Kerry Throws Witless Support Behind Obama’s Gutless Stance
John Kerry uses circular, irrational arguments to defend Obama's failure to support Iranian freedom.
In this week’s New York Times opinion pages, John Kerry articulates the rationale perhaps underlying President Obama’s reluctance to speak out boldly in support of the uprising in Iran. Kerry’s piece reveals the sickness inherent in his foreign policy perspective.
Kerry’s argument boils down to depriving the Iranian leadership of its ability to use words of support for the Iranian people’s protest for freedom against U.S. interests. Kerry concludes, of course, that by staying “tepid,” Obama is appropriately balancing U.S. interests in maintaining Iranian leadership goodwill so that proper negotiations over their nuclear weapons program can eventually proceed. Many liberal pundits and Obama devotees mindlessly mimic these same concepts.
Despite Kerry’s unquenchable need to appear erudite, this perspective is nonsensical, at the least. It echoes the liberal compulsion to explain the behavior of uncooperative opponents as responsive to our acts. That is, Iran (as with North Korea, the Palestinian Authority, etc.) acts the way it does because the U.S. (or Israel) has acted the way it does.
At the heart of this policy construction is an infantile attempt to make that which is uncontrollable appear controllable — a function to be called “the control factor.” The realization that certain enemies do not want peace and do desire your death is simply too difficult for many modern American minds to consistently hold in focus. Accordingly, the mind does all it can to change its perception of the world so as to eliminate the realization of the threat. In Iran’s case, the megalomaniacal regime is recast as “realistic,” too intricate to be attributed any one motive, presumably ineffective because the people are said to be pro-American, filled with appropriate national pride deserving of a nuclear program, and so on. Only America’s improper actions get in the way of peaceful and mutually beneficial outcomes.
Such has been the case for three decades with the Islamic Republic of Iran. A government would be hard pressed to make it any clearer that it is at war with America and seeks America’s destruction, not to mention Israel’s. Yet liberal U.S. foreign policy “experts” wrap themselves in a wardrobe of elite “smart thinking” to create the impression of deep understanding of the finer nuances of Iranian political realities. It is this product which, more than any action Kerry might attribute to America, has significantly encouraged, if not caused, the very Iranian behavior we seek to quash.
Kerry counsels us to realize that our words can be manipulated against us by the ruling regime. Thus, any support for the protesters can be framed as American involvement similar to the presumed horrific action the U.S. took in the 50s to overthrow Prime Minister Muhammad Moussadeq in favor of the shah. This is deemed so troublesome to Iranians that Obama had to apologize for it in his now famous Cairo speech. Speaking out now, Kerry suggests, would allow President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to cast himself as a modern day Moussadeq, which in Kerry’s mind would ruin our chances for a successful future negotiation with him.
Kerry’s details are dangerously distorted. First, the CIA involvement in the Moussadeq overthrow has been largely exaggerated. It also predates the lives of most of the population. Even in Iran, the human mind is capable of growing with time.
Additionally, this construct is extremely devaluing of the intelligence of the Iranian people. As has been seen through its facility with Twitter and Facebook, the Iranian population is well equipped to sort out realities, if only we would assist. Yet Kerry’s ego rears its head out from under his veneer of thoughtfulness and sensitivity in suggesting that the population is unable to credibly distinguish Moussadeq’s time from today.
More importantly, for years, the Left has correctly pointed out that the people of Iran generally favor America and aspire to have good relations with America. For years, the argument from the Left has been that military action against Iran’s nuclear assets will destroy that goodwill, and instead we must wait until an uprising comes from within.
That day has come.
And now Kerry is afraid to demonstrate support because that support will not be represented as support but rather as the attempt to overthrow what the people, themselves, are making clear they want overthrown. Perfectly circular logic is still circular.
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Bill Siegel lives in New York.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
44 Comments
1. arhooley:My theory says you shouldn’t waste your time parsing Kerry’s remarks; he doesn’t believe a word he says. Kerry has been running for Secretary of State for years and his only idea is to get on record either supporting the Democrat leader or bashing the Republican. Think Hillary will last four years? He may get that job yet.
