Iran's Next.

[mal]

Obama Faces Iran Heckler (VIDEO)

 

[mal]

"Use your leadership - no war on Iran!" she said, according to ABC News' Jake Tapper and several other reporters.

Obama responded, "Nobody's announced a war, young lady, but we appreciate your sentiment. You're jumping the gun a little bit there."

---

Interesting.



peace...

 

[waltky]

Let not him who puts on his armor boast as he who takes it off...

Obama says he's not bluffing on Iran nukes
Sat March 3, 2012 : "This is a dangerous time, actually," says Middle East analyst; The president is set to meet with Netanyahu; "It's unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon," Obama says; The risk of an Iranian weapon falling into terrorist hands is "profound," he says

President Barack Obama says he isn't bluffing when he says Iran shouldn't have a nuclear weapon, but he cautions against an Israeli strike against the Islamic republic. "At a time when there is not a lot of sympathy for Iran and its only real ally, (Syria) is on the ropes, do we want a distraction in which suddenly Iran can portray itself as a victim?" he said this week in an interview with the Atlantic. Obama, who is to meet Monday with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said a permanent solution is necessary. "The only way historically that a country has ultimately decided not to get nuclear weapons without constant military intervention has been when they themselves take (nuclear weapons) off the table," Obama said. "That's what happened in Libya, that's what happened in South Africa."

Obama said Iran and Israel understand that he isn't bluffing about his opposition to an Iranian nuclear weapon. "I think that the Israeli government recognizes that, as president of the United States, I don't bluff," he said. "I also don't, as a matter of sound policy, go around advertising exactly what our intentions are. But I think both the Iranian and the Israeli governments recognize that, when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say. " Iranian officials have insisted their nuclear program is intended solely for peaceful purposes. But their statements have not persuaded Washington or Israel. Obama said he's not going to take "any option" off the table and will pressure Iran until it "takes a different course." He stressed the importance of political, diplomatic and economic sanctions against Iran.

He said the West has a "sanctions architecture that is far more effective than anybody anticipated" and tough sanctions "put a world of hurt on them." He also said that a transition to "a peaceful and stable and representative Syrian government" from the pro-Iran Bashar al-Assad regime would be "a profound loss for Iran." "Preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon isn't just in the interest of Israel, it is profoundly in the security interests of the United States," he said. Obama said that Iran's gain of a nuclear weapons would "run completely contrary to my policies of nonproliferation." "The risks of an Iranian nuclear weapon falling into the hands of terrorist organizations are profound. It is almost certain that other players in the region would feel it necessary to get their own nuclear weapons," Obama said.

More Obama says he's not bluffing on Iran nukes - CNN.com

See also:

Iran debate: If Obama doesn't bluff, he's not a good poker player
March 2, 2012 - President Obama's interview with The Atlantic can be seen as a preemptive strike to control the nuclear Iran narrative ahead of Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu's visit next week.

As every poker player knows, the key to making a bluff work is to convince your opponent you're not bluffing (hat tip to Doug Saunders). And that's why President Obama's statement that "I don't bluff" in regards to his willingness to use force to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon in an interview with The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg released today is so apt. The truth value of the statement is in fact, unknowable. If at some point the US intelligence establishment determines Iran is on the brink of obtaining a nuclear weapon (the current US consensus is there's no ongoing weapons-related nuclear work), and Obama is president, the strong implication of his comment is that the US would go to war. But if that day comes, there will be a host of other factors to consider, from domestic politics, to surging oil prices, to the potential strains on US alliances.

A cost-benefit calculation will be made. And yes, Obama or any other president will consider containment as an option, depending on if and when the day comes. Obama insisted to Goldberg that containment as a policy is off the table "because you're talking about the most volatile region in the world. It will not be tolerable to a number of states in that region for Iran to have a nuclear weapon and them not to have a nuclear weapon. Iran is known to sponsor terrorist organizations, so the threat of proliferation becomes that much more severe." Those are real concerns. And it makes sense to insist that there's a red line for the Iranians as Obama and European allies continue to use sanctions and negotiation to bring Iran's nuclear program under stronger outside oversight. But that's just being a good poker player. There is always some ambiguity. Or as Obama told Goldberg: "I think that the Israeli government recognizes that, as president of the United States, I don't bluff. I also don't, as a matter of sound policy, go around advertising exactly what our intentions are."

Poker metaphors have also been in full flow about the jockeying between Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who's due in Washington over the weekend for the annual meeting of AIPAC, a pro-Israel lobbying group, and a state visit with the president. Though Obama may be leader of a superpower and Netanyahu the leader of a small Middle Eastern country, the Israeli premier casts a long shadow on US politics. He's been seeking to pry an iron-clad promise from Obama that the US will in fact attack Iran if it nears a nuclear weapon, and the AIPAC conference is expected to largely focus on the Islamic Republic, which Netanyahu and many Israelis view as the biggest threat to their security.

