To the Iranian people, "Hope you'd weren't expecting there'd be a Change!"
~Barry Soetoro

Is there nothing Obama can do?

Apparently so. Yes he can.

sarge here good thing old kate aint runnin...or ruining americun foriegn policy sarge thinks we got the deep thinkers here oh ya

sarge wonders maybe old kate would like to apply some pressure on old iranian hardliners sarge thinks yer screeching voice would do let lots fer democracy yar just promise to shut the h@ll up if ol Achmedinejad steps down sure as hell he will do it in the minute or just blow is own head off to stop the pain

What's a little blood between ideologues?

Syncro

"President Ahmatotaldouchebag" Now does not that just roll off the tongue in pleasant way...

Compliments of Drew at FARK...

Superb. Obama's cultural relativism - and indifference - loud and clear.

Well at least Iran is standing up for women's rights...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjQxq5N--Kc

Sadly the regime is going to win.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/snapshots-of-protest/article1191417/

It reminds me of a quote from George Orwell's 1984:
"There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always— do not forget this, Winston— always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face— forever."

Grow up, sarge. Your schtick is getting old.

(It was always idiotic.)

I want to say something but what? Why would this even be considered? Obama just doesn't care.

Yes Sarge, DO grow up

Join the chorus of those who want Obama to .... er...

well, invade and take over Iran - right?

I don't think Barry doesn't care...well as long as "doesn't" and "care" are properly defined.

Syncro

I'm not convinced that cartoon is in good taste.

I've seen the video, and it appears real, but does anyone know for sure where and when it was filmed? The girl is in western clothing. Does that mean she was protesting against Achmydinnersgone?

People have been saying for days that the movement requires a martyr. I guess she lost the lottery.

People have been saying for days that the movement requires a martyr. I guess she lost the lottery.
~dp at June 23, 2009 12:27 AM

The movement requires a leader. My guess is that the Basiji have removed many potential candidates in the last several days.

Having no leader, yet the movement continues, highlights the fact that it's a popular uprising.
I'm afraid that if a leader doesn't emerge soon, the uprising will be crushed.

No one is saying the US should invade. But inviting people over for hot dogs and fireworks while the regime is killing people in the streets is not my idea of as dp says 'in good taste'. Oh I forgot, ice cream too. Geez in my neighbourhood I don't think they would invite me. What neighbourhood does he live in?

Oh, so you don't want Obama to invade then?

You want him to use stronger language,is that it?

But what good is stronger language without the threat of force, i.e., invasion?

Just what is it you're all cavilling about?

Surely you're not using every incident to engage in another thoughtless kneejerk session of shit-flinging, are you? Another session of 'whatever the other side does, we insist on the opposite'?

Just what is it you want done? Please advise.

Does anyone but me see the Irony of Inviting the Iranian regime, in the middle of a protested election by people demanding democracy and may be the precursor for a second Iranian Revolution, to the Embassy while America celebrates it's Independence Day from a repressive and religously supported monarchy which occured during the early years of the American Revolution?

Now I ask... which is worse in the area of public opinion and political optics... attending or inviting them to attend?

Just what is it you want done? Please advise.
~bleet at June 23, 2009 12:59 AM

I would have advocated air dropping weapons and medical supplies to the civilians who are protesting.
It's sickening watching unarmed folks getting shot and brutalized by the Iranian government.

I would also have advocated sending in Special Forces A teams to organize an armed resistance. That is what U.S. Special Forces were created for originally, to work with indigenous peoples against oppressors and support popular insurgencies in enemy territory.

Let armed Iranian civilians take on their own attacking government and see how the populace doesn't unite against the government's enemy.

Remember back during the revolution the Ayatollahs sent "students" into the U.S. Embassy to take hostages and said they couldn't do squat to control the "students"?
Well now the students want to overthrow the status quo in Iran.

Remember how the Iranian Quds groups, whose primary mission is to organize, train, equip, and finance foreign Islamic revolutionary movements, has recently done just what the U.S. Special Forces was trained to do, with insurgent groups in Iraq?

Well turnabout is fair play says I.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Iraqi government already have U.S. trained Iraqis Special Forces, experianced in fighting the Quds, who could work with U.S. Special Forces to help supply and organize the Iranian students.

All it would take is the proper focus and the will of a U.S. President.

The response ahould have been a hands on hips and chest thumping one full of bravado in support of free and fair elections made in front of a American Flag waving in the Wind then pulled back to show soldiers of the revolutionary war marching and playing Yankee Doodle then dissolving to the Declaration then morphing into the Constitution while the President extolls the virtues or American Rights; the right to protest, the right to free speech, the right to bear arms, the right to the free flow of information, the right to buy an iPhone for $99.00 (with contract), the right to HD TV and full digital broadcasting, the right to marry a third cousin and that when elections are disputed they get solved in the Great American Way!

In The Supreme Court!

bleet, perhaps you could have a look at Reagan's December/1981 address regarding the uprising in Poland. That, in a nutshell, is what principled folks would like to see from the Leader Of The Free World.

What a great cartoon - at least it shows some cajones

I have often wondered why there isn't a geostationary satellite placed over Iran/Iraq - where the US could broadcast its own television station(s) for political purposes

Thanks Colin. Check out Reagan's speech

Bleet - you're tiresome lefty talking points are truly pathetic. Why not consider what Hitchens has to say about your dreamboat's disasterous performance to date:

"...[t]hat last observation also applies to the Obama administration. Want to take a noninterventionist position? All right, then, take a noninterventionist position. This would mean not referring to Khamenei in fawning tones as the supreme leader and not calling Iran itself by the tyrannical title of "the Islamic republic." But be aware that nothing will stop the theocrats from slandering you for interfering anyway. Also try to bear in mind that one day you will have to face the young Iranian democrats who risked their all in the battle and explain to them just what you were doing when they were being beaten and gassed. (Hint: Don't make your sole reference to Iranian dictatorship an allusion to a British-organized coup in 1953; the mullahs think that it proves their main point, and this generation has more immediate enemies to confront..."

See:

http://www.slate.com/id/2221020/?from=rss

Bull. Thanks for posting that video. Watching Reagan's speech truly brings into relief the stark contrast between principled Reagan conservatism, and the post-modern relativism of Obama Liberalism.

I suppose B.Hussien Obama could offer to send Jimmy Carter... oh wait.. let's not go there.

quite a difference to remember what R.Reagan had to say regarding the support of certain regimes.

sarge here sarge will cast his pearls before the swine of kates crazed minions

yeh oz send in de special forces maybe 250,000 of em with some tanks ya think? probably succeed where sadams legions of tanks and troopers couldnt crush them iranians in the day meanwhile the iranians stop shipping i n the straighst of hormuz with them chinese sunburn ground to sea missles the ones we aint got no defense against remeber the exocet of the falklands war ? look it up if ya forgot cause this one works even better

air drop weapons to them protesters? whut the hard liners need is an excuse to kill a buncha people though sarge guesses the canadians should have airdropped weapons to the US after bush "won" his reelction ya der hey!

sarge wonders if them iranians wont have to do the work of democracy tyhemselves after the pure an noble US of A been messin around thar deposin oil nationalizers and installin' shahs and puttin folks on the axis of evil soon to be invaded checklist sure it will help alot fer the "evil empire" to take sides with them good iranian lovers of democracy too bad we got no pull there abouts after the last 80 yeasrs of messin around with these folks.

sarge dont expect yall to get this but short of full scale invasion we aint got no mojo in iranistan but them iranian youth is in the majority and might just be able to pull sh#t off themselves without no blood bath

Ps kate nothin more old than the schtik of an american hating candian neofacsist medling in US politics and raising ugly little dogs useful for nothin but killin' rats and bitin' ankles

Sarge Erik here, erik tires a bit of your messages, n Erik thinks perhaps you should moderate the way you speak but Erik don't expect y'all to change much maybe better that sarge go into a corner and mutter to himself just Erik saying sarge thanks over and out

Obama is silent because what he sees is exactly what he is doing to the United States. The US doesn't know it yet but they will soon. Then it will be more than one young woman's blood in the streets.

Sarge,

I'd bust you back to private and send you to remedial writing class. I expect an NCO to be capable of giving clear orders. Your incomprehensible garble would have your section so bloody confused they'd probably shoot themselves just to escape the agony of deciphering your communications; written or spoken.

