Click to see the beacon journal online
Homes   Jobs   Cars   Shopping
All Da King's Men -- Community Blog

Previous post:

Next post:

Hopenchange, Meet World

by Da King on February 18, 2009

in foreign policy,Uncategorized

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is quite pleased that the United States government is approaching foreign policy with a new attitude. He is willing to deal with the USA based upon "mutual respect and equality." Ahmadinejad is all about CHANGE.

As long as it's the United States that does all the changing. (link)

In an interview with Iranian state-run television, Mr Ahmadinejad once again called upon Washington's new administration of President Barack Obama to implement changes that could make a "real" difference in the region.

"If they accept the rights of the Palestinians, the Afghans… if there is a real change, relations can change," he said.

"We are waiting to see the change. A lot of people are awaiting the change and if they [the United States] do change the relationship will change itself."

However, Mr Ahmadinejad also said his country's controversial nuclear programme which the West suspects is aimed at making atomic weapons is a "closed" chapter.

"If anybody wants to talk of the nuclear issue, they would be hurting themselves," he said in the television interview.

So, if the USA allows Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, and if the USA gets out of Afghanistan, and if the USA drops it's support of Israel, and if the USA supports the Palestinians instead, then that is change that Ahmadinejad can believe in. As for anything else, forget it.

Piece of cake. Who said it would be difficult to deal with Iran ?

Iran has decided the nuclear issue is "closed" without letting the UN know what Iran is up to.

"Iran right now is not providing any access, any clarification with regards to the whole area of possible military dimension," said Mohamed ElBaradei of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

It must be those failed Bush policies that are causing Iran to be so uncooperative.

North Korea also showed it's willingness to change during Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton's meeting with Asian leaders in Tokyo, by immediately threatening to test launch a new missile capable of reaching the United States. (link)

In an apparent attempt to command attention, North Korea hinted that it will test-launch a Taepodong 2 missile from its eastern coast.

"One will come to know later what will be launched," the government's state-run Korean Central News Agency said as the regime celebrated the 67th birthday of leader Kim Jong Il. It said the effort was related to "space development," rather than military ambitions.

At an appearance today with Japanese Foreign Minister Hirofumi Nakasone, Clinton responded that a missile launch by Pyongyang "would be very unhelpful in moving our relationship forward."

North Korean technicians have been assembling a Taepodong missile, and intelligence officials believe it is nearly ready to be fired, according to South Korean media. The missile may have the potential to reach Alaska and possibly the West Coast.

North Korea is also threatening to attack South Korea over a border dispute.

Quick, somebody send Kim Jong Il tapes of a couple Obama speeches, so he can see the error of his ways.

Pakistan has agreed to stop fighting extremists in the northwest part of the country, allowing Taliban-style Islamic rule to be imposed there. Big victory for the bad guys. (link)

Battle-weary residents welcomed a pro-Taliban cleric dispatched by the government Tuesday to convince militants in the former tourist haven of Swat to stop fighting in exchange for the imposition of Islamic law and suspension of military offensives there.

Sufi Muhammad arrived in a caravan of some 300 vehicles in Swat Valley's main city of Mingora a day after he struck the truce, which a U.S. defense official called "negative" and critics said represented a surrender to extremists fanning out from nearby strongholds close to the Afghan border.

NATO also expressed dismay. "We would all be concerned by a situation in which extremists would have safe haven," NATO spokesman James Appathurai said at a news briefing. "It is certainly reason for concern."

In response to these troubling signs coming from the world's most repressive and unstable regimes, President Obama said…….well, I couldn't find anything, but I'm sure he's on top of the situation. Obama didn't cause these problems, you know. Um, Bush did ?

  • larry d.

    Maybe we should drone bomb a couple Paki villages and see what happens.

  • The Reverend

    Ahmadinejab said…

    "If they accept the rights of the Palestinians, the Afghans… if there is a real change, relations can change," he said.

    King's interpretation…

    " if the USA allows Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, and if the USA gets out of Afghanistan, and if the USA drops it's support of Israel, and if the USA supports the Palestinians instead, then that is change that Ahmadinejad can believe in."

    Quite a disconnect.

    I suppose that belligerence is still called for from American leaders….because belligerence has worked out so well over the last 8 years.

  • Da King

    So, the Rev is fine with Iran having nuclear weapons, with Iran fomenting the destruction of Israel, and with the Taliban and Al Qaeda overrunning Afghanistan again.

    Figures.

    Ahmadinejad is definitely on your side.

  • Tbomb

    Oh, but King didn't WimpyII defeat the Taliban?Actually, Ahmadinejad is great friends with al-Maliki .I'm sure you must have seen the heroes welcome he received last year, complete with military parade and citizens rejoicing in the streets of Baghdad. If the goal of 'freeing" Iraq was to install a Shiite Theocracy in the region,well then,"mission accomplished".

  • roysoldboy

    Why King, I am sure that Rev and Iamajihad would get along famously. Red has been against support of Israel as long as I have been reading him. Am I wrong in thinking that because of his abject hatred for Bush?