Jun 20, 2009 - 2:53 am 2. GA Knight:The modern delusion of wisdom is nothing new really. John F’in Kerry’s just another in a long iteration of fools.
“Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,”
We’re doomed unless the chaff is soon separated from the wheat in congress. He, (Kerry) is long long overdue for a reckoning. He was denied the presidency based on his past exploits as a turncoat, joining up with the anti war crowd for political expediency’s sake and has yet to be brought fully to account for his actions. The intent was clear. Get on the public teat, and stay there.
Time to cut the damn cord.
Jun 20, 2009 - 3:25 am 3. Bad Karma:I’d comment on John Kerry, who by the way served in Vietnam, I am however pre-disposed and “stuck in Iraq”. Another fine example of our governments leaders in oxygen theft.
Jun 20, 2009 - 4:22 am 4. Tomp:Didn’t he serve in Vietnam?
Jun 20, 2009 - 5:23 am 5. eon:In Kerry’s statements, we see the three basic delusions of “progressive foreign policy” philosophy;
1. The Great Game Delusion; No, not the same Great Game Kipling wrote of in “Kim”. This “Great Game” is diplomacy, viewed by progressives not as a means to an end but as an end in itself. Often referred to as “an endless game of chess”, it is pursued for the sheer rush of playing, like a video game which you can never win- only play until the game beats you. The objective is not to accomplish an actual end (the end here should be a more rational and less dangerous regime’ in Tehran), but simply to Keep Playing Forever- in the belief that if the game ever ends, the people here in the U.S. might just conclude they don’t need the progressives.
2. The It’s All About Us Delusion; The belief that everything that goes wrong ultimately is our fault. I find it amazing that Kerry somehow manages to hold us to blame for radical Islamist philosophy, which predates the existence of our nation by about a millennium. But, like most progressives, he probably believes that studying history, as opposed to making it up to suit himself, is a waste of time.
3. The If We Speak Up For The Innocent, They’ll Get Hurt Delusion; News flash, Senator- the Iranian regime’ will do, or say, whatever it has to to stay in power, kill anyone it wants to to stay in power, and bask in the rosy glow of its own fanaticism while doing so, no matter what we do or do not do. Since they began claiming that anyone who opposed their Chicago-style “election results” was a “tool of the Great Satan” almost before they announced said “results”, your “argument” makes about as much sense as saying that since influenza viruses rarely survive cancer chemotherapy drugs, cancer is a great cure for the flu.
Kerry’s statements also prove the existence of yet another delusion- the MSM delusion that any liberal, Democratic Senator who runs for President is automatically The Smartest Man In The Senate. The American people should carefully ponder the fact that the Democratic Party, and the news media, both thought that this individual, who apparently is incapable of coping with linear logic, would make a suitable occupant for the Oval Office.
Then consider how closely his fallacious reasoning matches that of the present occupant of same.
clear ether
eon
Jun 20, 2009 - 5:28 am 6. Rose:He’s still a useless, dimwitted buffoon and a dangerous one at that. He has an unquenchable need to have someone, anyone, pay attention to him. The people in MA don’t even like him – they just keep electing him like they do the rest of the MA hacks.
Jun 20, 2009 - 5:41 am 7. Dougf:“More importantly, for years, the Left has correctly pointed out that the people of Iran generally favor America and aspire to have good relations with America.”
Umm, I think that this is a highly questionable line of argument even without resorting to polling data, the latest of which does not at all support it. The very fact that Iran as a ‘whole’ thought and perhaps still thinks that Mullahs have a superior place in political life would tend to lead the the very opposite conclusion. Iran is NOT really a ‘like-us’ country with a veneer of Islamic Cluelessness imposed from the top. It is rather more likely to be a very ‘backward-looking’ society with a veneer of modernity imposed from the top. Is that not one of the reasons that the Shah fell ? Because he was ‘Westernizing’ TOO FAST ?
Obama’s Iran pronouncements and inaction are distasteful to be sure in that they appear and may in fact be, Spineless and Un-Principled, but I think he is right in one thing .