Personally, I have no problem with "sarge".

His comments are so incoherent that I simply scroll right past them.

Snowbunnie, the salient difference between Iran and the USA is that American civilians are -extremely- well armed and well equipped. Imbeciles like sarge notwithstanding, the ACORN putsch if it comes will last a few hours. The ACORN types will come out on the short end.

The reason Ahmacorksucker and the mullahs are still in business is GUN CONTROL.

bleety, please take particular note. A nice air drop of 5 million one shot Liberator pistols would be my response to this weeks "unrest". When you see people standing up to a government which fires on crowds, you send the people ammo.

That would also be my response to Kim Jong Il. Except I'd send food too, so the poor b@st@rds would be strong enough to pick up the gun.

By the way, sarge and bleety huggums wuggums, how d'ya like being the ones sticking up for the murderous dictator? You liking that? Your guy Barry is schmoozing people who fire into crowds of unarmed civilians. I thought that was a Republican thing, eh?

The salient difference between Iran and the USA is that American civilians are -extremely- well armed and well equipped. The ACORN putsch if it comes (which I hope is unlikely) will last a few hours. The ACORN types will come out on the short end.

The reason Ahmacorksucker and the mullahs are still in business is GUN CONTROL.

bleety, please take particular note. A nice air drop of 5 million one shot Liberator pistols would be my response to this weeks "unrest" in Iran. When you see people standing up to a government which fires on crowds, you send the people ammo. Maybe add an airstrike or two on their nuclear weapon facilities. You know, just to serve notice to the mullahs. Netanyahu could fly back seat.

That would also be my response to Kim Jong Il. Except I'd send food too, so the poor b@st@rds would be strong enough to pick up the gun.

By the way, sarge and bleety huggums wuggums, how d'ya like being the ones sticking up for the murderous dictator? You liking that? Your guy Barry is schmoozing people who fire into crowds of unarmed civilians. I thought that was a Republican thing, eh?

I believe the cartoon summarizes Obama's morality as well as that of the "progressive" movement.

As for "Sarge", who can understand the guy? Who cares? Just ignore him. He's just a crazy troll who screams incoherently at people who ignore him. Hey, you know, he sounds just like a certain feller named "Warren"...

Oopsie, double post.

Incidentally, I googled up the Sunburn missile. Its a supersonic cruise missile, can be armed with a nuclear warhead. Meaning its actually a small jet aircraft, meaning normal anti-aircraft measures will be effective. Nice try, "sarge". And you wonder why we mock you.

Hamas shot a Silkworm at an Israeli corvette a while ago, 2006. Killed 4 sailors but didn't sink the ship, so either it didn't work right or the ship damaged it with anti-missile fire before it struck.

Seems the Silkworm requires a radar to work. Israeli response was to blow up all the Lebanese radar stations along the coast. Problem solved.

Sunburn likewise requires radar. That's why the Americans have Aegis anti-missile ships along with their aircraft carrier battle groups. Airplanes kill the radars, Aegis kills the missiles.

"By the way, sarge and bleety huggums wuggums, how d'ya like being the ones sticking up for the murderous dictator? You liking that? "

sarge here sarge and bleety aint stickin up fer no iranian old skoolers though yer poor little mind somehow pulled that outta yer butt. barry aint my guy either, but barry is powerless to stop whats happn over there seeing as our army is kinda stuck in iraq and afganistan where yer guy georgie put em, and the iranian army would make short work of a bunch of civilians with single shot pressed steel .45 pistols. the iranian military have tanks and artillery an a fairly outstandin record of creatin large scale mahem when needed. can ye understnd that your fantasty of meaningful military intervention by us or untrained poorly armed civilians is just that? a fantasy... do you understansd that us invading iran in the best of situations would piss off the russians and chinese as well as a whole lot of arabs? can ye understand them iranians woul;d shut off the oil tap fer a long time with minimal effort? do ya know whow dumb it is to make threats tya cant back up? is you aware of the term 'diplomacy? could you look it up in a dictionary and get back to sarge?

since the US is seen as the great satan to them mullahs and conservtive types an a major propganda point the us of a siding with the protesters in any meaningful fashion convieniently makes them look like traitors which makes killing them a lot more politically viable for the mullahs than it stands right now. can you understand that? sarge is pretty sure you can't but next time sarge will speak slower and use spell check even betyter ifn it will help ya. sarge dont guess it will tho cause yer all crazy even more than stupid and yer pretty frickin stupid . thar the sarge has wasted some time on yar

Obama seems to see himself as some sort of neutral mediator between the USA and those who would do it harm. That is a strange (and ultimately untenable) position for a US president and armed forces Commander-in-Chief.

Painful as it is to admit (and to try to read) much of what the sarge says makes sense.

The US is not capable of handling a real conflict in the region. It is over-extended and weakened, not to mention broke.

Poking their nose in there will strengthen the hard liners.

I would have thought that the lessons of the past decade in Iran and Iraq is that external intervention is a dicey proposition in the lands of religious and cultural lunacy.

Having watched the video of this girl's death too many times, I also find the cartoon in poor taste. Really poor taste. I'd rather watch the video of this tragic death and know the reality than look at a caricature of this very sad event.

ahh common guys, please don't feed trolls, dorks or sarges.

"Life" at that low level of evolution isn't worth wasting time or electrons on. Just too stupid to respond to.

Would canceling the invitation stop the crackdown? Do you hontestly think the Iran Mullah's are going to allow people to go the Evil American BBQ's

If anything it is pure diplo bluff and fluff. Revoking the inviations would nothing more symbolic as well.

Since Iran is between Iraq and Afghanistan, and Pres BO has stated he wants to move all the troops from Iraq to Afghanistan...maybe they should just drive there via Iran. Pres Bush set it up well.

~~favill~~

It's usual for most people to take the side of those fighting for greater freedom, despite whatever reservations they might have about the ultimate success of the project. And, for that matter, even if they realize the options for support are limited.
But we're hearing from the obozo adoration society, however, who are forever on the lookout for the increasing criticism that's coming his way these days and they're more than willing to back any tyrant to cover for him.
Hey, what's blood in the streets so long as barry isn't embarassed?
But I have no explanation for those who whine about the cartoon being in bad taste or go for a dimwitted belly laugh about a young woman "winning the lottery" with her sacrifice. They're in a category all their own.

sarge of what? cnn? msnbc? acorn? obammy's brown shirts?

sarge phantom here sarge i just think its interesting that guys like you and bleety got all bent out of shape when Bush did anything at all including draw breath
but let a holocaust-denying, fag-hanging, woman beating nuke-building hard liner conservative religious nut case start shooting live ammo into crowds, and from you we get a yawn. kinda makes me wonder about your commitment to freedom and human life and stuff eh?

by the way, have you heard how those poorly armed untrained civilians up in afghanistan are doing? last i heard the yanks, our guys and the whole rest of nato were still chasing them around. and wasn't the iraq war declared unwinable because of rinky dink iraqi civilians armed by iran blowing stuff up all the time? madhi army ferinstance?

are iran's civilians so feeble they couldn't run the amadinnerjacket's republican guard around in the desert for a couple years, if they received arms from iraq? or is it that civilians can only fight when they are fighting america?

and isn't this all-lower-case-no-punctuation crap annoying?

"yer pretty frickin' stupid" and i continue to mock you in every possible fashion crawl back under your bridge you sorry sob any real nco would eat you for a snack

Zorpheous, would you be so sanguine if Bush had invited Pinochet's guys over for a burger and beer while his cops were firing on crowds in Chile?

Sure you would.

Oh, so you don't want Obama to invade then?

You want him to use stronger language,is that it?

But what good is stronger language without the threat of force, i.e., invasion?

If you can't tell the difference between statements - strongly worded, effective statements - and wholesale invasion, that's not our problem.

No one is saying Obama needs to drop Green Berets in the middle of Tehran. But it WOULD be nice to see him say, on a daily basis, that America stands on the side of democracy and violence against mostly unarmed protesters is despicable.

Some said that Obama didn't because he doesn't want us to be blamed for Iran's mess. Guess what? If his election showed anything, it doesn't matter if a cowboy from Texas or a slick politician from Chi-town is in the Oval Office. Iran hates America and will always blame us for problems, just as they do to Israel, really. At least we knew the cowboy would have empathy for the people being shot to death in the streets and say something about it.

