This Is Why President Obama Was Wise To Be Careful In His Words About Iran

Protesters in Iran largely have been put down by the government in an aggressive and violent fashion in the wake of a highly-controversial and disputed election that it appears will keep Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in his position as president of Iran. Many on the far right of the political spectrum wanted President Obama to speak out strongly against the government of Iran for the election results and to support the protesters. President Obama did express support for the rights of the protesters to express their views (contrary to what you will repeatedly hear from those on the right who see virtually nothing positive in our president). President Obama was wise not to make an irrational move and entangle the United States too deeply in an Iranian affair (as much as many people were angry by the disputed election results and the way the protesters were put down). A rush to judgement by President Obama would have made it even easier for Ahmadinejad to demonize the U.S. even more and rile up those who still dislike or hate the U.S. due to the policies of previous administrations (most notably the George W. Bush presidency).

TEHRAN (Reuters) – President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accused Barack Obama on Thursday of behaving like his predecessor toward Iran and said there was not much point in talking to Washington unless the U.S. president apologized.

(EDITORS’ NOTE: Reuters and other foreign media are subject to Iranian restrictions on their ability to report, film or take pictures in Tehran.)

Obama said on Tuesday he was “appalled and outraged” by a post-election crackdown and Washington withdrew invitations to Iranian diplomats to attend Independence Day celebrations on July 4 — stalling efforts to improve ties with Tehran.

“Mr Obama made a mistake to say those things … our question is why he fell into this trap and said things that previously (former president George W.) Bush used to say,” the semi-official Fars News Agencyquoted Ahmadinejad as saying.

“Do you want to speak with this tone? If that is your stance then what is left to talk about … I hope you avoid interfering in Iran’s affairs and express your regret in a way that the Iranian nation is informed of it,” he said.

You can see that Ahmadinejad is trying to turn the comments from President Obama into a distraction from what is taking place on the streets in Iran and what took place during the election. That, I believe, is precisely what President Obama saw coming from some in the Iranian government.

Yahoo News/Reuters:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090625/wl_nm/us_iran_election

An Interesting Perspective From Joe Scarborough

MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough made interesting comments that Think Progress has reported today. Scarborough, who I do not always agree with, seems to take a stance opposite of political partisan parrots like right-winger Mitt Romney (who will say just about anything to appease the far right).

Here is an excerpt that includes the comments from Scarborough:

Later on Meet the Press, MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough seemed to rebut these right-wing claims, suggesting that President Obama’s outreach in Cairo “scared” the Iranian leaders into fixing the election:

SCARBOROUGH: You know, the law of unintended consequences came in again. I suspect that Cairo speech really scared the grand ayatollahs in Iran. If they were going to fix an election, this was the time to fix it, because the last thing they wanted to do was Barack Obama take credit for reformers winning in Iran, like they already have in Lebanon. And by the way, in the short term that’s bad news for us. I think in the long term, though – if the ayatollahs are seen stealing an election, as a result from what Barack Obama did in Cairo – I actually think that’s a positive for the United States and Iran in the long run.

That is an interesting thought, however, it is a reasonable belief that he would have done anything to remain in power as president. President Obama’s inspiration seems to be sparking people to stand up and assert themselves in the pursuit of fairness, freedom and to ensure they are not disenfranchised by a farce of an election, a rigged process with a predetermined conclusion. Perhaps Scarborough is correct in that this (what appears to some people to be a huge power grab) could spark people to continue to pursue change after being victimized by a process a large number of people see as crooked. If President Obama’s words have made people hungry for change then that seems to me to potentially be a positive.

Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/14/neocons-blame-obama-iran/