Iran is NOT now and is not going to be ‘friendly’ to the US in the foreseeable future. No matter which cabal runs the place.
Jun 20, 2009 - 5:49 am 8. zfredz:Senator Kerry has the consistent ability to bring the non-sequitur to its logical conclusion.
Jun 20, 2009 - 6:49 am 9. savage24:Kerry is another fine example of why we need term limits.Stupidity compounded by idiocy.
Jun 20, 2009 - 6:54 am 10. Vinny Vidivici:Bill Siegel and eon #5:
Good attempts at describing ‘progressive’ foreign policy delusions (which are mirrored by domestic policies on terrorism, crime, etc.)
I’m trying to decide whether its the pathological narcissism eon describes in ‘It’s all about us’, or whether there’s something more pathetic on display here. Kerry sounds like a serially abused spouse, blaming himself for the physical violence, infidelity and psychological torment inflicted on him.
Come to think of it, the whole ‘we bring it on ourselves’ breast beating thing and ‘blaming victims’ for being provocative have become a bit of a fetish on the Left.
Jun 20, 2009 - 7:15 am 11. BC:Kerry got it right, which means that you right-wingers got it wrong. Also you have to remember that the average Iranian, especially if she or he is up on politics and history, has absolutely no reason to trust the United States in any way given our sorry history of screwing around with their country, from the CIA’s installation of the Shah of Iran to backing Saddam Hussein (and winking at his use of chemical weapons) during the Iran/Iraq war.
Jun 20, 2009 - 7:29 am 12. Cybergeezer:11. BC:
Jun 20, 2009 - 7:46 am 13. MikeD:No; You got it wrong!
Well, its nice that Siegel, Eon, and Vinny try to intellectually probe the meaning of the disease that is John Kerry. I simply prefer to believe that he is a disgusting piece of self-serving sh*t intended to remind us that a majority of Massachusetts voters, just like BC, haven’t got the brains God gave a turnip.
Jun 20, 2009 - 7:50 am 14. ding:Kerry received three purple hearts, around one for each month he served in Vietnam, yet no visible scars. That’s because they were all for superficial “wounds”. He took a page from LBJ’s WWII experience and stayed in theater just long enough to manufacture a hero’s dossier.
He’s a fake.
Jun 20, 2009 - 8:17 am 15. Steve:Who really cares what this pompous a?? has to say. The only reason he got votes in 2004 was from those that opposed the War and who disliked George Bush. I would have preferred that he just disappeared after that election but oh no not so lucky.
His wife is a buffoon also, so glad that he lost or we would be having to see her all the time with her insane statements.
Jun 20, 2009 - 8:26 am 16. Anonymous:In ‘71, Kerry gave support to the wrong side. Hasn’t changed.
Jun 20, 2009 - 8:32 am 17. danny:#11, wierd that German supplying of the chemical weapons to Iraq for use on Iranians and Russia arms sales to deliver those chemicals weapons hasn’t hurt their relationship with Iran but apparently handing over a few satellite photos and protecting Iraqi oil tankers is an unforgiveable crime….
Jun 20, 2009 - 8:40 am 18. pistol pete:The only thing the haughty John Kerry(who served in VietNam)did was marry two heiresses,the second the widow of a Republican senator.
Jun 20, 2009 - 8:46 am 19. Joe Bison:The liberal mind sees things one way only.
They don’t think, well Israel is heavily armed
because they were attacked from the get go.
They see it as the Arabs are underdogs who
are victimized by a heavily armed Israel.
We cause our adversaries to be hostile
instead of the other way around.
Secondly I wouldn’t put too much faith
into the goodwill of the Iranian people
towards the US. They may be against a
bunch of whack jobs but that doesn’t
make them our friends. Allies perhaps
but not friends.
Moussadeq isn’t really very important to
the Mullahs as he isn’t their cup of tea
and that is part of the reason he fell.
Also don’t give the CIA too much credit
for anything past or present. Leftists
and Muslims give this agency almost magical
powers, if only.