Obama's silence can be interpreted as acceptance, or just a further slip on the veil that covers up his actual anti-democracy, anti-American politics and agenda. Either way, it doesn't make him look good.

oh well, why worry
maybe bleet sage and zorpheous are right and obama can lean back and let it slide

its not like real people are getting killed right? i mean, they aren't liberals after all...

Zorpheous ~ Would canceling the invitation stop the crackdown?

Incisive Kindergarten logic enhanced by a complete absence of honour. Describes the leftie model perfectly. Thank you for that.

Why would Obama speak out against a regime that is simply using force to suppress dissidence? Isn’t that what Obama intends to do himself when the time is ripe?

Joshua Muravchik, The Abandonment of Democracy

Iranian exiles in the U.S. are receiving calls from back home asking why President Obama has “given Khamenei the green light” to crack down on the election protestors. To conspiracy-minded Middle Easterners, that is the obvious meaning of Obama’s equivocal response to the Iranian nation’s sudden and unexpected reach for freedom. How to explain that this interpretation is implausible? That the more likely reason for Obama’s behavior is that he is imprisoned in the ideology of loving your enemies and hating George W. Bush?

Whatever the reason, Obama's failure may destroy his presidency. His betrayal of democracy and human rights through a series of pronouncements and small actions during his first months in office had been correctable until now. But the thousand daily decisions that usually make up policy are eclipsed by big-bang moments such as we are now witnessing. Failure to use the bully pulpit to give the Iranian people as much support as possible is morally reprehensible and a strategical blunder for which he will not be forgiven...

This is getting silly. Honestly, who cares if they show up at the BBQ. If they do then it gives you a chance to express your displeasure directly....

To be consistent you wouldnt have many people at the BBQ if they kept out any regime that wasnt elected like Canada, the US or western Europe. Most African nations wouldnt be there, most middle eastern nations wouldnt be there, a number of central american nations wouldnt be there.

Fair politics to criticize Obama for it, and he shoudl be able to offer an answer, but lets recognize this for what it is. There are more substantial things to criticize him for, like overspending, Acorn doing the census etc.

I dont expect anything substantial to come from a BBQ meetup. It is hardly a reward.

Bay of Pigs redux.

One wonders if there was an uprising in North Korea whether BO would have a similar response.

Obviously other nasty regimes will take this Hands-in-pockets diplomacy as a sign that they too can crack down on internal dissent with impunity.

When you read up on how foriegn affairs used to be conducted prior to BO - with no actions being taken with out the use of endless analysis an gameplanning so as to try and anticipate all of the consequences, this amateur grad lounge level of analysis is quite shocking and hugely unsettling to the pros in state, the DOD, and elsewhere.

What Obama ought to have done is made a statement that he, as President of the US, stands for and supports the desire and need for democracy of all people, anywhere in the world. Period.

He ought to have spoken up FOR and TO those Iranians fighting for their democratic rights. Instead, he ignored them. Utterly ignored them. He spoke instead to the Authorities.

He told the Authorities to 'be less brutal' in their repression of their misguided population. Disgraceful.

Obama is not a friend but a foe of democracy. You can see this, not merely in his foreign affairs, but in his internal politics.

How does insisting that a bill, filled with pork to buy support and loyalty from members of Congress, be passed without reading it - how does that show support for democracy? Obama transforms Congress into his loyal supporters because he buys them..and if they question him - he turns the situation into a 'crisis'..and forces them to do what he wants. Or, if they continue to confront him - he gets rid of them.

How about his treatment of the Inspector General?
How about his ACORN tactics?

Obama isn't interested in democracy or the people. He's an elitist, who operates by setting up a realm-of-power, which runs the show.

His foreign affairs tactics are a disgrace. Psychologically, he is only able to interact with people/nations if they seem under his control (so, he'll charm the Iranians on July 4th)..If they can't be controlled, he ignores them. They don't exist.

And since most foreign peoples aren't directly controllable by him, then, Obama will resort more and more, to empty rhetoric, to supporting the status quo, in his dealings with them. He'll try to change only the US - and his tactics for that, are deeply undemocratic.

Bay of Pigs redux.

One wonders if there was an uprising in North Korea whether BO would have a similar response.

Obviously other nasty regimes will take this Hands-in-pockets diplomacy as a sign that they too can crack down on internal dissent with impunity.

When you read up on how foriegn affairs used to be conducted prior to BO - with no actions being taken with out the use of endless analysis an gameplanning so as to try and anticipate all of the consequences, this amateur grad lounge level of analysis is quite shocking and hugely unsettling to the pros in state, the DOD, and elsewhere.

Why would Obama speak out against a regime that is simply using force to suppress dissidence? Isn’t that what Obama intends to do himself when the time is ripe?

Yes, I think that's a possibility, or at least a hope. There's a reason Americans bought guns and ammo like crazy in the run up to, and after, Obama's election.

Unlike the poor souls in Iran, we will fight back.

The US security community have known how volatile the current Iranian Administration is for some time. Any government that holds power by fear and intimidation of dissent and opposition has enemies.

It would not take much to spark civil unrest with an Iranian leader, hell the US has done it before and CIA sparked upheavals has been the signature of Dem administrations.

Easy to get things going by spreading a rumor of ballot tampering. Easiest thing in the world in that environment. Just spread the rumor let the totalitarians react and watch the riots.

In any event Iran is screwed. If they react and get brutal with democracy protesters they lose status with western finance and if they allow the turmoil to go on, it will justify forced stabilization because of their nuke capability. Pakistan take notes. This will be your fate. The west will not allow the possibility of extremist elements in a failed nuclear state to gain control of WMDs.

Don't write Barry off yet. He's a UN lackey and the UN reacts militarily when London, Frankfurt, Paris and Wall street are POed.

What the leftards are too foul and degenerate to see is the difference between not intervening and lending credibility to the thugs.

Realpolitics, indifference and staying out of a fight you don't have a stake in are all viable options.

But do you have to give the mad mullahs the full monica? Is it too much to ask that you don't invite the thugs to your party?

Really. "They" say you can judge a man by the friends he keeps. That seems entirely apropos with Obama. The man has no scruples, morals or values.

Leftards: don't you ever, ever again even pretend you give a flying f**k about human rights. You don't and you never did.

Your reaction to people who want freedom from religious fanatics now is the very same as your reaction to people who wanted freedom from communist fanatics during the cold war: contempt and snobbery.

If the world was a perfect place we'd be able to deport leftards an other sub-human vermin unworthy of the freedom they enjoy but do not support for others to the very places they make excuses for. It would be poetic justice for large numbers of western leftards to starve to death eating dirt in n.korea or beheaded in Iran or Iraq.

gord tulk - yes, I think Obama would react in a similar fashion, with his hands in his pockets, if there was a popular revolt in N. Korea.

Note, again, how he treated the Iranian protests. He didn't, as he ought to have done, speak in support of democracy. All he needed to do, was make a public speech, as leader of the free world, in support of the democratic desires of all people, anywhere in the world. Period. Not a word more.

Instead, he spoke to the current Iranian leaders, which was actually an acknowledgment of their actions and even right, to suppress and control 'their people'. He merely told them to be 'less brutal' in their control of the population.

But this notion of authoritarian control fits in with Obama's psychological nature, which is based on his control of people. He can only interact with people if he feels he can control them. Anyone who can't be controlled by him - he'll belittle them, denigrate them, try to get rid of them as powers...and ..utterly ignore them.

He is not a supporter or follower of democracy but the exact opposite. If he breaks the law in his agenda of control (as he has already done in various instances..eg..the Inspector General)..he'll do so. If he has to use force, via others, he'll do so.

Again, Obama ought to have spoken out on behalf of democracy. To the people who want democracy. Instead, he spoke only to the Iranian authorities who were repressing democracy!

Zorpheous Do you think symbolism is without power? Isn't your flag a symbol? The Statue of Liberty? On the statue why didn't the US just let it rust and fall apart rather than spend millions restoring it? People die for their flag. People stand and sing their National Anthems. Symbolism is what speaks to people. Defines who they are and what they stand for. I don't see the POTUS standing for much except what the Democrats got their arse kicked out of the White House in '96 for. Government thugs doing drive bys on motorcycles firing into a crowd is a symbol too, which do you support?

unless the phone rings at precisely three AM , Obama isnt there to answer.

