The Iranians have formally denied any participation in the attempt to murder the Saudi ambassador to the U.S.
As usual, they're probably lying. We actually have one of the perps in custody.
But what they may not be lying about is the rationale for the ramping up of rhetoric by the Obama administration ( emphasis mine) :
An aide to Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday denied US allegations that the Islamic republic was involved in a plot to kill the Saudi envoy to Washington.
“This is a prefabricated scenario to turn public attention away from domestic problems within the United States,” Ali Akbar Javanfekr, the president’s press adviser, told AFP.
“The US government and the CIA have a lot of experience in diverting public attention from domestic problems in the United States. We have to wait now to know the details of this prefabricated scenario to know the US government’s objectives,” he said.
Let's examine a few things.
Iran is a rogue nation and state supporter of terrorism who has been in a state of war with us since 1978. They or their proxies have killed US troops in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan, supplied weapons to our enemies. There's even some credible evidence they may have helped facilitate 9/11.
They actually engaged in a shooting war with the U.S. in the Persian Gulf back in the 1980's, and then there's their illegal nuclear program, the constant threats and bluster and their direct arming of our enemies.
President Barack Obama has been an enabler and appeaser of Iran ever since he took office (and to be honest, so was President Bush before him to a large degree). Nothing I mentioned above ever caused him to falter a single bit in 'engaging' with the mullahs or extending what he called 'an unclenched fist' in their direction, no matter how often they spat in his hand.
Now, all of a sudden, President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton are pounding their chests and issuing war cries about an 'unacceptable escalation'? Why now?
What's changed, of course is the president's poll numbers. With an election coming on, President Obama might just see some forceful engagement in Iran as a way to boost those ol' approval numbers. It wouldn't surprise me one bit.
This president frequently channels Jimmy Carter, and you may recall the boost in President Carter's popularity when the Iran Hostage crisis began. Before that, he failure to show even a semblence of acumen in running the U.S. economy or its foreign policy had him doomed to be a one term president.
But once the mullahs moved against our diplomats, the American people rallied around him - at least until they finally figured out that an incredibly weak president was going to be as feckless with the Iranians as he had with the commies and virtually everyone else. Then his ratings plummeted again. Meanwhile the mullahs were smart enough to release the hostages the day President Reagan took office even at terms that were actually far less than what they had been demanding of Carter.
If our current miserable excuse for a commander-in-chief has ideas of taking on Iran to bolster his political future, I applaud the action if not the motivation, provided it's done properly...which it likely won't be with President Obama in charge. A few things to consider:
The president is also likely to face hardline pressure from Putin to back off from Iran - something Obama has been notably deficient in dealing with in the past. In fact, the only real allies we're likely to have will be Australia and Israel, with maybe the Saudis and the Gulf nations in support roles. Given president Obama's hostility towards Israel, is he going to be prepared to make use of our mosy loyal ally in the Middle East?
These are all things I hope President Obama is considering if he's contemplating a wag the dog moment.Frankly, I wonder if he has.
No comments:
Post a Comment