Kerry is just a snake oil salesman, he tells
Jun 20, 2009 - 8:57 am 20. rbell:his target audience what they want to hear.
His BS almost made him President and if the
Acorn vote machine was more developed he
probably would have been.
I enjoyed this article and how it documents Kerry’s many flaws.
“Despite Kerry’s unquenchable need to appear erudite, this perspective is nonsensical.” Kerry does need to appear erudite and he is nonsensical. After all he first threw his metals over the fence at an antiwar rally and then had to go around the fence to retrieve them when no one was looking. Really, is his a smart guy?
“Kerry’s details are dangerously distorted.” Yes like his recollection of the three Purple Hearts and his valor in the war. He was there four months and claims to be a hero. I saw guys there who did three voluntary tours in the field of combat.
The only thing Kerry is good at is “marrying up.” Why do we care what he has to say on any subject? Veneer is an accurate description of this Senator form MA.
Jun 20, 2009 - 9:04 am 21. john samford:While circular and irrational are apt descriptions of both skerry’s argument and his normal mental process, that issue is between him and the citizens of Taxachusetts.
The Usurpers ‘hands off’ policy remains the best policy for America. Here is why;
Jun 20, 2009 - 9:18 am 22. arhooley:A change in the regime WILL NOT mean a change in policy. The new boss will be the same as the old boss, if the new boss wins. Like you, the Iranian protesters are dupes, useful fools according to Marx. People to be used to gain power, then discarded.
Don’t feel bad about that, America has a huge supply of useful fools, the Usurper barely scratched the surface in his seizure of the Oval office. The ‘Big Lie’ being sold here is that the ‘reformers’ represent a ‘true’ democracy. They don’t. If they win, which is unlikely, it will be just a change in Mullahs at the top of the religious kleptocracy that is modern Iran.
No point and nothing to gain from the USA getting involved.
john samford,
That’s debatable. I assume you’ve read Krauthammer’s view:
>>this incipient revolution is no longer about the election. The election allowed the political space and provided the spark for the eruption of anti-regime fervor that has been simmering for years and awaiting its moment. But people aren’t dying in the street because they want a recount of hanging chads in suburban Isfahan. They want to bring down the tyrannical, misogynist, corrupt theocracy that has imposed itself with the very baton-wielding goons that today attack the demonstrators. This started out about election fraud. But like all revolutions, it has far outgrown its origins. <<
Jun 20, 2009 - 9:37 am 23. Mary Madigan:John Kerry has always been an enemy of democracy in Iran, and he has always been a supporter of kissing up to the Mullahs.
In 2004, Kerry and his friends were waging a courtroom battle against Iran’s “Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy in Iran (SMCCDI)”:
Before the Council on Foreign Relations in December 2003, Kerry announced that he would be willing as President to pursue rapprochement with Iran: “As president, I will be prepared early on to explore areas of mutual interest with Iran, just as I was prepared to normalize relations with Vietnam a decade ago.” And most notoriously, his staff sent out an email that somehow made its way to the government-controlled Mehr News Agency in Tehran, where it was trumpeted as evidence of his resolve to patch things up with the mullahs. “It is in the urgent interests of the people of the United States,” the message read, “to restore our country’s credibility in the eyes of the world. America needs the kind of leadership that will repair alliances with countries on every continent that have been so damaged in the past few years, as well as build new friendships and overcome tensions with others.”
Jun 20, 2009 - 9:46 am 24. tanstaafl:Kerry’s camp professed puzzlement over how this email made it to Tehran. Initially, a Kerry aide dismissed the story as “just a hoax.” But this pose proved impossible to maintain. Kerry’s senior foreign affairs advisor, Rand Beers, later admitted that the message was genuine, saying: “I have no idea how they got hold of that letter, which was prepared for Democrats Abroad. I scratched my head when I saw that. The only way they could have gotten it was if someone in Iran was with Democrats Abroad.” In light of the ties between the AIC and the Democratic Party, that possibility is at least open to question.
