Lieberman, Obama and Netanyahu at the International Criminal Court.
See you guys soon.
This would make a great postcode.
What questions do you think should be asked at the debates between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney? Let us know, and we’ll assemble the best and present them in an open memo to the debate moderators.
For the love of god, can someone follow up Mitt Romney’s comments during the GOP’s presidential candidate debates and subsequent interviews and ask him how he thinks using force with Iran would be a wise move economically and foreign policy-wise when the IAEA and U.S. intelligence have determined that Iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons, isn’t trying to build them, and poses no threat to national security?
When will the US begin to put pressure on Israel for continuously ignoring UN resolution after UN resolution calling for the re-installation of basic human rights for Palestinians?
I’d like to hear them answer that.
Obama has absolutely no problem with infanticide in Pakistan…
Illustration by Darrow
So, the American government hates the Taliban and Al Qaeda because they kill innocent people like in 9/11, right?
But the American government is doing the same thing in Afghanistan and Pakistan. (see here)
I believe that should give me the right to fire drones at the White House to eliminate their leader, Barak Hussein Obama.
But life isn’t fair and the American government is a sick son of a bitch.
Apparently drones today killed al-Qaeda’s second in charge in Konar, Afghanistan today, about 50 miles from the Pakistani border.
How many innocent men, women and children did it take?
Far. too. many.
President Obama on Saturday claimed Iran’s nuclear program is a “grave concern” for world leaders, and said the U.S. and its allies were prepared to heap yet more sanctions on the country.
Iran’s “continuing violation of international rules and norms and inability thus far to convince the world community that it is not pursuing the weaponization of nuclear power is of grave concern to all of us,” Obama said in a joint statement released after meeting with the Group of Eight at Camp David.
Apparently, Iran’s “inability” to convince the world that it is not pursuing nuclear weapons hasn’t phased the entire U.S. intelligence community, which has concluded that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons, has not demonstrated any intention to do so, and stopped all weaponization activities almost a decade ago.
Even the top brass of the Obama administration and military leadership, from Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey believe Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons. Obama’s statement was mere rhetoric.
As for the “continuing violation of international rules,” Obama is being similarly disingenuous. It’s clear the gripe against Iran has nothing to do with violation international rules, because plenty of U.S. allies are violating international laws but the U.S. consistently blocks enforcement of those violations.
Israel has been in stark violation of international law for 45 years since its occupation of Palestinian territory after the 1967 war. UN Security Council Resolution 487 calls on Israel to open up its own nuclear weapons program to international inspections, but the U.S. has blocked enforcement of that mandate.
UN Resolution 1172 calls on Pakistan and India to halt development of nuclear weapons, but the U.S. has instead helped both countries increase such development, while blocking enforcement.
“We’re hopeful we can resolve this issue in a peaceful fashion with respect to Iran that recognizes their sovereignty but also recognizes their responsibilities,” Obama added.
Throwing harsh economic sanctions and militarily encircling Iran is not exactly “peaceful.” In fact, Columbia University Professor Gary Sick, who has a special expertise on Iran, has called the sanctions “the equivalent of a blockade. It’s an act of war.”
Iran will begin a second round of negotiations with world powers next week about its nuclear program. Progress toward a peaceful resolution is possible, but it is troubling that heads of state, particularly from the U.S. and Israel, continue to employ threatening rhetoric despite a widespread understanding that Iran is not even developing nuclear weapons.
How can you prove the non-existence of something?
The United States has issued what could be its most forceful threat to date of a potential attack on Iran. Speaking at a public event in Jerusalem, the U.S. ambassador to Israel, Dan Shapiro, said the Obama administration has made preparations for military action. Shapiro said the United States would prefer a peaceful resolution to the standoff over Iran’s nuclear activities. But he added: “That doesn’t mean that the [military] option is not fully available. And not just available, but it’s ready. The necessary planning has been done to ensure that it’s ready.”
“All options are on the table…” — Barack Obama about Iran.
“The necessary planning has been done…” — Barack Obama
“A nuclear armed Iran must be stopped…” — Netanyahu
Last time I checked, that kind of rhetoric is fear-invoking, especially when you have no intention of building a nuclear weapon, and yet Iran is to blame.
“We have no problem with the world. We are not a threat whatsoever to the world, and the world knows it. We will never start a war. We have no intention of going to war with any state.” — Ali Khamenei (Iran’s Supreme Leader (AKA the person who has the final word on Iranian foreign policy and war.)
The country with 10,000 nuclear warheads — America — bullying the country without a single warhead — Iran — is absurd.