Obama: I'm Not Bluffing About Iran

[Madeline]

I don't go with that. China would have some serious concerns as would Russia. I think it is because of those two countries that America is loath to make the first move. However, secretly I believe America would prepare itself to jump in to aid Israel if she started. Obama may lay on his back and P up his belly like a puppy when it goes off, but the alternatives are too dire to contemplate, if he does nothing and nukes are smuggled onto American soil.

Agreed about China and Russia, but how do we know that nuclear weapons haven't already come across very porous borders?

[farmboy]

Well Madeline you don't and that is the worry. There are container ships arriving on a daily basis which can carry seemingly harmless items, which customs officer would actually test the gas in a refrigeration system for example? There are mini subs shuttling back and forth from south America undetected, any one of these could be carrying a deadly weapon.
This situation is very similar to the cold war with Russia and it was only the fact that America had an arsenal in Europe aimed at its juglar that kept the peace untill Russia collapsed under its own momentum.
The only secure way to deal with Iran is to completely break it financially, untill women and children are dying in the streets of starvation and disease. It has to be reduced to a lower than 3rd world country where a million Rials are worth less than a dollar. The centrifuges have to go and we must all do what is neccessary to stop Iran becoming a nuclear power. There will be silly leftists protesting for human rights, but this issue is too threatening to our right to life. To make an ommelet you need to break a few eggs.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Ne...8#.T1b3xXn8-vU

Several members of the U.S. Congress are working on a new bill that would require banks in Asia and the European Union, that have at least one account in the U.S., to report all their activities in Iran.

The move is designed to increase the economic isolation of Iran in the wake of its controversial nuclear program.

[dayag]

I know many of you think Obama is bluffing, but I don't think so. This wasn't just a once off the cuff statement. They are making it clear to leaders around the world what is going to happen should the Iranians not back down. That would set up the U.S. to lose all credibility worldwide should it merely be a bluff. I really don't think they would risk that. That would destroy the U.S.'s ability to have an effective foreign policy during Obama's second term.

U.S. President Barack Obama said on Sunday there was still time to resolve the Iranian nuclear standoff through diplomacy, but that the window for such a solution was closing.

Obama reiterated his position on the Iran nuclear issue after talks with Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan on the eve of a nuclear security summit in Seoul.

"I believe there is a window of time to solve this diplomatically, but that window is closing," Obama told reporters.

Obama has pressed Israel to hold off on any attack on Iran's nuclear sites to give sanctions and diplomacy time to work, but has said military action remains an option if all else fails...

With regard to Iran, the U.S. president made similar remarks in a joint press conference British Prime Minister David Cameron a week and a half ago, when he warned window for a diplomatic solution was "shrinking".

In those remarks, he encouraged Tehran to seize the opportunity of talks with world leaders to avert "even worse consequences."

During that press conference, Obama said there was still "time and space" for a diplomatic solution, in lieu of a military strike to set back Iran's progress toward a possible bomb, but said "the window for diplomacy is shrinking."

Earlier that day, the Kommersant daily quoted Russian diplomats as saying that the United States asked Russia to deliver an ultimatum to Iran, warning the Islamic Republic that it has one last chance for talks before a military strike.

According to the Russian newspaper, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked her Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov in New York on Monday to tell Tehran that it has one last chance to solve the conflict peacefully by making progress in the talks with the P5+1 group - United States, Britain, France, Russia, China, and Germany. Otherwise, an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities will occur within months, the diplomats said.

source: http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-e...osing-1.420588

[Kachah]