-yeh oz send in de special forces maybe 250,000 of em with some tanks ya think?

The United States Army Special Forces, also known as Green Berets, is a Special Operations Force (SOF) of the United States Army tasked with five primary missions: unconventional warfare, foreign internal defense, special reconnaissance, direct action, and counter-terrorism.

The original and most important mission of the Special Forces had been "unconventional warfare", while other capabilities, such as direct action, were gradually added.

Their official motto is De Oppresso Liber (Latin: To Liberate the Oppressed), a reference to one of their primary missions, training and advising foreign indigenous forces.
There aren't 250,000 of them and they don't have tanks.
Their specialty, as SF Special Forces, is to infiltrate secretly and train indigenous groups to overthrow tyrants.

- meanwhile the iranians stop shipping i n the straighst of hormuz with them chinese sunburn ground to sea missles the ones we aint got no defense against remeber the exocet of the falklands war ?

We do have a defence against anti-ship missiles.
It's called the Phalanx CIWS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS

Here is the British Goalkeeper version of the Phalanx CIWS shooting down the newest version of Exocets.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZBFSGzRyV4&NR=1

All NATO warships have them and the Chinese knockoff of the Exocet can't touch it.

Hey Zorph, how's the traffic over at your I'm-a-liberal-lawyer-quitter, site going?

Score board.

I agree with ET on this one. From the outset Obama should have made general, basic statements about his and his country's support for freedom everywhere in all its forms. But he should have done so in such a way as to make it clear that he was expressing fundamental principles that his country stands for and was founded upon.

I suspect that his reason for not doing this is that he can't do it with any conviction. He doesn't really believe in principles of freedom, except possibly at some relativist level that doesn't mean anything in particular (not freedom but "freedom"). And I suspect that to him the USA stands for something that most Americans wouldn't really recognize or understand if he ever had the candor to explain it honestly. Sometimes he lets his guard down, as when he spoke of Khameini as Iran's "supreme leader" (a disgrace) and of Iran as the "Islamic Republic," and when he bowed to King Abdullah a few months ago.

The apologists for his inaction on Iran are sounding increasingly pathetic and irrational.

One thing is perfectly clear to me: after 4 or 8 years of Obama the US will be less free in many ways than it was before him.

A leftard's mindset:

We should not interfere with other countries, even if it is only to make a statement about our complete support for freedom, justice, equality and real democracy in which we have been enjoying ourselves for a few centuries. The reasoning behind this is that it might invoke more bloodshed. Bloodshed will be witnessed and this is what is unacceptable. It will make us feel uneasy and sad. We don't want that stress.

We would rather go back to when Iran was a make believe democracy. At least our perception was of normalcy. We don't care if 100's routinely dissapear, are tortured, are stoned and that this kind of injustice has been going on for years. We seldom here about it and thus we are not stressed. It not our business to be stressed for them people in other lands.
George W. Bush made us stressed with Iraq when he help establish a democracy by liberating the people there. We were not stressed and sad when things were hidden away and Sadam was ruling there.

Reader's Digest version of a leftard mindset:
SELFISHNESS

I heard CNN trying to "sell" Obambo's words which were in effect.

There's no "regime" ready to step in if Iran's present system is over-thrown so it makes no sense to push them and we should STFU on his one"

Which is somewhat true, but Reagan would have at least spoken to the people of Iran and wished them freedom from tyranny and the evil of dictators like Komenie.

At it's most basic level, Obama and the left do not support individual freedom, it's always about the chess game of groups they define, "regimes" and power at the expense of individual freedom.
The cartoon is genius.

richfisher - actually, there IS a regime ready to step in; it's called The People. And what The People would do, as have all democracies, is to gather representatives of themselves, develop a constitution, pass this constitution, and start to govern themselves. By themselves.

What Obama did was disgraceful as the president of the US, the most important democracy in the world. He spoke to the Iranian authorities, legitimizing their actions of repression; all he asked them to do was to 'temper it down'.

He ought to have spoken to each and any peoples who want democracy and freedom, and supported their desire for both. That's all he needed to do. Instead, he supported the authorities.

He did the same with Netanyahu of Israel; he supported the status quo. Obama gave a speech of support for a Palestinian state; Obama only did this as a manipulative tactic of charm, to get the Arab states on his side. You see, Obama thinks that his speeches, his rhetoric, can cause all peoples to fall on their knees before him. So, Obama gave a speech in favour of Palestinian statehood. But of course, his agenda wasn't that state; it was Arab adoration-of-Obama.

Netanyahu recognized this, and replied in an equally rhetorical (words, no action) way. He spoke of his support for a Palestinian state, heh..but in the same speech, he insisted that Israel has an inherent, essential right to the lands of Judea and Samaria (aka the West Bank)! Get it? There's no land for a Palestinian state! And Netanyahu also said that they were to have no control over their air space or borders; heh. Note again...there's no LAND for them; Netanyahu insists that the West Bank belongs to Israel.

What did Obama do to this blatant mockery of his call-for-a-Palestinian state? He accepted Netanyahu's mockery; he said it was a great speech and an important 'step forward'! [What kind of step forward is it to agree to a state but remove the land base of that state?]

Obama is unAmerican and anti-democratic. He's disastrous for the US and its heritage of freedom, its heritage of individual freedom, its wealth, its morality.

"actually, there IS a regime ready to step in; it's called The People. And what The People would do, as have all democracies, is to gather representatives of themselves, develop a constitution, pass this constitution, and start to govern themselves. By themselves."
ET

I agree, ET, it's just that I don't think there's enough people in Iran who believe it, yet.
So far a lot of the Tehran elite (Westernized) do, but it's a huge country.
What do the rest of them think, why aren't they taking to the streets?
There should be protests everywhere, the movement to be free should be coming from everywhere, not just Tehran.

richfisher - the movement for democracy emerges, gathers weight and mass, over time. It's the under 30 in Tehran and other cities now and it will spread.

There's no going back. The regime will suppress it now by force. Because it has the force. And because it has the desire to retain authoritarian power. But it cannot repress the majority of its population forever.

That's why Obama's behaviour is so disgraceful, and I mean the word. His role, as President of the US - and he keeps reminding everyone that he is the President - is to stand up for democracy.

Instead, he is smashing it, grinding it to irrelevance in the US. By his manipulative buying of members of Congress (with his pork stimulus bill). By his emotional manipulation - where he threatens apocalpytic disaster if, eg, they don't pass the stimulus bill immediately. Without reading it. I repeat; without reading it; without discussion. So much for democracy.

By his manipulation of 'facts', where he regularly misinforms the public, claiming increased jobs where there are none; claiming saving of jobs where there are losses; claiming that his actions are merely reactions to Bush's 'mess'; claiming outrage at the AIG bonuses and so on.

By his rejection of dissent. He rejected the Tea Parties; and denigrates any news system that criticizes him..can you imagine..Obama is obsessed with FOX news and constantly refers to it..because they critique him.

His behaviour in foreign relations is based on his personal need to control people by 'charm'. He's not interested in the economy of other states, nor in their political systems. His interest is only: 'Are they charmed by me? Do they adore me?' That's all.

So, if they consider themselves equal, he'll insult them - as he did with the UK Prime Minister.
If they are angry at the US, he distances himself from the US; and apologizes for the 'evils of previous presidents'..after all, He, Obama, Is The New Man...and he must be adored.

If they are non-players with the US, as in the Arab world, he attempts to charm them, personally.

The fact that NONE of his foreign sallies have worked, operationally, seems to have escaped him.

What does he do, when he finds he can't charm and control someone else? He ignores them; they cease to exist. And so, for Obama - the Middle East will simply 'cease to exist'. He will do nothing to help freedom in that region. Or anywhere else.

richfisher

Again, it's not that it isn't a good idea to chose one's words carefully so that the mullahs don't have the anti-American shtick to beat the yanks with. It's always a good idea to be seen as a friend rather than a meddler. It's the kiss of death for someone to be seen as the puppet of the great satin. The quickest way to rally the unwashed masses around the nutters is to give the impression that the yanks are bossing the Iranians around.

It's another thing entirely to be seen as supporting the oppressors.