But Kerry’s olive branches to the regime that carries on the legacy of the Ayatollah Khomeini now embarrass him: his Council on Foreign Relations remarks seem to have been removed from the Kerry-Edwards website. Hence also the Nemazee lawsuit: to silence the SMCCDI and its inconvenient protests.
Kerry concludes, of course, that by staying “tepid,” Obama is appropriately balancing U.S. interests in maintaining Iranian leadership goodwill so that proper negotiations over their nuclear weapons program can eventually proceed.
Cough. You hit the nail on the head in identifying John (”Genghis Khan”) Kerry as wishing to appear erudite at all costs.
…infantile attempt to make that which is uncontrollable appear controllable …The realization that certain enemies do not want peace and do desire your death is simply too difficult for many modern American minds to consistently hold in focus. Accordingly, the mind does all it can to change its perception of the world so as to eliminate the realization of the threat.
The mind (such as it is) engages in an elaborate process of rationalization. Also, the arrogance & egotism of a Kerry (or an Obama) is such that they appear to assume they can talk anyone out of anything.
The notion that A’jad & Khamenei are going to abandon “the nuke thing” (even on a cold day in hell) is for idiots.
(I like the headline, witless & gutless, indeed)
Jun 20, 2009 - 11:23 am 25. Vigilante:It’s ironic that Republicans choose the elephant as the GOP symbol, because they have such short memories.
It was George H. W. Bush (#42), as American forces were driving Saddam’s troops out of Kuwait in February 1991, who called for the people of Iraq to rise up and overthrow the dictator. That message was repeatedly broadcast across Iraq. It was also contained in millions of leaflets dropped by the U.S. Air Force. Eager to end decades of repression, the Shiites arose. Their revolt spread like wildfire; in the north, the Kurds also rose up. Key Iraqi army units joined in. It looked as if Saddam’s days were over.
Bush, in the end, did nothing to stop Saddam’s repression.
As an object lesson to his people, Saddam Hussein himself ordered Iraqi television to record and broadcast scenes of the repression: appalling scenes of captured Shiites, some with ropes around their necks, being kicked and beaten and insulted, threatened with pistols and machine guns, a few pleading for mercy. Most of them, eyes downcast, are eventually dragged away to execution.
Jun 20, 2009 - 11:29 am 26. johngaltrules:#11 bc-right now, Id settle for the shah anyday over the idiot Im a Dumb Jihaddi or his dimwitted SUCK A TOE LLAHS.
Jun 20, 2009 - 11:37 am 27. Self-hating Boomer:Question for the crowd arguing that American support would be the kiss of death: if the protesters don’t want the involvement of the outside world in general, and America in particular, why are so many signs in English?
Jun 20, 2009 - 11:40 am 28. keithacita:president john fitzgerald kerry, senator, parallel president – last 8 years, active military ops in cambodia and pakistan – still earning battlestars.
Jun 20, 2009 - 12:28 pm 29. Meryl:just agree to whatever he says – he’s a political rock star.
I’ve always thought John-Who-Served-In-Vietnam-Kerry should have been a shoo-in for veep for the Chicago thug. Then the two of them could stand side by side, looking down their long noses at all of us peasants.
Of course, the narcissitic, me-first/me-only, self-centered arrogance of both of them would make the whole thing too competitive, I suppose, and we all know that King Fraud has never faced serious competition on any level in his entire life and it might make him wet his pants.
So the Naked Emperor blithers on. He’s really getting scary to those mullahs. Not.
Jun 20, 2009 - 12:28 pm 30. Sandy:Honestly. You remind me every day of the fallacy that education will resolve all our problems.
Most people learned by kindergarten that the quickest way to unite two enemies is to turn them against a third. You try to avoid being that target.
Why do Republicans always rant about not being the world’s policeman – until a Democrat becomes President.
Jun 20, 2009 - 12:43 pm 31. ReConUSMC:11. BC:
Jun 20, 2009 - 1:34 pm 32. Marc Malone:Kerry got it right, which means that you right-wingers got it wrong. Also you have to remember that the average Iranian, especially if she or he is up on politics and history, has absolutely no reason to trust the United States in any way given our sorry history of screwing around with their country, from the CIA’s installation of the Shah of Iran to backing Saddam Hussein (and winking at his use of chemical weapons) during the Iran/Iraq war.
