Pat Dollard | Young Americans

Not even 24 hours since being crowned the democrat nominee for POTUS and Hussein has both feet in a pile of donkey-shit …

Obama’s Evolving Position on Iran

Hawkish Stand More Like the Bush Administration’s Position

By JONATHAN KARL - (ABC News)

Don’t call Barack Obama an appeaser.

In his speech Wednesday before the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, Obama sounded a bit like the more hawkish officials in the Bush administration.

He said the military option is “on the table” for dealing with Iran’s nuclear program, and in stark contrast to earlier statements, he said he would meet with Iranian leaders “if and only if it can advance the interest of the United States.”

Obama’s tone was strikingly different from it has been in the past.

During a debate last summer, he said he would be willing to meet with Iranian leaders and other American adversaries “without preconditions” during the first year of his presidency. Today, he made it clear that we should not expect a President Obama to be sitting down with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad any time soon:

“[A]s president of the United States, I would be willing to lead tough and principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leaders at a time and place of my choosing if and only if it can advance the interest of the United States. That is my position. I want to be absolutely clear.”

Obama Camp Defends

Obama campaign officials insist the presumptive Democratic nominee has not changed his position.

“It’s not a precondition to say he’ll only do it to advance our interests,” said Obama foreign policy adviser Denis McDonough.

McDonough said Obama has never promised to meet with Iran’s leaders. He’s simply said that he is willing to meet with Iran’s leaders. “And the key word there is willing. The idea that some have suggested is that he has promised a meeting. That is not the case and never was the case. He argued then as he argued today that he is willing to meet as it advances our interests.”

But take another look at what Obama said during last July’s Democratic debate sponsored by CNN and Youtube. The question is clear, and so is his response:

QUESTION: “Would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea?”

OBAMA: “I would. And the reason is this: The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them — which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration — is ridiculous. Ronald Reagan constantly spoke to the Soviet Union at a time when he called them an evil empire. He understood that we may not trust them, and they may pose an extraordinary danger to this country, but we had the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward. And I think that it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them.”

Obama’s position on talking to Iran has been evolving for some time.

Since the CNN/Youtube debate, he has been saying that he would only meet with Iranian leaders after “preparation” by lower-level officials.

Most recently, talking to reporters in South Dakota last month, he explained, “The preparation would involve starting with low-level, lower-level diplomatic contacts, having our diplomatic corps work with their Iranian counterparts, an agenda. But what I have said is that at some point, I would be willing to meet.”

Now with his speech before AIPAC he said he will meet with Iranian leaders “if and only if it can advance the interest of the United States.”

This isn’t all that different from the Bush administration’s position.

Echoes of Bush Policy

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has also offered to meet with Iranian leaders if Iran agrees to suspend its uranium enrichment program. It’s a more specific precondition than Obama’s, but it is an offer to hold negotiations.

“We would be willing to meet with them but not while they continue to inch toward nuclear weapons under the cover of talks,” Rice said Tuesday. “The real question isn’t why won’t the Bush administration talk to Iran. The real question is why won’t Iran talk to us.”

There is, of course, one important difference.

Obama is willing to start low-level talks on Iran’s nuclear program right away, something the Bush administration has refused to do.

Obama said he would engage in such diplomacy “with no illusions about the Iranian regime.”

“I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” he said, repeating himself for emphasis, “everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear, everything.”

Echoing the Bush administration, Obama added: “I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally, Israel. Do not be confused.”

————————————————————————————

Doug Ross @ Journal lists several of Hussein’s out and out lies in today’s speech before AIPAC:

For a skilled politician capable of evading concrete positions, Obama’s speech was characterized by an unprecidented series of fabrications, gyroscopic spin, and outright lies.

Recall that Barack Obama spent two decades attending a church that supported Hamas, attacked Jews and repeatedly honored Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.

Now compare and contrast:

Obama at AIPAC:

…I will ensure that Israel can defend itself from any threat — from Gaza to Tehran… First, we must approve the foreign aid request for 2009. Going forward, we can enhance our cooperation on missile defense. We should export military equipment to our ally Israel under the same guidelines as NATO…

Lie. Obama opposes all missile defense technology.

Obama at AIPAC:

There is no greater threat to Israel — or to the peace and stability of the region — than Iran… while I don’t want to strike too partisan a note here today, I do want to address some willful mischaracterizations of my positions.

Lie. Barack Obama told a crowd of 75,000 last month that Iran is not a threat.

Obama at AIPAC:

The Iranian regime supports violent extremists and challenges us across the region. It pursues a nuclear capability that could spark a dangerous arms race and raise the prospect of a transfer of nuclear know-how to terrorists. Its president denies the Holocaust and threatens to wipe Israel off the map. The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat.