Obama isn't neutral, he's on the wrong side.

Live example of Iran government is
Loblaw companies ltd

they are feed sepciall people around them to be wealthy
as you know wealthisest men in food is

Loblaw companies owner
and second is Saptupto

and you know the Loblaw recent sell of their milk company was that Loblaw sold it to Saputo

and all people know the having house in Florida and sell to Mexican bread companies and dealign with MaFIA KIND OF business such as Supto
bring

whether or not Loblaw are deal or involve

with organized crime in and outside to
manfacure to Lobalw and they stay as billionar and so on

====

In Loblaw when we say halal food is wrong and after more than 30 years
all complain and evolution to halal food and respect to Muslim food

finally Terry West say I like to go old way and choose any manfacure deal with us and not allow Muslim to have big oppoutunitye
and

Lolbaw hated Shia Iranina and only

like to deal with corrputed Sunni Pakstain
who are currtnly ONLY sell MONOPLOY of halal in Loblaw is by hand of Pakstain only

NO SHia and Muslim from Iran are allowed to sell to Loblaw

we recommanded all Iranian are not support

any big chain such as Wal mart and Loblaw and Food basic in their halal food

instead support only halal food from retail
Iranina famoust stores or Indian stores and Afani and not support Pakstini corrpted store in canada
---

similar like Irna goverment
Loblaw ban anybody talk or say any opinon and
not email and not meet and not busienss
and only business and milion belong to peopel around them
and

wished of Michale Kimber to court is to
support peopel who are corrpted Muslim and

he act like pimp to who like protest women around to steal ideas from big senior and

he hate woman from family background
and Ban law by court order

to stop talk email ormeet and no more sell

from Misom halal food
is example of
ban communication for 5 years and as

all food was monopoly in hand of them so long

late

we faced of god mother Mary Ceriocola who run
Surefresh food over steal sicilan way or busienss of all Muslim by sell expensive

products to Loblaw and tak skin of Muslim to made her within two years 3 plan and finlay 150 police arrest 70 employee of Mary Cerical farm

In result Michael Kimber and all legal in Loblaw are dictor and ban all talk good or complain to Lboalw to run and feed Muslim their nonMuslim and steal peopel busienss

and also put stampt of corrutped of Crescent food over Misom halal food in Loblaw

we recommnaded all Muslim do not buy any bran supported by come up of Loblaw such as Crescent food and Alsafa are brand of Loblaw not really are muslim food

and we condemn all court order to stop selling Iranina shia food to Lobalw

and support owenr of Loblaw who help all Terry West to allow all corrpted link with organized crime sell in meat department of Loblaw

we also ask do third shake down by

fireing that big ass
Allan leigtho who are not even divorce to pay his old x wife money only seperated from her
and she came from England to take all money from Canadian and still he is citizen of Egnaland and got 14 million dollare money and 60 million offer to Glane jr to do what he asked to do

and probably all proteitue in Vancover are helping replace x wife of Allan legighton and goet pay by Allan leighton now

and as you can see how much women hired in Loblaw such as Stacy Joyce who run
PC brand by steal all food and innovation to Loblaw and steall all things must lable PC
come from and who feed those kind of women
such as Nany Alberga who was assitant to John Tavlari and assitant to Dave Gore all was victim and witness in crminal court

now both Dave gore and John Tavlari are fired
still Nancy Alberga and Branda Kwan and Rebbac Moorey and other stacy joyce seat to steal idea of seniors and later fired them for compensation
illlegaly made by legal of Lobalw Gorden Curerie and his staff to bribe their seniors to listen to legal of law they force to criminal court and
civil court

we recommanded to all Iranina do not shop Loblaw and condemn all freedom of talk in Canada and peopel who hate Iranian shai albe to sell to Loblaw

we did two shake down to Loblaw as evolution lead to revolution
Iranina did change Iran and peopel who stop all email and internet hate freedom to people

stop and change them and not supporte them too
stop buying any brand sellby Loblaw such as crescent and alsafa food

I'm going to predict that as Obama's poll ratings drop - and they've moved out of the double digit difference between Strong approval vs strong disapproval since May, and into the negative in the last few days..well, as this continues,

I'm going to predict that we'll see more of Obama on popular shows, late nite shows, at ball games, more hamburgers, more ice cream and so on.

Obama maintains his primacy, his dominance over you, by manipulative emotions. He'll charm and cajole and misinform and even, threaten that if you don't do as he says, the apocalypse will be upon us.
So, as the population becomes more sceptical, more alarmed by his spending and his abrogation of freedoms, Obama will move more and more into campaign mode. After all, that's his only 'schtick'.

At some time, the Republicans have to enable a leader to emerge, a genuine American, committed to the Constitution, which Obama is not. It's still too early for that. The dissent to Obama has to emerge from everyone and everywhere, particularly among the Independents, those not aligned with a political party.

Then, what happens? Obama has no morality or ethics, and he'll do anything to retain his power.

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air is arguing that Obama and his aides are claiming that his Cairo speech was the inspiration for the Iranian protests!

Morrissey also notes that Obama's FIRST claim was that the uprisings were triggered strictly by internal events, had nothing to do with the US, and therefore the US and Obama should stay silent. But..that was on day one. Now, Obama is claiming credit!

Morrrissey writes:
"This is the most despicable, self-serving, and arrogant spin I’ve seen yet from this White House, and that’s saying something. Obama gave a speech, and suddenly the people of Iran discovered that they’re being ruled by tyrants? Never mind that two weeks passed between the speech and the uprising, and that the very obvious trigger for the unrest was the incompetent manner in which the mullahs rigged the election for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Never mind the fact that this President took a full week to even sound like a watered-down Nicolas Sarkozy, let alone the leader of the free world."

And "This is very obviously an attempt at damage control. Obama has gotten hammered for staying behind the curve of Western leaders in the defense of liberty, freedom, and human rights. He has preferred to stay on the sidelines in the hope that silence will make the mullahs like him enough to grant him an audience, while Sarkozy, Angela Merkel, and the Brits slam the mullahcracy for its brutal treatment of political opposition."

" Now, suddenly, Obama wants to claim credit for getting their first with his Cairo speech — which had nothing to do with overthrowing mullahs, and in fact had only a passing mention of democracy as an official US policy in the Middle East."

"On the grand scale of things, I’d say that the establishment of democracy in Iraq had more influence on the Iranians than anything Obama’s managed to say, and I wouldn’t go so far to make it a proximate cause, or much more than a tertiary influence, after the stolen election and decades of repression by the mullahs."

Right, that Cairo speech, (although my view is that it was indeed aimed at the youth of the Middle East,) had nothing to do with democracy. It was instead a cajoling attempt to make these youth feel good about themselves as members of the global community (obama filled the speech with sentence by sentence praise, all invalid, about Arab achievements). It was to bring them into the global community. It didn't say how. It had nothing to do with changing the political or economic state of the ME.

But Obama, the narcissist, is of course, claiming credit for any and all actions in the world.

Sarge and the other arm-chair generals are idiots and don't know squat about counter-insurgency.
1. You don't defeat people by killing them---that is psycological. The mullahs demonstrate defeat by deploying deadly force....everytime you shoot the revolution grows. Killing an idea is difficult....it is like a virus that is very resistant...
2. Insurgeants have more flexabilty, latitude, licence, and resources than the establishment---besides being invisible. The "liberator pistol" theory does work and work well by demoralizing the establishment's security people. There is no real defence or counter to a determined assassin...
3. Conventional forces (tanks and artillery) are largely futile against insurgeancy.....there are exceptions such as Napolean's ending of the French Revolution.....the Paris mob/revolutionaries were not very numerous and foolishly concentrated before artillery loaded with canister.
4. Iranian society is totally alien to western thinking. The volatile/political segment is young, educated and urban....and in the streets and on the rooftops.
5. Prague's velvet revolution, the Philipine revolution are examples the mullahs fear, the Romanian revolution is what the mullahs really, really dread.....

ET: "I'm going to predict that as Obama's poll ratings drop."

I detect that the media may be becoming more critical and will contribute to the drop -- though of course they could hardly be less critical than they've been.

Just this morning CNN had a segment on the firing of the Inspector General in California; a week ago they didn't even know that such a position existed. David Gergen for the past two days has been expressing disappointment in Obama. Some of the usual suspects in the print media sound self-conscious about their defence of Obama's Iran policy, as though they know how ridiculous they sound. The little I saw of the press conference today seemed to show a feistier press corps and a testier President. Lots of small things like that.

