Posted on 09/25/2012 9:09:59 PM PDT by lbryce
On Monday in New York, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad promised that Israel will be "eliminated," a variation on his previous threats to the nation's existence. He was in town for the opening of the United Nations General Assembly, a gathering that reliably sees leaders issuing pronouncements that, even if not new, at least are given a bigger stage. On Tuesday, the first day of the gathering, President Obama delivered a speech that also struck familiar notes, including the statement that "a nuclear-armed Iran is not a challenge that can be contained." He moved no closer to giving a signal of what he might consider an intolerable development in Iran's advance toward a nuclear weapon.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Dershowitz:There are those who argue that an American president should never make a threat that he may not want to carry out. But President Obama has already committed his administration to preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, which necessarily means employing the military option if all else fails. He has also told the world that he does not bluff. If that is true, then there is no downside to his stating U.S. policy and intentions explicitly.
Wow.Such solid, irrefutable arguments about Obama's ultimate use of the military option because he has told the world that he does not bluff. How about that Obama is bluffing when he says he doesn't bluff? cmomitment by Obama
Alan. 0bama does not know how to bluff. He has never played poker or any other game that was not rigged in his favor.
Incredibly, that would be an improvement.
Well, if memory serves me right, did not Bill Clinton claim that North Korea would never be allowed to develop nuclear weapons ? We have seen this dance before. As have the Israeli’s. They are not fooling anyone, expect for maybe Bill’s other half.
This precedent, of a US administration flatly stating that the N. Koreans would not be allowed to obtain a nuclear capability and then letting happen is the exact model the Iranians are (and have been) banking on since the 90’s.
The N. Koreans have assisted the Iranians 100% in this development and they helped the Syrians too until the Israeli Air Force obliterated that site in 2007 - killing N. Korean technicians there.
This administration is worse because it lies to the world, lies to itself and hopes for the best. Carter is proud and we are the more in peril now.
>>President Obama delivered a speech that also struck familiar notes, including the statement that “a nuclear-armed Iran is not a challenge that can be contained.”
Big whoop. Empty words.
That’s like saying “Allowing termites into your house is a challenge that cannot be contained.” or “Fire is hot.”
So what are you going to do about it?
>>President Obama delivered a speech that also struck familiar notes, including the statement that “a nuclear-armed Iran is not a challenge that can be contained.”
IMO, Zippy is using this empty rhetoric for a reason.
1. It sounds forceful, it sounds like he is “serious” so Zippy fans are satisfied that he is a strong leader. (Hahahahahaha!)
2. The words are completely empty, so it sends the signal to Iran and Zippy’s other muslim friends that he will continue to do nothing.
That’s like your credit card company saying that spending more than you make can become a problem, while they allow you to continue using the card and raise your credit limit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.