____________________________________________
It is obvious a History of Why those things took place in Iran and Iraq is beyond you mentally .
l would tell you but it would be far above your mental ability to “”Get it “” ! America sided with Russia and China during WW 2 .. The Telibane and Al Quada said with America against Russia .
That has happened 471 different times in World conflicts….. Duh !
You just another Far left anti American .
Dumbo it is Carter a far leftist Nut who got The Nut Cleric in ….. The worse leader since Persian wars .
#22 arhooley – Yeah, but was does Dr. Charles Krauthammer know? Seriously. He’s really not all that bright. His Pulitzer means nothing. Nor does this year’s award for outstanding opinion journalism.
sarc off/
Jun 20, 2009 - 2:17 pm 33. john samford:“john samford,
That’s debatable. I assume you’ve read Krauthammer’s view:”
Yes, which is just as debatable as my own.
The only evidence iare the words spoken by both sides. As far as America goes, BOTH sides see us as the ‘great satan’. Both sides want nuclear weapons, although they both call it a nuclear program so the terminally ignorant can pretend it’s not about nuclear weapons. Ahamadamnutjob actually has a lot of support among the older, rural portion of the population. Opinion polls arent worth much in a nation where having the wrong opinion can get you murdered, but what polls are out there have been predicting an outcome not unlike what actually happened. Urban voters want a change, rural voters want to keep things as they are. The rural population of Iran is about 2/3, the urban about 1/3.
The vote was about 2 to 1, which is pretty much how the population breaks down. We have seen the Urban/Rural split that has dominated human politics since the first city was built. Nothing new here.
I respect Mr. Krauthammer, but he would be the first to tell you that he isn’t perfect. Let me be the second.
Historically, The USA has always created more problems then It’s solved when it intervens in civil wars. If you want examples; Cuba, Philippines, South America & Central America (many countries, manytimes), Vietnam, China, Soviet Union, the list gos on, that is just a sample.
I assume you mean this Krauthammer article;
http://townhall.com/columnists/CharlesKrauthammer/2009/06/19/hope_and_change_-_but_not_for_iran
Let me fisk it a moment
“This revolution will end either as a Tiananmen (a hot Tiananmen with massive and bloody repression or a cold Tiananmen with a finer mix of brutality and co-optation) or as a true revolution that brings down the Islamic Republic.”
Maybe. He present no Evidence, just a hope. Charles is seeing what isn’t htere, IMHO. This is not atrue revolution, by a struggle over which set of Mad Dog Mullahs rule the kennel.
My evidence, of their own words is slim, since all these guys are natural born liars, but it is better then no evidence.
“Even from the narrow perspective of the nuclear issue, the administration’s geopolitical calculus is absurd. There is zero chance that any such talks will denuclearize Iran.”
I agree totally, but I’m not sure what the point is. The ONLY thing that will denuclearize (not sure that is a word, but since Charles used it, I will too in the sincerest form of flattery) Iran is a few US Army Divisions…. whoops, a dozen Brigades. Krauthammer gives the impression here that Some sort of action on the Usurpers part will change that. He knows better so that is one nasty bit of ambiguity.
Jun 20, 2009 - 3:46 pm 34. Sebastian Shaw:Senator John Kerry proves being a self-proclaimed “Internationalist” translates into being a Spineless One; he would rather play politics with innocent peoples’ lives to gain more political power than actually take a stand. His “present” vote is taking a stand on the wrong side of history.
Jun 20, 2009 - 4:53 pm 35. Snake eater:LOL! I’m looking forward to the Obama Ahmadinejad photo op after their “negotiation”. The campaign commercials are already writing themselves.