They really don't get it - Iran cannot and will not back down. And by saying "Iran" I mean the ruling clique - Ahmadimaniac and his ilk. The rules in that world are such that they can't be perceived as "weak" - immediately after the decision to "back down" they will be consumed by the tribe/gang who are their current competitors for the power in the country.
In the same way Hamas will not recognize Israel or openly support any peace accord with Israel. They got to rule Gaza precisely because they are vicious "fighters" who will not compromise their "cause" by recognizing and negotiating with the enemy - that's the "high moral ground" in the eyes of the utterly confused and brainwashed population. Once they show "weakness" - they will be destroyed (physically as well as politically) by the rival gang - so they won't.
Obama is not bluffing, but he is wasting time or rather is buying Iranians time to make the task of destroying their nuclear installations as hard as possible. Iran hopes that by the time Obama exhausts all "peaceful" options the installations will be fortified beyong acceptable risk level for the States and/or Israel when finally they decide to strike. The Russians would love dearly to see Iran being able to inflict severe casualties on America or Israel so giving Iran time to build strength is their strategy too.

[Pleepleus]

Two points. First, Ahmadinejad isn't part of the ruling clique of Iran. Ayatollah Khamenei holds all the real power and is on the outs with Mahmoud.

http://gulfnews.com/news/region/iran...power-1.989313

Two, the sanctions are hurting Iran and they even defaulted recently on payment for rice from India. Their country's economy is being crippled and if they don't back down, their own people will destroy them.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-e...india-1.411664

[Madeline]

Two points. First, Ahmadinejad isn't part of the ruling clique of Iran. Ayatollah Khamenei holds all the real power and is on the outs with Mahmoud.

http://gulfnews.com/news/region/iran...power-1.989313

Two, the sanctions are hurting Iran and they even defaulted recently on payment for rice from India. Their country's economy is being crippled and if they don't back down, their own people will destroy them.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-e...india-1.411664

So, your answer would be?
Give in?
I might misread you, but it surely sounds like it. Please explain.

[Kachah]

Two points. First, Ahmadinejad isn't part of the ruling clique of Iran. Ayatollah Khamenei holds all the real power and is on the outs with Mahmoud.

So what are you saying? Ahmadinejad is a democratic popular choice? Of course he is part of a clique. There might be forces bigger than him and he might have temporary (or terminal) struggle with them, every gang always experiences that. My point is - he backs down and he is dead meat. That's the way the medieval autocracies roll.

Two, the sanctions are hurting Iran and they even defaulted recently on payment for rice from India. Their country's economy is being crippled and if they don't back down, their own people will destroy them.

Ridiculous conclusion. This will become possible not when the people are impoverished and despearte (which they are probably now or close) but when their KGB (or islamic guards or whatever) becomes impoverished and despearte - and good luck waiting passively for this moment to come. We still have good memory of the well thought most efficient strategy of sanctions against Saddam.
We never learn.

[Pleepleus]

So, your answer would be?
Give in?
I might misread you, but it surely sounds like it. Please explain.

Madeline,
Where did I say give in? That is not my position at all.
I think the sanctions are going to work and that either the Iranian government will back down or their own people will destroy them as their economy goes down the tubes.
Should the government not back down from pursuing nuclear weapons, I think that NATO and/or Israel should destroy their nuclear, rocket, air force, and naval facilities.

[Pleepleus]

So what are you saying? Ahmadinejad is a democratic popular choice? Of course he is part of a clique. There might be forces bigger than him and he might have temporary (or terminal) struggle with them, every gang always experiences that. My point is - he backs down and he is dead meat. That's the way the medieval autocracies roll.

I thought I was pretty clear that what I was saying that Ayatollah Khamenei is the real ruler of Iran and that President Ahmadinejad has little to no power. Mahmoud got his presidency via a rigged election, but has since fallen out of favor with the real ruler of Iran. He is not part of the ruling clique. He may have his own clique, but it is not "the ruling clique".

Ridiculous conclusion. This will become possible not when the people are impoverished and despearte (which they are probably now or close) but when their KGB (or islamic guards or whatever) becomes impoverished and despearte - and good luck waiting passively for this moment to come. We still have good memory of the well thought most efficient strategy of sanctions against Saddam.
We never learn.

I disagree with your conclusion. Doesn't matter though, if the Iranians don't take this last chance to back down their nuclear program will be destroyed militarily.

