Comments on: The Nowrūz Message

By: Dantheman

Dantheman — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:05:57 +0000

Christopher's comment to me wins the Triple Crown -- no connection to the comment it is referring, pointless ad hominem, and no actual substance. Party on, dude!

By: Franklin

Franklin — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 02:11:50 +0000

As an address to the Iranian people, this was much better than calling them evil, which had the direct result of putting more hard-liners in power. Eight years ago, the majority of Persians had a positive view of America. This is no longer true and it ain't because of Democrats.

By: The stench of Obama’s failures extends now to foreign policy | BitsBlog

Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:22:01 +0000

[...] James Joyner has comments on this matter as well. [...]

By: Bithead

Bithead — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 16:47:18 +0000

Iran continues to play a weak hand well while we play a strong hand badly.

It's called kissing the backside we oughta be kicking. It's something we've seen out of Democrats for generations now... to the point where it's become quite predictable.

By: sam

sam — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 10:59:11 +0000

If anybody knows about idiot moves, it's Christopher.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 06:42:23 +0000

Dantheman, when are you coming back to this planet?

And Dave, I guess this is one of the few promises Obama has kept so far. He said he was gonna to this, and now he has. He admitted what an idiot move he would make like this, he made it, and now it is proving to be an idiot move. Perfect!

By: Michael

Michael — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 03:13:28 +0000

The Supreme Leader’s remarks are a non sequitur as far as President Obama’s message is concerned.

Are you so sure about that? It seems an awful sloppy mistake to make. I think it was intentional, I'm just not sure what the message behind it was, a threat or an admission?

I'd like Obama's next message to specifically address Iranian politicians like Rafsanjani and Khatami, without addressing the President or Supreme Leader.

By: legion

legion — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 00:35:13 +0000

I'm going to have to agree with Dan. So what if Khameni gave us the cold shoulder - what did anyone (including, I'm quite certain, Obama) expect? That strange feeling you have? It's called "having the moral high ground". It's something Americans haven't been able to claim for a few years now...

By: KVC

KVC — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 21:26:56 +0000

Didn't the Iranians learn the precondition to the meeting from the PLO and Arafat? Oh yea, which president was that?

By: Kevin

Kevin — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 20:54:31 +0000

Interesting, Dave. Didn't realize Bush had done similar.

By: Dantheman

Dantheman — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 19:48:25 +0000

"Iran continues to play a weak hand well while we play a strong hand badly. If we’re going to achieve results that are mutually acceptable through negotiations with Iran, we’re going to need to be much cannier negotiators with Iran than we have been."

I am going to disagree. At the very worst, Obama's message is going to be well received by the people we need for multilateral actions (starting with sanctions) to succeed. Offering to talk respectfully and showing that the other side is not interested in doing so will likely lead to greater cooperation among our potential allies.

Hostile rhetoric (of the sort preferred by the prior Administration) which pushes away those whose help we need is how to play a good hand badly. This is playing a good hand patiently.

By: Triumph

Triumph — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 19:46:08 +0000

Any "Nowruz" message we send to these Islamo-crazies should be placed on the end of a nuclear bomb.

Of course, B. Hussein is in cahoots with his moselm brothers so we can't expect relief from terrorism any time soon.