But trust the CBC to stay on message. Susan Ormiston interviewed an "expert "at lunchtime and asked him why Iran is such a problem for Obama. Answer: it's George Bush's fault, and now Obama has to clean up the mess. Ormiston, of course, didn't challenge him on this piece of idiocy.

"I'm going to predict that we'll see more of Obama on popular shows, late nite shows, at ball games, more hamburgers, more ice cream and so on.

Obama maintains his primacy, his dominance over you, by manipulative emotions. He'll charm and cajole and misinform and even, threaten that if you don't do as he says, the apocalypse will be upon us."
ET

Likely, He'll pull a Chavez and attempt to stay in power using the ignorants amoungst the population. Will it be enough? I doubt it. He is definitely a one term President, IMO. He might not even make it to 2012...Or the country for that matter.

I saw an Obama that's already starting to come apart at the seams today in his press conference. Even the reporters are starting to look at each other when O starts interupting them, cutting them off. They even witnessed his narcissism when at one point he ask if the reporter was making fun of his ears because "Spock"? was mentioned (Something that escaped me/cannot pinpoint...need to look at the footage again)...Obama looked serious and not amused at all.

I was surprized on the many tougher questions that came out except for the very last one from CNN's Suzanne Malveaux.

Twice he answered: "I am the President" meaning his critics are not. "Because I said so" would have meant the same thing.

When asked if the reason for him to be tougher on
Iran was because people like John McCain were saying he should be, his answer was: "What do you think?"

At one point, frustrated that John McCain was still being quoted Obama said: "Well you know, John McCain like to dwelve in International affairs" or something like that. My immediat reaction was: Well maybe McCain should be in charge. A very weak moment there IMO.

This guy must go. The sooner the better.

It will be a very long time before another semi unscripted and prepared press conference will take place again IMO...It was not a good one in Obamaworld today.

right on, sasquatch. The origional Liberator was dropped in France before D-Day if memory serves, and also in the Philippines against the Japanese.

They were dropped with a little cartoon inside that showed how to use the gun, and a graphic suggestion that the best thing to do with it was to sneak up behind Herr Nazi, pop him from point blank range and swipe his lovely German made sub machine gun.

Work awesome in Iran and N. Korea, with the added bonus that they're completely useless as weapons of war. You know, just in case Dictator A is replaced by Dictator B, you haven't re-armed his military for him.

rh terry tory - I fully agree. I didn't see the press conference but I note how often, not simply in this meeting but at other times, that Obama reminds people "I am the President'. Can you imagine Bush doing that? Can you imagine any mature leader doing that?

Is he actually declaring that he is the sole authority? In America? Has he rejected the Constitution? Has he rejected the words: Of the people, by the people, for the people?
Yes - he has; he's unAmerican to the core.

Obama cannot handle being in a situation where you, the other person, are not controlled by him. That's why his public appearances and press conferences are so carefully scripted. This one, apparently, was less so- and he won't allow it to happen again.

Obama's 'reality' is a total fiction. By this I mean that Obama is, like an author, of himself. He writes the images, the notion of..the Obama that you interact with. HE is the author of the image. Not you who perceives it. HE controls what you are supposed to perceive.

So..if you perceive that Obama was a wimp on his early statements on Iran; that he supported the authorities and merely told them to 'don't be so abusive'.. if you perceive this...then, now, Obama is telling YOU that YOUR perceptions are wrong.
Obama is telling you that what you must perceive is what HE tells you to perceive.

And he says that his statements on Iran have been 'entirely consistent'. That his statement of today supporting freedom..is consistent with his earlier statements ignoring the notion of freedom and instead merely asking the mullahs to 'don't be so brutal' (in repressing freedom).

Just like Obama telling you that his stimulus increased jobs..it didn't. But, when you ask him this, he'll inform you that YOUR perceptions are wrong. Because HE is the President.

Obama doesn't like to feel he can't control you and your perceptions. And he cannot, absolutely cannot, handle criticism. He is obsessed with FOX news because they criticize him..and he constantly refers to them. He can't stand it; it makes him feel without power..and so, he reminds you, 'I am the President'. Again and again.

Cross him - and you're out of a job - as was the Inspector General.
Did Obama break the rules in this instance. Yes. Does he care? No. "I am the President'.

CNN's Lou Dobbs is quite critical of Obama, by the way. I'll agree, there'll be few of these unscripted press meetings; Obama can't handle criticism - and his hot temper is going to become quite evident soon enough.

Terry Tory, I heard a snip of that news conference. My favorite part was, "You guys are on a 24 hour news cycle. I'm not." With a really loud "a-hole!" left unsaid at the end of the sentence.

He's an accident looking for a place to happen, is our Barry. One of these days the teleprompter is going to go on the fritz, he's going to wander off-script, some reporter dude is going to ask just the wrong question at the wrong time, and Barry is going to frickin' snap.

I bet we'll get to see if the Secret Service will shoot people on command. 6 of Tim Horton's finest says we do.

ET, I'm please to see someone smarter than I agrees with me. ~:D Makes me feel all intelligent and stuff.

Well, just as I thought. I was away for awhile, I come back, and you guys really haven't presented anything.

Stronger words from the US are meaningless without the threat of backing them up with force - an impossibility at the present time.

Everyone knows that. Yet you guys howl and froth at the mouth and pile on.

Why? Because that's what you do. You have no ideology of your own. Merely reacting to whatever the 'other side' does is your ideology. It's the philosophy of ineffectual rage.

From Phantom's bizarro fantasy of dropping guns from the sky, to ET's ludicrously verbose essays trying to prove how she's all 'book-smart' (someone get her gainful employment!) to Jason's whacked out venom about liberals being "subhuman vermin" who should be "beheaded" - and of course the tastelessly vile cartoon the webmaster hails as a "masterpiece".

All venom, all rage all the time.

What's wrong with letting tools like bleetlet in on the fact that people are tired of the lefty crap?

That bug you bleety?

FOAD

bleet, yet again, your venemous attacks on us at SDA, reveal your paucity of thought and analysis.

And you pompously assert that you've been away and guess what, (sound of weeping?)..no..we didn't notice. Not one comment amongst us..that you (sob) weren't here. Ah well. Such is our lack of interest in your careless insults.

And no, your correlation that 'weak words' mean that you don't have to back them up, while 'strong words' mean that you have to back them up with force is sheer nonsense.

The 'force' can come from the basic truth, logic and evidential reality of the words. No need to bash someone over the head to make them accept truth. It's a basic truth, for instance, that a society ought to be ruled by its people rather than by a totalitarian autocrat. There's no need to force the people to accept this truth.

But, bleet, your lack of knowledge about such things..sigh..leads you to merely froth and rage and insult everyone here.

Try again. Have fun. Or, go away again. We hadn't noticed that you weren't here.

Phantom: Re Liberator pistols

Dropping a few planeloads of these would be helpful in an occupied country but, if dropped in Iran, Ahmedinejad's civilian supporters would get as many as the dissidents. Wouldn't that be a lovely outcome! A agree that getting arms into the country would be helpful but, quietly, by smuggling - when there's specific group to smuggle them to. Since there isn't (as yet) an organized faction to take delivery, "arming the revolution" doesn't look like an option.

ET: The US has neither the means nor the stomach to really hurt the mullahs. It does, of course, have the capacity to devastate the country (without resorting to nukes) but, I hardly think that the protesters would appreciate that sort of help! Therefore, a lot of empty bombast and chest thumping by Obama would only amuse the mullahs and give them a propaganda boost.

The worst possible side effect could be to give the demonstraters false hope of outside help. Think Bush One and the Marsh Arabs (one of the worst U.S. foreign policy debacles ever) or, more recently, Bush Two and the hapless Georgians.

Looks like Joe Biden was correct, and Barack Obama was tested in the first 6 months of his presidency and it looks like he failed.

zog - I never suggested that Obama or the US actually offer to materially help the Iranian protestors.

I suggested, repeatedly, that what Obama ought to have done was to effectively speak TO the protesters, by saying that the US, as a democratic state, fully supported all peoples in their desires for democracy and freedom. That's all.