[Kachah]

I thought I was pretty clear that what I was saying that Ayatollah Khamenei is the real ruler of Iran and that President Ahmadinejad has little to no power. Mahmoud got his presidency via a rigged election, but has since fallen out of favor with the real ruler of Iran. He is not part of the ruling clique. He may have his own clique, but it is not "the ruling clique".

I disagree with your conclusion. Doesn't matter though, if the Iranians don't take this last chance to back down their nuclear program will be destroyed militarily.

This is testament to the total incomprehension in the West of how the dictatorial society works.
Why is this chance "last" by the way? By which timeline? Why can't we keep tightenning the "sanctions" for - how many years with Iraq? - another decade?
The "Iranian people" do not exist and certainly do not function in the way the American or the Dutch people exist and function. They are not going to decide on any matters, not that they are expected to. That's the result of them being oppressed. Sure, there are real democrats and very educated broad thinkers among them but they do not hold any sizable sway and mostly viewed as "nutty professors" at best and traitors at worst inside their society. Remember, the biggest political, economical and social aspiration of an average dirt-poor barely literate Gazan is "Death to Israel", not education for his kids or better living conditions. Same in Iran.
Ahmadinejad enjoys all the benefits of being a ruler of a large and generally not wealthy country, Whether he is subservient to even higher authority or in contradiction to it is not important in this context. In fact it's even more obvious that he is not giving up giving whatever Big Brother - Ayatollah - clear reason to blame him for "weakness" and dispose of him. Perhaps he has been kept as a figurehead all this time - I don't know, it's not important.
Important is that there is always invisible tribal power struggle behind the scenes and the loser loses it all. He has got no way out. So in theory the only "peaceful" resolution might be achieved if he is removed by this higher authority, supreme leader guy, and his replacement given more flexibility - at least not to proclaim Iran's determination to develop nuclear energy. I find this scenario unlikely (but not entirely impossible). So war it will be.

[Kachah]

.. the Iranian government will back down or their own people will destroy them as their economy goes down the tubes..

Care to explain why the North Korean people do not destroy their governemnt - the N Korean "economy" hit rock bottom long time ago? What about the Cuban people - their economy surely fits your "down the tubes" assessment? I can (and anybody else of course) draw a couple of dozen more exapmples easily.

[Pleepleus]

This is testament to the total incomprehension in the West of how the dictatorial society works.
Why is this chance "last" by the way? By which timeline? Why can't we keep tightenning the "sanctions" for - how many years with Iraq? - another decade?
The "Iranian people" do not exist and certainly do not function in the way the American or the Dutch people exist and function. They are not going to decide on any matters, not that they are expected to. That's the result of them being oppressed. Sure, there are real democrats and very educated broad thinkers among them but they do not hold any sizable sway and mostly viewed as "nutty professors" at best and traitors at worst inside their society. Remember, the biggest political, economical and social aspiration of an average dirt-poor barely literate Gazan is "Death to Israel", not education for his kids or better living conditions. Same in Iran.
Ahmadinejad enjoys all the benefits of being a ruler of a large and generally not wealthy country, Whether he is subservient to even higher authority or in contradiction to it is not important in this context. In fact it's even more obvious that he is not giving up giving whatever Big Brother - Ayatollah - clear reason to blame him for "weakness" and dispose of him. Perhaps he has been kept as a figurehead all this time - I don't know, it's not important.
Important is that there is always invisible tribal power struggle behind the scenes and the loser loses it all. He has got no way out. So in theory the only "peaceful" resolution might be achieved if he is removed by this higher authority, supreme leader guy, and his replacement given more flexibility - at least not to proclaim Iran's determination to develop nuclear energy. I find this scenario unlikely (but not entirely impossible). So war it will be.

This is the Iranian government's last chance because the President of the United States said so. I firmly believe that President Obama will act decisively to destroy their nuclear capabilities if they do not back down soon.

And the timeline is not years nor decades:

According to the Russian newspaper, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked her Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov in New York on Monday to tell Tehran that it has one last chance to solve the conflict peacefully by making progress in the talks with the P5+1 group - United States, Britain, France, Russia, China, and Germany. Otherwise, an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities will occur within months, the diplomats said.

