In the history of mankind, many republics have risen, have flourished for a less or greater time, and then have fallen because their citizens lost the power of governing themselves and thereby of governing their state. TR


Obama Ignores Iranian Threats

President Obama showed a little backbone with Iran, sending an aircraft carrier through the Strait of Hormuz in defiance of Iranian threats to attack American ships.

From Fox News:

The USS Abraham Lincoln on Sunday passed through the Strait of Hormuz — the first time a US aircraft carrier has been through the strategic waterway since Iran threatened to close it earlier this month.

The US Navy said the passage of the vessel was “routine” and had been completed without incident.

Meanwhile, Europe borrowed some backbone from somewhere – they lost their own backbone years ago – and slapped an oil embargo on Iran. The Iranians curled their lips and spit.

In response to the EU announcement, one senior Iranian politician said Tehran should halt all oil sales to European countries immediately.

Ali Fallahian was quoted by the semi-official Fars news agency as saying that Iran should stop the export of oil before the 1 July deadline “so that the price of oil soars and the Europeans… have trouble.”

These are good first steps. Obama is right to try to exhaust all options before attacking Iran – and to not be cowed by threats. But he will need to demonstrate that he is serious about the sanctions, even if the price of oil goes up during an election year.

And then, if Iran doesn’t fully relinquish its nuclear program, he needs to take care of business.

We’ll see.

27 thoughts on “Obama Ignores Iranian Threats”

  1. Well, I’ve got egg on my face. Never in a million years would I have thought this administration would have the intestinal fortitude to call the Iranian bluff. Did someone spike the White House punch with testosterone?

  2. I think with the upcoming SOTU and the empty schedule via there are workings going on. That being said, it would be quite a bit more tactful to load the schedule with actual meetings. For instance “Meeting with joint chiefs to discuss possible nuclear strike on Iran” Something tactful, hinting that we can swat Iran whenever we feel like it. Of course, you might have to have a spine to do that. A schedule that anyone in an intelligence community can read, provide analysis on, and report to various governments around the world could read a lot into a well written “softly” released schedule, perhaps indicating that the Golfer-and-Chief may not be a useless, giant, flaccid bag of Euro-aggrandizing Uptopian-bile. But that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong.

    1. You hit the nail on the head. Let those peace-loving Iranian people lose the ability to put that $.30 gallon gas in their cars. See how long they put up with THAT.

  3. Tis time to take a line from Shakespear’s Julius Ceasar and “Cry ‘Havoc,’ and let slip the dogs of war.” Iran will never understand anything less than a total and complete military response to their insane aggression and posturing.

  4. If Obama gets flack on this from any of his base, the decision will have been necessary because of something the Bush Administration did or said or perhaps some hapless NSC guy or general on his way out. I can’t see any of the Susans or Valerie thinking this is a good idea. So that’s a win.

  5. Gracepmc: there are two things which can get Obama elected, one will be how many people are so dazzeled by Dr. Paul the R. vote is split and two would be a war.
    Now, it wouldn’t have to be a big war, though I would expect it would degenerate into a doozy; but remember: the Viet Nam war was started by a couple of patrol craft ‘attacking’ a U.S. Frigate/Destroyer. Iran has a multitude of high speed, well armed, patrol craft, one or 10 patrolcraft against a carrier group is a gnat after an elephant, but it very well could be the war BHO would like. that carrier may be in the Gulf a long time

  6. I don’t believe for one moment that this move was MrO’s idea or that the military asked for his permission to act. Just as I don’t believe that MrO wanted to kill BinLaden, that he ordered drones to kill terrorist suspects on foreign soil or that he has any influence over our massive military machine.

    The Iranians consider us a toothless tiger unable to win any conflict since WWII. Our State department, led by the unexperienced wife of a shamed politician, hasn’t shown any coherent foreign policies other than the offer of our money and an insane support of radical Islam whose stated goal is to destroy us and Israel.

    As for the “oil embargo” of Iranian crude; who the heck do they think they’re kidding? Iran will sell their crude to S.Korea or Uganda or some obscure nation who will then sell it to the European countries.

    1. srdem – first thought that came to my mind too. There is no way BO is making hard decisions especially at the time he’s working on his blame Bush SOTU speech, and cramming in as many fundraisers as he can.

  7. Don’t hold your breath hoping this muslim-in-chief will do the right thing – at least what is right for America – won’t happen.

  8. MT for re-redistribution

    …serious about the sanctions, even if the price of oil goes up during an election year.

    Well he should be man up about Iran’s threats. It’s his rainbow and unicorns policies that encouraged Iran to be butt-holes to begin with. I was curious when O was elected just how the “big fuzzy hug” was going to go over. Huh, just like I thought. It made the enemy think we were weak.

    We need a (perceived) madman in office again, like Reagan. Yep, I said it. I want another Ronald Reagan. No, it’s not too much to ask.

    What a conundrum, corrupt Newt or liberal Romney… Once again, looking for the lesser of the evils. Romney might help us financially but Newt might give the left the finger they need sooooooo badly.

    1. There is always the chance Romney would consult some people and weigh a decision–like is puts millions on the line now and pulls the trigger at some pt. As for finger giving, that can be a temporary high.

    2. Newt’s win in South Carolina was a message to the establishment in my opinion. Conservatives are not going to allow the establishment to install their candidate of choice this time around. We need time to vet each and every one of the candidates, even if it takes us all the way to the convention. Newt won South Carolina because he defended conservative principles more forcefully than any of the other candidates still in the running. Only time and a very thorough vetting process will give us the best candidate. Let the best conservative win.

      1. I was kind of hoping we could get the one least likely to tee me off and ruin my life…but OK, I guess if you call that conservative, but could the teeing off thing be in there someplace? I do approve of the vetting notion–I don’t read Esquire and of course all that stuff was not widely spread, so that interview did me a favor vetting wise.

        1. I believe in redemption, so Newt’s personal life 15 years ago is not important to me. His conservative principles are what is most important to me. Only time will tell if he pans out. I’m still pulling for Santorum, but he’s coming across as more whiny than bold. I just know we need someone to pull us back from the brink. Whoever gets the job is going to have to tee us all off in order to correct our course.

  9. Pingback: Obama Ignores Iranian Threats | Posner Politics

  10. Pingback: The Morning Links (1/24/12 ) | From the Desk of Lady Liberty

  11. Pingback: Obama Banana Republic | My Blog

Comments are closed.