That's not a statement of material assistance; it's a statement of support for the political system of democracy and for freedom.

As for the mullahs, they can be as amused as they want - such a statement wouldn't give them a propaganda boost. After all, like Canadians (CBC) always blaming the US for everything, the Iranian administration always blames the US. So - who cares?

But it would be important to the people fighting for freedom in Iran, to know that other people elsewhere in the world, support their struggle.

Instead, Obama spoke to the Mullahs! He merely said that they shouldn't be 'so brutal' in their suppression of the people! That meant that he effectively, supported their actions. He said nothing to the protesters..and he ought to have done so.

Jason and ET, agreed.
He's on the wrong side, sorry I'm not clear here, he should express his support for the people of Iran, like I believe Reagan would have , but there's no sense yet speaking against their bullshit form of government directly, because the Owe surely won't walk his talk no matter what he says he's not a doer of anything he's a talker, like Iggy.
I'm advocating a fine line of talk here for sure.
If and when the riots reach their tipping point then the entire western world should help militarily if need be.
I think we differ in our views only on timing .
I think that enough of the Iranian people do not believe in freedom as we are lead to believe, it's probably still a couple of years away, it's encouraging watching the riots though, and until the people of Iran for the most part want freedom and are willing to get rid of the mullahs it's not worth getting trapped in a Vietnam scenario.
A lot of the protesters I believe just want the green side to win and hate Ahmadouchebag, they don't mind the mullahs all that much.
There sure are a lot of "Ali akbaers" being chanted in the streets, that's not the "Kill Komenie " I'd like to hear before we get all beside them, yet.
There has to be more of a ground swell of support like in the Ukraine and Romania before I'd support risking becoming a foil for the mullahs again.
Obama is a do nothing scared pussy make no mistake, he has been told to stand down and will to the detriment of the free world.

ET: "...by saying that the US, as a democratic state, fully supported all peoples in their desires for democracy and freedom."

That's a distinction without a difference. Again, think Georgia.

My perfect scenario would be to just kill the mullahs and the big cheese's of the dictator regime with predator drones, wipe out their nuclear capabilities at the same time and let the Iranians have their country back. "No engagemnet" no troops on the ground as I think Mark Steyn put it a couple years ago.
Let Iranian's democracy happen after that.

Zog, I think you underestimate people's ability to do things themselves.

Pretty much everything we know about Iran right now is coming off Twitter, utube and blogs. This is with the official Iranian internet and phone system shut off.

There's no "group" making this happen, its happening self-assembly style. Imagine how much faster it would go if the poor b@stards could shoot back.

"The worst possible side effect could be to give the demonstraters false hope of outside help." Why would it have to be -false- hope, Zog? Iraq is RIGHT NEXT DOOR, the Marines could be in Tehran in like an hour. Besides, if the government falls without America having to come in and bomb the hell out of everything, they won't need any help.

Give the demonstrators a couple million handguns and the government would be toast the next morning.

Just sayin'.

Phantom,

You missed my main point. A couple of million guns dropped willy nilly into the country would mean a million for the protesters and a million for Ahmedianijad's supporters. Scope for a lot more bloodshed for no discernable benefit.

Anyway, we're arguing for naught as the idea is fantasy. A few thousand decent weapons smuggled in from Iraq would make a real difference, if only there was a functioning underground group to take delivery.

Iran new election this time

all candiate say their name and all view they can made and let otehr to wath
and nobody go to street if they lost it this time
and let media watch win or loose this time

and goals to find person who able to change existing systme and do not scared all otehr better president to come
may be we have better than Mosavi or Ahamdinigad to become president

let this blood shit get stop and ask for new election one more time

they can do within 6 month

that Ahamdinigad agreed to made new elction day within 6 month to stop all strik in Iran and let freedom made choice for Iranina one more time

adn west must promist to stop all santion to Iran
and help Iran ecomony as they did heloed Iraq qand Paksitan and Afagnistan and etc...
=====
All the hit companies sanction Iran is they hit Iranina peopel not Iranina government

www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=sanction&meta=&rlz=1R2RNTN_en&aq=f&oq=

LIKE LOBLAW put MISOM HALAL FOOD IN Sanction to do not let them to eat and life or feed Muslim Iranina in Iran

all war hit Iraninan people not Iranina government and this fact about
world was not fair with Iran and Iraninan right for live in peace full and nobody has right to tlak to say to world or hit by both parties
by Iran government Inside or hit by West countries

Iranian got revenge over all politcial systems

from theya re shia and otehr Muslim are Suni
they donot liek Sadam they did not like all west fredom or they did not or like otehr...

Problems in Iran is lack happy time number of unemplopyed even peope work 10 hour per day are not able to feed their fmaily
nobody go to invite guess not able to pay the cost and nobody married since they have not money to pay their cost or nobody has brng more children they do not have money and
poor situation and all forigh and presur to go to univeristy must work hard for small miminim life in Iran that is unfortuant

Iran was in 7 years war and all
Sanction

!!!!!!!!!!!
is similar sanction other companies in west also not fair to Iranian people

Nobody has right to kill other peopel for say their differnces and no court shoule

allos court order so simply for benfit of one group in all views of it
people can talk and you have right to not hear too you can not force to hear but you have to talk espcially when they start in non viloance walk and

basicaly government in Iran are nto respect anybody in differnt view with them that

MUST be changed

Ahmadinagd say that Palestinina are died by gun shot of Isreal in bad scen for freedom of talk
and land
tben

Ahmadinagad must accept

Land of Iran belong to so many Iranian include
Jeiwh and Chrisitna Iraninan

He must respect them

If you respect peopel right they arenot going viloance

peoipel go violance when you ignore them or disrepect them or kill them with no trail

or not feed them and let few peopel get rich and otehr are hungry

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Every body know Obama is not have too much experince in foright policy
even regard to Isreal and Palstian he did not say quick his opionion

he is lawyer and like to see from criminal view and defintly peopel who know criminal law do not
support any violance in street from both sides
and most like this is used from lef to right wings now

there is not left and right wings exist in Iran

that is problems and if some one talk other hate to listn or at least try new ways too

====

Do not forget Iran also always in link with Britain and USA American and mostly I would say
English from britian who are not say and do not like freedom of talk and say opion and are mostly are calm peopel Iran also do nto like to hear any changes quickly or in harsh way

but if we tell them in nice way also they are not listening and for peopel in order to change them to ask or let those group their voice are hear

and most young are not experince such as last girl was killed in street she is 25 and born after revlotion in Iran and so naif and loose her life so simple in election is really

made me sad and unfortunaly see those scne mad me almost vomating really discusing

Iran is very complicated country

in North are Iranina with blue or green eyes are accent called them " Rashdi:
in North West is Turkish Iranian who are link with country of Turky which are Iraniana but their language background are turk and

in south is West are Arab Iranina who are speak Arabic and in south East are peopel of Iran who like to eat food with hot spice like Pakstian and they have dark skin

but We do not have small very dark skin in city of Bander Abus but not too many black or may be none in Iran

and in big cities the culture and accent and culture are diffent vern food are differnt too

therefore deal with Iran inside is very difficult and

you should understand Iran like Canada is multicultural group made today Iran

like in Iran in north East are look like eyes like Chineese some call them " barbry " while some thing this word is offend them as result

now orignian persi or Iranina are located in middle of center of Iran located in big cities

and

peopel who kill in street other Iranina are
named as " Chomagh Daran" it means

peopel who has stick= Chomaga in their hand and they are viloant people and they are very xxx restricted and even governemtn when they are got mad can not calm them down easy
are group of angry and like Islam in old fashion way and their women only wear balck dress

still do not mix them so many are wear blak dress but they are fine you should go in Iran to understand and differnce among thos peope and nation

=====

people must stop risk loose their life

new eletion came to grond

and all candiate to say their opion in free
internet

and let new elction to go and

then who were won
otehrs do nto made any street walk any more

new president made all sanction from Iran must get open and ecomnic change
anbd link with west and East need it for Iran

breif of what I said:

For respect of Iranian people

Government can allow new election within 6 month date get fix and open to media and present new
candidate better than Ahamdinagad and Mosavi to run presidency and allow change to Iran government

and West must stop Sancation against Iran and made help to Iran as they did to other countreis with was zone like Iraq and Pakistan

People can talk and has freedom but do not kill eachother which is criminal offence

people can not go to one building viloancy to cause treat to otehr shoot them or so
do not get close to any building peopel work or live

area and hour can said to govement in order they know for preotest to hear their voice
if some one hit them they must arrest too

Do not support Loblaw halal food as long they are not let freedom of tlak and made interfer in fredom of choice for shia Muslim in Canada this is cutomer choice not them as they are run by Dictors like Michael Kimber who wish people go to jail and not talk or work or sell in his wish list Loblaw should not supported unless Misom halal back to them fight Dictors with all energy you have had but do not act like them

change society but do not harrass them even if they viloance you do not

because world watching Iran and Iranian people
god bless
do not risk your life when you stranger in street
peace

zog - you cannot readily go into a sovereign country and assist that 'half or more' of the population that want change, even change to a democratic regime.