The Iranian people are not all uneducated mindless peasants like you make them out to be. The Iranian people overthrew the Shah and they can overthrow the Ayatollah. Things are going from bad to worse there. Their oil sales are dwindling and they can't pay for their rice imports. When people cannot feed their families, neither the army nor the Revolutionary Guards will be able to stop them.

[Pleepleus]

Care to explain why the North Korean people do not destroy their governemnt - the N Korean "economy" hit rock bottom long time ago? What about the Cuban people - their economy surely fits your "down the tubes" assessment? I can (and anybody else of course) draw a couple of dozen more exapmples easily.

What about the people of Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya? Dictatorships, even Middle Eastern Dictatorships are not immune from being overthrown.

[Kachah]

What about the people of Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya? Dictatorships, even Middle Eastern Dictatorships are not immune from being overthrown.

What about them, tell us please? In Egypt it's Moslem Brotherhood which orchestrated the removal of Mubarak (with the complicity of Obama), are you saying they are any better than Mubarak? Same in Egypt, Libya and now Syria - sunnis are mad with Alawytes, one bedouin tribe against another and so on and so forth. Dictatorships have NOT been overthrown, but the new dictatorial figures are about to emerge - and they sure as hell will not be any better than the old ones. By the way nothing unusually bad was happening with the Egyptian economy, I mean, it's not Switzerland but never has it been.

The Iranian people are not all uneducated mindless peasants like you make them out to be. The Iranian people overthrew the Shah and they can overthrow the Ayatollah. Things are going from bad to worse there. Their oil sales are dwindling and they can't pay for their rice imports. When people cannot feed their families, neither the army nor the Revolutionary Guards will be able to stop them..

You got reading impediment? I never said they are mindless, I said they are oppressed and brainwashed. They don't have objective sources of information, they are genuinely afraid and yes, on average of lower educational level. They will rebel out of desperation but this moment is not close and the outcome of such rebellion is far from being certain.
Anyway, you are following Obama - I find it useless to argue and reason with the genuine Obama fans. The guy's been one miserable failure since inauguration in all his enterprises - hopefully this year we'll see him go. And I thought Carter was bad!

[Pleepleus]

What about them, tell us please? In Egypt it's Moslem Brotherhood which orchestrated the removal of Mubarak (with the complicity of Obama), are you saying they are any better than Mubarak? Same in Egypt, Libya and now Syria - sunnis are mad with Alawytes, one bedouin tribe against another and so on and so forth. Dictatorships have NOT been overthrown, but the new dictatorial figures are about to emerge - and they sure as hell will not be any better than the old ones. By the way nothing unusually bad was happening with the Egyptian economy, I mean, it's not Switzerland but never has it been.

I never said they turned into liberal western democracies. You were acting like dictatorships are immune from being overthrown as long as they take care of their security people. And you can spin it all you like, but regardless of what regime follows, dictators were overthrown in those countries and the Iranian government is not immune.

You got reading impediment? I never said they are mindless, I said they are oppressed and brainwashed. They don't have objective sources of information, they are genuinely afraid and yes, on average of lower educational level. They will rebel out of desperation but this moment is not close and the outcome of such rebellion is far from being certain.
Anyway, you are following Obama - I find it useless to argue and reason with the genuine Obama fans. The guy's been one miserable failure since inauguration in all his enterprises - hopefully this year we'll see him go. And I thought Carter was bad!

Well now your posts are degenerating into insults. I'm not worth talking to because I support Obama? Osama is dead and GM is still alive (also my son has healthcare again). I guess we have a different definition of failure. Obama has my vote.

You said of the Gazans and Iranians:

the biggest political, economical and social aspiration of an average dirt-poor barely literate Gazan is "Death to Israel", not education for his kids or better living conditions. Same in Iran.

And you take exception to me saying you are calling them "uneducated mindless peasants"? I think my comment was spot on.