Lie. In September 2007, a bipartisan effort in the Senate passed the Kyl-Lieberman resolution designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. Obama vehemently opposed this effort and used the opportunity as a political tool to attack Hillary Clinton. Obama rewrites history by pretending his opposition to Kyl-Lieberman never happened, When given a chance to fight Iran’s support of terror, Obama instead worked against the bipartisan effort to increase the economic pressure on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

Obama at AIPAC:

Contrary to the claims of some, I have no interest in sitting down with our adversaries just for the sake of talking.

Lie. Obama’s own website reads as follows: “Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions.”

Obama at AIPAC:

I have been proud to be a part of a strong, bipartisan consensus that has stood by Israel in the face of all threats… I will always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself in the United Nations and around the world.

Lie: In January 2008, a Palestinian activist named Ali Abunimah described Barack Obama’s overnight switch from Pro-Palestinian activist to supporter of Israel.

Barack Obama is not distinguished from the rest of the [candidates], except by for how far he has moved to try to appease AIPAC and pro-Israel movements.

I remember, Amy—I knew Barack Obama for many years as my state senator—when he used to attend events in the Palestinian community in Chicago all the time.

I remember personally introducing him onstage in 1999, when we had a major community fundraiser for the community center in Deheisha refugee camp in the occupied West Bank. And that’s just one example of how Barack Obama used to be very comfortable speaking up for and being associated with Palestinian rights and opposing the Israeli occupation…

Obama’s list of lies is getting so long, folks will soon need a data warehouse to keep track of everything.

————————————————————————————-

And DEBKA File echoes:

In his first foreign policy speech after clinching the Democratic nomination for president, Sen. Barack Obama vowed that as president he would deepen American defense cooperation with Israel. “Those who threaten Israel, threaten us. I will bring an unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security and guarantee Israel’s military strength so that it can defend itself from any threat – from Gaza to Tehran. Obama said he would sign a memo of understanding promising Israel $30 bn over 10 years. He was addressing the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee’s (AIPAC) annual conference, June 4.

Obama spelled out his position on talks with Iran. He said: “I will do everything in my power – everything, everything - to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.” Iran has grown stronger and increased its support for terror since this administration went to war in Iraq “and I refuse to support a policy that has made the US and Israel less secure.”

Proposing getting US troops out of Iraq “carefully”, Obama urged broaching Iran first with “aggressive principles and diplomacy. We have no time to waste. I would keep the military option on the table to defend our security and our ally Israel,” he stressed.” But, he said, diplomacy can be tough if backed by real leverage with no illusions. “We must give Iran a clear choice: Abandon nuclear weapons, support for terror and hatred for Israel or else we will ratchet up the pressure. Al Qods is rightly labeled a terrorist organization.

“If we must use military force, we are more likely to succeed at home and abroad if we have exhausted our diplomatic efforts.

Some lay all the Middle East problems at the door of Israel and its conflict with the Palestinians, he said. “It is not, never has been and never will be.”

He endorsed the Bush vision of a two-state solution for Israel and the Palestinians, saying there was no room at the negotiating table for [the Hamas] terrorists. While stressing that Israel’s identity must be preserved as “a Jewish state with secure, recongized and defensible borders and Jerusalem its undivided capital,” Obama also stated that the Palestinians need a state “that is contiguous.” He advised Israel to take steps consistent with its security to ease conditions on the West Bank and refrain from building new settlements.

Obama declared repeatedly that as president he would never compromise on his commitment to Israel’s security – “not while there are still voices that deny the Holocaust, not when there are terrorists who threaten Israel’s existence and there are rockets raining down from Gaza.”

Asserting that oil prices are a dangerous weapon and they were bankrolling the Iranian regime, he urged greater US-Israeli partnership to develop alternative sources of energy.

And not to forget Hussein’s promise for his idea of a strong defense:

Fucking unbelievable!

And here is Sen. Joe Lieberman’s reaction to former fellow democrat Sen Hussein: “First I should congratulate him on securing the Democratic nomination. I hope it will be a civil and constructive campaign debate…

“I appreciate many of the very good intentions toward Israel that Senator Obama expressed today. But I also thought, respectfully, that there was a disconnect between what he said today, particulary in regard to Iran, and things he has said and done earlier in campaign and in Senate.”

“I was troubled earlier this year when he compared Iran and other rogue and terrorist states to the Soviet Union and minimized the threat. Today he said he thought Iran represented a grave threat. Today he was right.”

“That measure was supported by three quarters of the Senate. Obama said it was saber-rattling. But it had nothing in it regarding military action. I hope he will say that vote was a mistake.”

“Also, he made a major point during the campaign that American foreign policy in recent years has essentially strengthened Iran, and at one point he almost seems to suggest that our policy elected Ahmadinejad. I just disagree with that.”

Representative Eric Cantor: “The speech had some good phrases and lines in it, but don’t think it did anything to dispel the doubts about Senator Obama’s commitment to the U.S.-Israel relationship.”

[Sen.] McCain’s senior foreign policy and national security advisor Randy Scheunemann wondered if Obama is living in an “alternate reality where the presence of U.S. troops in the region strengthens Iran.”

(NRO)