Take That, Neocons: Obama's Unprecedented Outreach to Iran
Everything about this Obama video message to Iran is just right, starting with his reference to the "Islamic Republic." No threats. No.pointless references to its President's pff-the-wall statements. Just respect and the offer to join the US in working for peaceful relations.
If you ever wondered why we elected this guy, here you have it.
Advertisement
It is amazing. We may have elected the next Lincoln, in the very best sense.
I was noodling around YouTube and I found and oldy-but-goody from a righteously indignant Senator Barack Obama, who has apparently been consistent on Iran.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne41EPnrKFU
March 20, 2009 8:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Impressive, indeed. Subtle. The tone is right, and someone around Obama -- and probably he, himself, given his background -- has really done their homework.
From what I know of Iranian public sentiment, this ought to have a very positive impact. They do have an ancient culture and are rightly proud of their history. It's an opening, nothing more. But it shows the kind of normal respect for the people that they crave, and lays the groundwork for more constructive work in the years ahead.
I'm at a loss, though, to know where to look to find signs and reports from Iranian sources, in English, to indicate how this is going over, over there? Can anyone suggest some? I'm really curious to know if my sense about this message is true.
March 20, 2009 9:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
This also comes in the context of the post-Freeman dustup, and I find it reassuring. I note that he does not reference Israel in any way, but this is most definitely a signal to the rightwingers there that he's not going to be bullied.
What will their response be?
March 20, 2009 9:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agree totally, MJ. But according to The Opinionator at The Times this is not going over well in a lot of other commentary.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/
March 20, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
You just edited your post and deleted the BBC analysis link you had included and which you called a "deconstruction" of Obama's message.
Here it is:
What Obama's message to Iran means
By Paul Reynolds
BBC 15:36 GMT, Friday, 20 March 2009
Perhaps because it says this?--
or this?--
Not than one person's interpretation of the message is better than another single person's interpretation of the message. But apparently it's sufficiently vague that not everyone is going to read it the same way.
In this cross-link that the BBC site offers with this article, there's a reminder that the Iranian leadership didn't cotton much to his "tough but direct" and "carrot and stick" diplomacy language in December:
"Iran shuns US 'carrot-and-stick'
Monday, 8 December 2008
March 20, 2009 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
One thing I just don't understand: Instead of all this show-biz and bright-lights production, all the rigamarole, why don't we just call them up, pencil in a meeting, sit down for a talk and see where things go from there? Take everything off the table, and start from square one. At least, kick it off. But we don't. Instead, we have feints, and whispers, and announcements of "intentions", and then doubts are expressed, heads are shaken in dramatic sorrow, and, finally, we reach agreement (with Tel Aviv) that there's just no resoning with the Persians.
If I were cynical, I would think this big, oomphy televised message is aimed at America instead of Iran - to convince us that everything is being done to engage the Iranians, when, in reality, we've done squat... that we never intended to engage them... that we intend the long, bitter night to continue. But when that time comes, when we abandon the still-born idea of negotiations, or perhaps even attack their "nuclear" facilities, we can always assert tearfully that we tried. We tried and tried and tried...
March 20, 2009 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Iranians have made perfectly reasonable compromise offers that would address any legitimate concern about nuclear weapons proliferation -- for example, an offer to open their enrichment program to multinational participation, endorsed by US and international experts -- and the US has consistently ignored these offers and moved goalposts and demanding the Iran simply give up its rights. (Read about the iranian offers http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/04/05/opinion/edzarif.php)
Conclusion: the US doesn't want to make peace with Iran and is looking to keep the nuclear issue alive as an excuse and pretext.
March 20, 2009 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nothing has happened yet. What is wrong with you liberals? You don't even know what the outcome is and it's 'amazing'. ~He's the next Lincoln, ah~
You know, the day will come when liberals realize that their enemy is not the "neo-cons,' that there really are enemies of our country.
You're an angry, constantly divisive group who hate your own fellow Americans.
March 20, 2009 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, we just hate people who say we hate our country.
March 21, 2009 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or we hate people who LIE incessantly about how we hate our country.
March 22, 2009 5:13 AM | Reply | Permalink