Jun 20, 2009 - 5:56 pm 36. Bohemond:“From the Office of Mr. Mir Hossein Mousavi
To the President of the USA, Mr. Barack Hussein Obama:
Dear Mr. President,
In the name of the Iranian people, we want you to know that when you recently made the statement “Achmadinejad or Mousavi? Two of a kind,” we consider this as a grave and deep insult, not just to Mr. Mousavi but especially against the judgment of the Iranian people, against our moral conviction and intelligence, especially those of the young generation that comprises a population of 31 million.
It is a specially grave insult for those who are now fighting for democracy and freedom, and an unwarranted gift and even praise for Mr. Khamenei, whose security forces are now killing peaceful Iranians in the streets of every major city in the country.
Your statement misled the people of the world. It was no doubt inspired by your hope for dialogue with this regime, but you cannot possibly believe in promises from a regime that lies to its own people and then kills them when they demand the promises be kept.
By such statements, your administration and you discourage the Iranian people, who believe and trust in the values of democracy and freedom. We are pleased to see that you have condemned the regime’s murderous violence, and we look forward to stronger support for the rightful struggle of the Iranian people against the actions of a regime that is your enemy as well as ours.”
Jun 20, 2009 - 6:56 pm 37. Grant:So glad to see youall are making something political out of Obama’s lack of a decisive “jump in with both feet” stance. The last President who did that cost the US billions of dollars, thousands of American lives and did nothing to help our standing in world opinion. Obama, by standing by, is actually letting the Iranian dictatorial government hang themselves by their own noose of theocracy.
Jun 20, 2009 - 7:33 pm 38. misanthropicus:In defense of Kerry defending Soetoro:
You guys, you completely ignore that the Iran problem is inherited from Carl Rove and W. Bush.
Barry Soetoro can and does it when he’s given the chance – remember his firm poisition when the Russians invaded Georgia, remember Soetoro’s forceful handling of the Somali pirates problem.
Yes, Opossum -
Jun 20, 2009 - 9:28 pm 39. Terry:It has been said many times that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Yet Americans, predominantly on the left, refuse to remember how we felt after 9/11 or how Saddam acted and what the world thought at the time, ad nauseum.
As we debate the best response by the U.S. administration, we neglect to notice that Obeyme and his comrades without arms continue to view the world, particularly troublemakers, by imagining they can discern what is being thought instead of what these regimes and their people actually do.
Obeyme assumes that Iranians despise the U.S. because of a CIA sponsored coup 54 years ago while protesters take to the streets armed with English language signs, obviously written with Americans in mind. All the while this administration dismisses the obvious: Bush’s stand in Iraq showed the middle east how their own democracy could begin. Beware not only threats to the mullahs control of Iran, watch for a simmering of pro-democracy sentiment in Saudi Arabia. That will be a real change. Hey, maybe that’s what he meant after all.
Jun 21, 2009 - 3:12 am 40. Chuck Pelto:TO: Bill Seigel, et al.
RE: Interesting!
Kerry has found a new meaning to the infamous Army slang of a “circle jerk”.
And it’s oh so apropos as a double entendre too, if you’ll pardon my french.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Jun 22, 2009 - 8:48 am 41. Cybergeezer:[A pun is the lowest form of humor -- when you don't think of it first. -- Oscar Wilde]
John Kerry is an embarrassment to the U.S. Military, Congress, and the United States as a whole; How could such a limp minded homo sapiens get to this level of government? Oh, yea, right; Obama too!
Jun 22, 2009 - 2:41 pm 42. SukieTawdry:I’m hard-pressed to see how Kerry could throw any other kind.
Kerry counsels us to realize that our words can be manipulated against us by the ruling regime.
Well, now, that’s something on which Kerry can actually claim a bit of expertize. Of course, he fully intended to have his words manipulated against us, but that does suggest at least some insight into how the “ruling regimes” play the game.
Jun 22, 2009 - 3:47 pm 43. sam:I don’t care what Kerry says..he’s useless. A humiliation to the U.S., oh wait, that makes him and Obama bookends…ObKe
Jun 22, 2009 - 3:53 pm 44. Paul -Indiana:#32. Where’s your Pulitzer?
Jun 24, 2009 - 1:33 pm