After all, that would open the door to, for example, France coming in and assisting the 40% of Quebecers who want a sovereign Quebec.

I repeat, Obama should have spoken to the protesters, telling them that the free world supports their fight for freedom. That's all. Instead, he spoke to the mullahs, to the government, asking them to 'tone down' their brutality of response! Effectively, that meant that he rejected the rights of the people to freedom, and supported the government's right to suppress that freedom! He just wanted them to 'do it nicely'. Disgraceful behaviour by Obama.

Oh, and what about his open house for the Iranians, for the first time in how many years, that Iranian diplomats could go to US embassies for July 4th 'hot dogs and..'? He ought to have rescinded that invitation, claiming that he was disturbed by a regime that shot at its own citizens. Instead - he kept the invitation open, and shifted the responsibility for going..to the Iranians. 'That's up to the Iranians'. he said.

No it isn't. An invitation to someone's house or embassy isn't up to the guests. It's up to the owner of the House/Embassy.

Zog, sorry I didn't address that issue. Two things. First, Imadinnerjacket's supporters already have guns. His supporters are the cops and the army. Who are -already- shooting at the protesters, who are protesting -anyway-. That's his problem. It doesn't matter how many the authorities pick up, they're crappy little one shot things, the authorities gain no advantage.

Second, the idea of arming civilians is not so that they go out and kill lots and lots of police and defeat the Army in the field. Civilians aren't going to do that.

The idea is to make the police afraid they are going to die. Civilians with crappy one shot pistols can absolutely do that. You have to remember that these friggin' "police" we're talking about aren't like our police here. They're more like a big drug gang. They aren't brave and they have no honor or sense of duty.

Sadly, I agree with you that its a pipe dream. The very last thing on this Earth Obama is going to do is arm civilians. He's doing his best to disarm his own people.

Phantom

"Imadinnerjacket's supporters already have guns. His supporters are the cops and the army."

I'm afraid that it's not that simple. Amadi has strong support among the nation's poor, among those who associate Mousavi with the corruption of Rafsanjani and the old guard, among ultra-nationalists who like his rable-rousing confrontational approach to foreign relations and among those who simply yearn for domestic tranquility.

The people who took to the streets were overwhelmingly young and better educated. My Iranian acquaintances tell me that, although Aminadijad's landslide victory was bullshit, the split of supporters and opponents among the population is probably about equal.

Arms inadvertantly given to the working poor would most likely be arms given to his supporters.

The video this cartoon was based off of was extremely heart wrenching. And the U.S government cannot even lend moral support? Disusting and disturbing.

Sarge: "the iranian army would make short work of a bunch of civilians with single shot pressed steel .45 pistols. the iranian military have tanks and artillery an a fairly outstandin record of creatin large scale mahem when needed."

They said all this stuff about the Iraqi army too. How well did that work out?

sasquatch: "the Romanian revolution is what the mullahs really, really dread"

Yeah, give 'em the Ceausescu treatment! Tell 'em to quit or be prepared to die at any moment, unsuspectingly.

bleet: "You have no ideology of your own"

Some do, some don't. But the leftie ideology is faith, force and Platonic / Hegelian fantasyland. All the things that make life miserable.

Oh, and what about his open house for the Iranians, for the first time in how many years, that Iranian diplomats could go to US embassies for July 4th 'hot dogs and..'? He ought to have rescinded that invitation, claiming that he was disturbed by a regime that shot at its own citizens. Instead - he kept the invitation open, and shifted the responsibility for going..to the Iranians. 'That's up to the Iranians'. he said.

No it isn't. An invitation to someone's house or embassy isn't up to the guests. It's up to the owner of the House/Embassy.
Posted by: ET at June 23, 2009 7:20 PM

True, Obama kept the door open, but he can not force the guests to come, and I doubt very much IamaDinerJacket's people are going to show, given the fact that they are currently painting anytthing the USA says as interference (polite was to put it) right now. If a few do show, it might be the only method right now of getting any gov insider POV or intel,... right now onformation is more valuable than playing to the US home crowd.

For Obama to pull the iniatation right now would be more of a symbolic stunt for the USA home crowd than for doing anything for the Iraian people. If this is to be about helping the Irian people and giving them a true shot a real freedom and democracy, then hometeam politics need the left out of this.

If there is be any real progress, Obama's approach is the the best one right now, and that is to appear to be completely hands off,... meanwhile, I'll bet there are plans like the Phantom's being done right now (very selectively and quietly) and I'm sure that BBQ backdoor politics is neing watch very closely as well.

If the Iranian people want this, they have to earn it themselves,... If the USA openly tries to influence the situation, chance are it end very badly,... Stupid cowboy diplomacy at this point may very well be great entertainment for Us, but this is not entertainment for people of Iran.

Phantom's idea about the one shot Liberators is a good idea, of you can get them into the hands of the right people,... dropping a million of them from the skies isn't,...

zorpheus - you are quite the apologist for Obama. I repeat my point; he ought to rescind the invitation for July 4th to the Iranians.

It's is quite simplistic to suggest that he retain it so that he could get their 'point of view'. A civil service embassy agent is hardly going to provide an honest unbiased POV. Is baised Newspeak from Iran really what you consider as Information?

Second, no-one is suggesting that the US move in with its military, and Obama hasn't been 'hands off'; His speeches were to the administration, merely asking them to be less 'brutal' in their repression of the protesters. That means he was on the side of the administration and he was supporting its right to repress the people! you don't seem to undertand this.

He ought to have spoken to the protesters, saying only that he was fully in support of democracy and freedom. Period. That's all he needed to say. He didn't do this. And this action isn't pandering to the hometown voices; it's acknowledging that the US holds the role of promoter and defender of freedom and democracy.

Iranians have to earn freedom? What is it? Some kind of test that they have to go through before they can be rewarded with freedom? It's an inalienable first right!

Zorpheous, no fair agreeing with me. Makes me look bad, you know. ~:D

Still, to the point. It -doesn't matter- how many get into the hands of the "right people". It only matters if some do. Nobody is going to win battles with these things. As a practical matter they are nearly useless in a fight, you'd be much better off with a spear.

What you're doing is two things. You're stiffening the spine of the protester because now he can shoot back, and you're terrifying the thugs passing for police and soldiers.

Think of it as a cell phone. If you're trying to provide coverage of an event you can spend zillions on news crews, who are easily waylaid, diverted, misled or just plain imprisoned. Or, you can drop half a million cell phones into the situation. Now you're getting pictures, eye witness reports, live video even. It doesn't matter how many of the "wrong" people have phones and post lies, because so many are posting truth you can tell the difference. Truth is always the same, lies vary.

With the little guns, ok fine you add some otherwise unarmed punks to the cops who are firing on crowds of protesters. You can see how that doesn't really make any difference, because the protesters are -already- facing down assault rifles. They're going to run away from a one shot tin pistol?

What happens is the government doesn't get it all their own way now, like they are used to. Mr. Invincible thug guy now has to face return fire. He's not in it for the danger, he's in it for money and power. He's going to keep his head down, and start thinking about running away.

The problem for people like Obama is, he wants to control the outcome. He wants to pick the winner. If you empower the people, -they- pick the winner. The new government emerges naturally from the ranks of the people, which is extremely messy and so no government wants to do that. So there's no way in hell they are going to drop Liberators.

They don't want to empower the people of Iran. They want the people of Iran to do what they are told. Same as they want you and I to do what we are told.

Call me crazy, that's not what I think freedom is about.