MORE

 

[TruthSeeker56]

Iran's next..............on Obama's official Presidential Apology List.

 

[BreezeWood]

The question mark with Iran is how large their retaliation will be after the Israelie bombing ...

 

[MolochSolomon]

Iran wouldn't use a nuke on america, so who cares?

 

[Late2TheParty]

I've been hearing the Iranian war drums for the last decade.

And most of it is coming from our side.

Read: The Boy Who Cried Wolf!

Let's not get dragged into another needless war.

 

[waltky]

Cannucks say Israel has right to defend itself against Iran...

Canada says Israel has right to defend itself against Iran
Monday 5th March, 2012 - While on his way to Washington Benjamin Netanyahu stopped in Ottawa to confer with his patriot in arms, Stephen Harper.

Following their morning meetings, of which we know little, the two held a very brief 'press conference' that simply highlighted the double standards under which the two operate, especially Netanyahu. Harper began with a brief statement in French and English. The French comments included advice directed towards Assad in Syria, that he should "cesse tue leur proper citoyens" - he should stop killing his own citizens. He ended his French statements hoping for a solution for Israel that would be "juste et durable" - just and durable. When he switched to English, he repeated the standard pro-Israeli fare. He indicated they had discussed "security issues of global concern" in what "are especially challenging times." He repeated the mantra to "pressure the Iranian regime to abandon its nuclear program," and his familiar line for Israel and its "right to exist as a Jewish state in peace and security."

Fairly bland stuff from Canada's Dear Leader, yet the double standards remain. Certainly if Assad is to stop killing his own citizens, then perhaps Israel should stop killing its own citizens. Not an exact analogy as Palestinians are denied citizenship in the occupied territories, and those in Green Line Israel, while citizens, have many laws and actions that deny them equality and democracy. With Harper's stated concern and fear of "Islamicism", stemming from his Christian dominionist/fundamentalist perspective, it is only natural for him to think these are "especially challenging times," with the "need to stop Iran's nuclear program." No one ever seems to think to ask Israel to abandon its nuclear program, through which it has developed a clear military dominance in the region, and has done so outside the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty that Iran accepts.

Everyone in the west seems to grant Israel a right to exist. Technically, no country has the "right" to exist as all are founded on decades and centuries of conquest, wars, civil violence, and the subsequent negotiations. However, granted that, let us also grant the Palestinians the right to exist in their own sovereign territory, free from Israeli occupation and military rule, and within boundaries that are contiguous and defensible. Netanyahu made a short comment indicating that Canada and Israel are "cooperating in unprecedented ways," referring to those unknown discussions that assuredly contained comments about effective internal security measures and how to best control the thoughts and images for the Canadian public and its knowledge of Israel. Speculation, but premised on known qualities of the two.

Israel's prime minister also commented on the "slaughter taking place in Syria" an event that "all decent nations should speak out against." He further discussed the "turbulence" in the region coming from the "relentless pursuit of nuclear weapons." More double standards, the slaughter in Syria can fairly obviously be compared to the slaughter in Gaza, in Lebanon, in the occupied territories. The latter of course is a very slow motion slaughter, one house at a time, one child at a time, over the course of decades. Certainly there is turbulence in the region, but once again, the Israeli liaison with the U.S. is the centre of most of that turbulence, their oppression of the indigenous peoples, and their support and sustenance of the repressive non-democratic monarchies and oligarchies that represent the Arab world in general.

MORE

See also:

Obama seeks to calm Israeli fears over nuclear Iran
Monday 5 Mar 2012 - US President Barack Obama criticizes "loose talk of war" as he pleaded for patience in ending the nuclear standoff with Iran, arguing that sustained international pressure can work

US President Barack Obama and Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu go into key talks on the Iranian nuclear stand-off on Monday, with each publicly seeking to stake out some common ground. While Obama in an address to the powerful pro-Israel lobby on Sunday criticized "loose talk of war" he also gave a strong nod to Israel's refusal to contemplate a nuclear-armed Iran. "No Israeli government can tolerate a nuclear weapon in the hands of a regime that denies the Holocaust, threatens to wipe Israel off the map, and sponsors terrorist groups committed to Israel's destruction," he said, to applause from members of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

Obama also acknowledged "Israel's sovereign right to make its own decisions about what is required to meet its security needs," drawing a swift vote of thanks from Netanyahu. "I appreciated the fact that he said that Israel must be able to defend itself, by itself, against any threat," he told reporters in Ottawa on Sunday, during a weekend stopover in Canada on his way to Washington. "I very much appreciated the fact that President Obama reiterated his position that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons and that all options are on the table," Netanyahu added.

