in questions of foreign policy, the usurping bastard ran on a platform of "I'm going to use gutless failed methods in regards to Iran.
What the Ayatollahs have learned is that Americas liberals are just as eager to tear the country down as they are and if they don't totally blow it they will have willing allies in Americas media outlets.
The only proper response for a MAN with PRINCIPLES would be large shipments of small arms and ammunition. Not only would it remove the problem of Irans Nukes and rockets it would eliminate all support for Hezbollah, and the Iraqi Shiites forcing them to seek peace, it would also remove the majority of the support being given to the Taliban in Afghanistan, a later quiet word with Pakistan would be enough to remove the rest.
In short, an active hardline response to Iran now would go a long way to bring Peace to the entire Arab world.
The usurping socialist bastard will not do that, he will beg, "Now guys, can't we just get along ?"   

[Sponsor]

[fightingquaker13]

You can't leave politics aside in questions of foreign policy, the usurping bastard ran on a platform of "I'm going to use gutless failed methods in regards to Iran.
What the Ayatollahs have learned is that Americas liberals are just as eager to tear the country down as they are and if they don't totally blow it they will have willing allies in Americas media outlets.
The only proper response for a MAN with PRINCIPLES would be large shipments of small arms and ammunition. Not only would it remove the problem of Irans Nukes and rockets it would eliminate all support for Hezbollah, and the Iraqi Shiites forcing them to seek peace, it would also remove the majority of the support being given to the Taliban in Afghanistan, a later quiet word with Pakistan would be enough to remove the rest.
In short, an active hardline response to Iran now would go a long way to bring Peace to the entire Arab world.
The usurping socialist bastard will not do that, he will beg, "Now guys, can't we just get along ?"   

I pretty much agree with the shippments of small arms thing, its just that its not exactly something you can do publically or you discredit the opposition before you start. The thing is, we can take on (or just let the Israelis do it) Iran openly, but that alienates our Iranian sympathisers because no matter how much they may hate the regime if foreigners start bombing they'll rally around the flag. IF this could be a genuine indigenous revolt we win. No more nukes and a friendly, or at least neutral Iran. This needs to be done delicately, which is why I put the question out there. Not to defend or attack BO, but to get people's insight as to how to approach this opportunity tactically. Think of it as a war game.
FQ13

[Texas_Bryan]

A liberal shipping small arms to revolutionaries didn't work out to well last time at Piggy Bays.  Don't trust a liberal to help you fight, cause unless its for their own power, they ain't got no fight in them.

[tombogan03884]

FQ posted, "The thing is, we can take on (or just let the Israelis do it) Iran openly, but that alienates our Iranian sympathisers "

That isn't going to happen because the only "Iranian sympathizers" are liberal Americans and the media. Everybody else in the world has hated the Persians for about 4,000 years, first for being Persians, later for being Shiites.

FQ also posted "pretty much agree with the shippments of small arms thing, its just that its not exactly something you can do publically or you discredit the opposition before you start."

That's crap Exactly the same action did not discredit the Solidarity Trade Union in Poland, and it did not discredit the anti Soviet resistance in Afghanistan.

[fightingquaker13]

FQ posted, "The thing is, we can take on (or just let the Israelis do it) Iran openly, but that alienates our Iranian sympathisers "

That isn't going to happen because the only "Iranian sympathizers" are liberal Americans and the media. Everybody else in the world has hated the Persians for about 4,000 years, first for being Persians, later for being Shiites.

FQ also posted "pretty much agree with the shippments of small arms thing, its just that its not exactly something you can do publically or you discredit the opposition before you start."

That's crap Exactly the same action did not discredit the Solidarity Trade Union in Poland, and it did not discredit the anti Soviet resistance in Afghanistan.

Two corrections.
By Iranian sympathisers, I meant those Iranians who sympathize with us. Not the reverse.
Secondly, we could support Solidarity because the majority of Poles liked us, and it didn't hurt Solidarity to make our support open. In Iran, where  its only about a third of the country that does, its more delicate. I wouln't mind screaming that we support them from the roof tops. Question is, is it effective? This the kind of debate I was hoping to provoke.
FQ13

[alfack]

How we respond is important. But someone already crossed that bridge. "Go ahead, build your nuclear power plants." Sound familiar?

Now it is their problem. It is not our imperitive to be meddling in their internal affairs based on propaganda, which is all we have to go by. Nobody here knows if the election results were valid or not. Without knowing this, any argument you come up with is moot. Just because people are protesting in the streets doesn't mean they are on the right side. Both candidates were chosen by the mullahs, like the media chose both of our candidates. Neither one was a good choice to begin with, just chumps to perpetuate the corruption.

The only things we need to worry about in Iran are the proliferation on nuclear weapons (now inevitible) and if they attack our allies (Israel).

And the half-black Alfred E. Newman "what me worry" can go back to stroking his own ego and making up his own laws as he goes along on his merry path to the destruction of our own society. Seriously, we have more important things to worry about.