Tuesday Morning Open Thread
9 hours ago
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Friday, October 10, 2008
General Petraeus Suggests Talking to Our Enemies
Do you ever get the sense that when McCain talks about General Petraeus, it sounds an awful lot like a love-struck high-schooler talking about his latest crush?
Well, maybe McCain won't like his (heart) crush Petraeus after hearing that he basically endorsed Obama's call for America to talk to its enemies:
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
McCain Camp Issues Hugely Dishonest Iran Ad
I am livid over McCain's new ad that falsely claims that Obama doesn't think that Iran poses a serious threat to the United States. It is one thing to attack Obama over his policy positions, it is quite another to put out a completely bald-faced LIE.
Here is Jake Tapper from ABC News, saying that the ad "crosses a new line into dishonesty":
Today's new McCain ad -- "Tiny," which you can watch HERE -- crosses a new line into dishonesty...
The script reads; "Iran. Radical Islamic government. Known sponsors of terrorism. Developing nuclear capabilities to 'generate power' but threatening to eliminate Israel.
"Obama says Iran is a 'tiny' country, 'doesn't pose a serious threat,'" the ad continues. "Terrorism, destroying Israel, those aren't 'serious threats'? Obama -- dangerously unprepared to be president."
This is a dishonest representation of Obama's words.
...Watch [Obama's actual words] HERE.
That is not even close to Obama saying Iran is a "tiny" country that "doesn't pose a serious threat."
Not even close.
Here is part of the Obama response:
What McCain Won't Tell You About Iran: The McCain campaign's latest false attack ad raises the issue of Iran. What Senator McCain doesn't want you to know is that many of his top advisors lobbied for companies doing business with Iran or otherwise have a vested interest in Iran. At the same time, and despite all his bluster to the contrary, John McCain opposed closing a loophole that allowed foreign subsidiaries of American corporations to do business with Iran and refuses to support a bipartisan bill written by Barack Obama that would direct divestment from Iran.
Click here to see the rest of the response.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Reason to Be Scared of McCain: Religious Rhetoric
This is a truly alarming McCain statement, especially in the context of geopolitical diplomacy in the Muslim world and what appears to be an alarming trend:
On a frozen winter evening at a Town Hall meeting in a school in the Manchester, N.H., suburbs, John McCain expressed surprise and irritation with an intelligence report downplaying the threat of Iran's nuclear program... At the end of a long list of reasons to be suspicious of the Iranians, McCain declared: "And they sure don't share our Judeo-Christian values."
This is absolutely inflammatory and indefensible. McCain may think that he is simply scoring some cheap points with religious-values voters but the subtext to what he's saying is disturbing.
Remember how even President Bush took great pains after 9/11 to stress that a war against terrorism didn't equate to a war against Islam? By painting our tensions with Iran as tensions with a country that doesn't "share our Judeo-Christian values", he is starkly calling out to the people of Iran and other Muslim countries that he sees this as, at least partially, a struggle of religions and the values underpinning them. This is scary, undiplomatic and unworthy of a candidate for the office of President of the United States.
Monday, August 18, 2008
Foreign Policy Experts Favor Iraq Withdrawal
These are some pretty striking numbers from a recent survey of top conservative and liberal foreign policy experts by the Center for American Progress and Foreign Policy. Not surprisingly, the results are strongly in line with Obama's foreign policy positions and far afield of John McCain/President Bush. But, then, as McCain would likely say, why should we listen to EXPERTS?
– 80 percent say that the U.S. has focused too much on the war in Iraq and not enough on Afghanistan.
– 69 percent recommend that the majority of U.S. forces in Iraq be redeployed in the next 18 months, up one percent from last year.
– Zero percent say Iraq is most likely to become the next al Qaeda stronghold; 51 percent say Pakistan will be.
– 81 percent say U.S. policy towards Iran has negatively impacted national security.
Read the whole survey
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Obama Talks Tough on Iran
Iran tested nine medium range ballistic missiles today. Obama wisely got right out in front of the news and talked about the need for strong diplomacy and negotiations in below video. I liked his reference to us "farming out our diplomacy to the Europeans".
McCain: Cigarettes Can Kill Iranians For Us
McCain stepped in it again when trying a bit of humor:
Responding to a question about a survey that shows increased exports to Iran, mainly from cigarettes, McCain said, "Maybe that's a way of killing them."
I know this was a joke but it's in poor taste and really shines a light on how McCain views our foreign policy.
In his mind, you can see him thinking that there aren't "people" in Iran (you know, like the millions of civilians who would die, either of lung cancer or as a result of an American/Israeli invasion), there are only "enemies" there, bent on subverting American freedom and prosperity.
Feh.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
McCain Likeliest to Attack Iran
Former interim UN Ambassador (never confirmed) John Bolton says that he's backing John McCain because "he would handle the Iranian nuclear program in a “stronger” way than the Bush administration."
In light of some comments that Bolton made earlier in the interview, I am really scared that we're about to open up another war. Well, scared at least of the prospect of a McCain presidency, which ultimately isn't all that likely. Still enough to give you heartburn though:
Adopting Bill Kristol’s argument, Bolton suggested that an attack on Iran depends on who Americans elect as the next President: "I think if they [Israel] are to do anything, the most likely period is after our elections and before the inauguration of the next President. I don’t think they will do anything before our election because they don’t want to affect it. And they’d have to make a judgment whether to go during the remainder of President Bush’s term in office or wait for his successor."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