The Israeli premier arrived in the US capital late on Sunday evening and will meet Obama in the White House on Monday morning, addressing AIPAC himself later in the day. While Obama does not rule out the use of US military force against the Islamic republic as a last resort if diplomatic and economic pressure fails, Israel fears that the time until Iran reaches a stage where it is too late to take out its nuclear facilities is running out. Israeli officials reserve the right for their country to stage its own attack on Iran if they see no alternative, although Israeli analysts say a strong assurance of US readiness to act would encourage restraint, at least in the short-term.

Obama on Sunday sought to calm the fears of Israel and its supporters. "I have a policy to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon," he said. "As I've made clear time and again during the course of my presidency, I will not hesitate to use force when it is necessary to defend the United States and its interests." Analysts believe that Netanyahu will be seeking more precise guarantees in his private talks with Obama, while the president will want to retain room to maneuver. "Obama doesn't want to wake up one morning and to hear that Israeli attack planes are hovering over Iran," top-selling Israeli daily Yediot Aharonot wrote on Sunday. "He... will explain that if the day arrives and there is no longer any choice, he will prefer to send the US army to fight against Iran over the options of allowing the Iranians to have nuclear weapons."

MORE

 

[mal]

So I'm Listening to the News on the Radio this AM and it sounds just like the Lead-up to Iraq with Iran...

"UN Inspectors"...

All the same old lines.

How long?

And then there's McCain talking about Vietnaming Syria...

WTF?

Is he off his Meds?



peace...

 

[HUGGY]

So I'm Listening to the News on the Radio this AM and it sounds just like the Lead-up to Iraq with Iran...

"UN Inspectors"...

All the same old lines.

How long?

And then there's McCain talking about Vietnaming Syria...

WTF?

Is he off his Meds?



peace...

I hope you have better luck with this three year old thread than the last threee year old thread....srsly........

 

[mal]

So I'm Listening to the News on the Radio this AM and it sounds just like the Lead-up to Iraq with Iran...

"UN Inspectors"...

All the same old lines.

How long?

And then there's McCain talking about Vietnaming Syria...

WTF?

Is he off his Meds?



peace...

I hope you have better luck with this three year old thread than the last threee year old thread....srsly........

This Thread isn't even 3 months old, HUGGY!...



peace...

 

[HUGGY]

So I'm Listening to the News on the Radio this AM and it sounds just like the Lead-up to Iraq with Iran...

"UN Inspectors"...

All the same old lines.

How long?

And then there's McCain talking about Vietnaming Syria...

WTF?

Is he off his Meds?



peace...

I hope you have better luck with this three year old thread than the last threee year old thread....srsly........

This Thread isn't even 3 months old, HUGGY!...



peace...

Three years...three months... What evaaaahhhh..........

I just wish you success after that bastich killed off the last one for no reason at all...

 

[zeke]

War with Iran?

When Congress passes a war resolution and when they decide who's taxes are going up to pay for this war.

Then they can talk about going to war.

If Obama takes us to war with no declaration of war and no way to pay for it, impeach him.

 

[Avatar4321]

Iran wouldn't use a nuke on america, so who cares?

I think if Iran was going to use a Nuke, it would be on America. After all, what better target for nuclear annihilation then the Great Satan?

 

[Avatar4321]

BTW I thought the next target was supposedly Syria.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The question mark with Iran is how large their retaliation will be after the Israelie bombing ...

Once you're old-enough to vote, you'll better-understand.....

PRE-ELECTION BULLSHIT!!!
(Not intended for the weak-of-heart or political-neophytes.

)​

 

[GoneBezerk]

Dumbfuck, Iran has promised to destroy the big satan and little satan.

Try to figure out who is who, asswipe.

Iran wouldn't use a nuke on america, so who cares?

 

[mal]

War with Iran?

When Congress passes a war resolution and when they decide who's taxes are going up to pay for this war.

Then they can talk about going to war.

If Obama takes us to war with no declaration of war and no way to pay for it, impeach him.

A Declaration of War is not a Requirement for any and all Military uses... But Authorization from Congress regarding the use of the Military is.



peace...

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Dumbfuck, Iran has promised to destroy the big satan and little satan.

Try to figure out who is who, asswipe.

THERE ya' go!!

Try, again.

Stupid Teabaggers​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Dumbfuck, Iran has promised to destroy the big satan and little satan.

Try to figure out who is who, asswipe.

Here's some
reading-material, for you.......

.....while you're preppin' for bed, tonite.
​