Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Jedi Knight, Jun 17, 2009.
Good for McCain. In a democracy we should have a healthy give and take on policy issues. I would ask John if he would break from our closest allies, notably the UK, on this question.
That is why we didn't put McCain in office. He would have us in a third war by now. Perhaps he would have suspended his presidency to go save Iran.
The worse thing America can do is endorse either side of this conflict. The US supporting either side in Iran would be like the Communist supporting someone's cause in this country. The other side would say, "see, I told you so."
Having America on your side in Iranian civil conflict is not a good thing... Remember, they burn our flags in the streets?
This is an internal struggle and just as we wouldn't want Iran getting in our business it would be wrong for us to get in theirs.
You are incorrect as usual. As I recall reagan backed the overthrow of the Communist regime in Poland. This act may well have started the downfall of the Soviet Union.
"Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran." - Senator John McCain
I keep seeing the right making this analogy but they fail to realize this is like calling an apple and orange fruit without acknowledging their differences.
What we have in Iran is a religious revolution intertwined with a desire for representative change which is very different from the secular revolution's Regan and others dealt with. The religion/Islamic family situation adds a giant twist to this. American involvelemt is what the Iranian government wants. We'd be playing right into their hands if Obama chose sides or made any demands other than for human rights.
The blame America is currently getting for the uprising is bad enough, what we don't want to do is provide the proof. You can see this because they have now added the Brits and used the word "West". We have yet to give them a solid card to play at this time which is driving the government crazy. If we give them evidence to say America is behind this uprising, they are them free to slaughter all the protesters and say they were American sympathizers and enemies of Islam. They would say it is not an Iranian uprising, it is America stirring up Iranians.
Right now they are hesitant to put full force against the protesters because of the opposition from the rest of the Muslim world. If they can make this America they are free to go full force.
I know you guys believe in strong arm diplomacy but this is what many of us hated about Bush and one reason we didn't want McCain near the oval office. McCain has made it clear he would have been more involved in this fight which is the worse thing we can do. Our involvement will turn this from an Iranian uprising to Iran or Muslim community against the US.
You also fail to give Obama credit for his speech in Cairo which led to these events. There are people in Iran that clearly want to accept our open hand as opposed to our clinched fist. That had a lot to do with what you see happening. I believe Obama is handling this situation about as good as it could be handled and it is probably best if us arm chair quarterbacks acknowledge that WE can be wrong, Obama can't afford to be wrong.
I haven't heard one person from Iran asking where is the US...
That guy's foreign policy was scary when it came to handling the Muslim community. This was a good example.
I am glad to finally have a leader who realizes all Muslims are not bad or out to harm the US. I truly believe if America will act civil toward them the majority will act civil toward us. Yes, there will still be extremist and if we can get them all in one place I will agree with McCain, let's bomb them.
If we can get the 80% who are civil to be civil with us, they will help us police the extremist from their ranks. It is happening right now in Pakistan and it can happen in the rest of the Muslim world.