    I wonder why others can't see these things as Ahmedinejad and Rev do. I guess it has something to do with the political thinking of the rest of us compared to those of the far left.

  • roysoldboy

    King, I forgot to mention that I mentioned that Hopenchange thing to Larry4 and he likes that name. Of course, there could be several reasons he likes it but I think it coming from you is part of it. I regularly use it in red when writing about old Hopey on my forum. Thanks.

  • Da King

    Excuse me, Tbomb, but Iraq held free elections. I think that's called democracy, not theocracy.

  • Da King

    C'mon Roy, don't be so hard on the Rev. What could possibly go wrong by allowing the jihadist Iranian government to acquire nuclear weapons ? No possibility for trouble there. And we know those Jews are responsible for the world's troubles, just like Rev, Amadmanjihad, and Hitler said.

    Is Larry4 posting on one of your forums ? Which one ? I haven't corresponded with him in months.

  • Tbomb

    King, I referred to the"region" as in the Middle East.Iran is Shiite and Iraq is something like 70 % Shiite. The main reason Republicans [Reagan,Bush I] supported Saddam even after he gassed his own people was his ability to keep his population under control while being an irritant to Iran. Wimpy II touted the democratization of Iraq as stabilizing to the region.Somehow,I don't think the forming of an alliance between Iran and Iraq[largely secular under Saddam]was what he envisioned.Add the Iraq debacle to the failure in Afghanistan[ the Taliban was not removed nor Bin Laden captured] and you get one giant failed foreign policy.

  • larry d.

    Democracy is on the march, TBomb!

    Iraq is free to do what it pleases and if it wants to sit down with Ach-Man with no preconditions who are we to argue? I'm sure they know who is buttering their bread.

  • Da King

    So, Tbomb, I take it you're a 'glass half empty' sort of guy.

    Two questions:

    Is Iraq better off now or under Saddam ?

    Is Afghanistan better off now or under the Taliban ?

  • roysoldboy

    Larry4 has a tendency to use his blackberry to e-mail me now and then. This time he did it in answer to a forward from me and for some reason I mentioned Saint Barack and being a supporter of his he had to learn where that came from. He is, I think, pretty busy being a big time lawyer in NYC.

    Let me take a swing at your question to Tbomb. Afghanistan is receiving several thousand more American troops soon at the order of the new CIC, Saint Barack. Guess he thinks that since people call that his war he might as well get in more troops to win with.

  • Da King

    I heard The One say we couldn't win the Afghanistan war by military force alone, that we have to get the people there on our side. I think even the Sainted One is going to have a hard time getting the Taliban and Al Qaeda to like us. Those boys are pretty stubborn, and their God is named Allah, not Obama. I don't think Hopenchange will work on them.

    The 17,000 troops should help more than trying to play nice.

  • The Reverend

    Tbomb is correct here. On the Shiite-Sunni-Iran stuff. Indeed, the Wimpster changed the dynamic over there ……. I guess the wisdom for such an eff-up came from his Higher Father….you know, in those secret meetings they had together.

    Engagement, adult style, is what's required with Iran….and all other nations as well. In less than a month Obama has Iranians responding to non-belligerent, grown-up, gestures of good will. That's what a leader would do.

  • averagejoe5

    More troops? Wartime escalation instead of withdrawl. Sounds like Johnson and Vietnam. hhmmmmm? We all know how that turned out. Will he start the draft? He is already a huge proponent of voluteering.

  • larry d.

    TBomb isn't correct, Reverend. You fellows seem to think more war or tension between Iran and Iraq is the litmus test for success. What you're seeing is a little more stability and that's good.

    Bush is genius and Obama is smart to be following his lead!

  • larry d.

    The one who is right is averagejoe. Afghanistan has quagmire-potential written all over it–more troops, no clear plan, no reasonable goals.

  • Da King

    Rev says, "In less than a month Obama has Iranians responding to non-belligerent, grown-up, gestures of good will. That's what a leader would do."

    Kool-Aid altert. Yes, Obama has Iran responding. They responded by saying that Iran won't change a thing. They responded by demanding the USA change all it's policies.

  • roysoldboy

    Along with Iran demanding that the US change its policies they have been testing longer range rockets. I guess it is all that Obama diplomacy that is forcing them to get more belligerent. I would rather apply the bully principle to them, where you back off and they come at you harder.

  • larry d.

    We can always ask th UN to intervene if Iran bullies us too hard.

  • Da King

    Didn't Joe Biden say something about the world testing Obama in his first six months as CINC ?

    Biden had the time frame wrong. It's happening in Obama's FIRST month. Russia, Iran, Pakistan, N Korea, they are all stress testing our new prez.

  • The Reverend

    Here's the scream of the week….

    "Bush is genius and Obama is smart to be following his lead!"

    I mean, please….larry…you gotta' stop….I think I'm injuring myself with all the laughing.

  • Da King

    Except that Obama is following Bush's lead.

Previous post:

Next post:

 

© The Akron Beacon Journal • 44 E. Exchange Street, Akron, Ohio 44308

Powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).