Comments on: Obama Going Down the Sanctions Path

By: Lapis Solmons

Lapis Solmons — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:22:39 +0000

As I see it, the question is whether refusing the current Iranian regime to build up a nuclear military capacity justifies war with Iran. Interestingly, President Obama’s main theme in his Nobel Address was “just war”.

Without war, Iran _will be able to threaten Europe and the US before long. Also, the risk of increased nuclear proliferation will probably heighten. This is the ‘China recipe’.

With a preemptive attack on Qom, all hell will break loose. The consequences are incalculable. Iran is not Iraq.

The choice is between plague and cholera.

By: Liz

Liz — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 09:59:22 +0000

I think that after the huge, emotional, and unprecedented pro-Islamic Republic rallies held throughout Iran yesterday, it’s time for the US government to rethink its misguided policies towards the country. More sanctions will have serious consequences for the United States in Afghanistan, Iraq, as well as other parts of the Middle East. Iran’s influence is far too great to be ignored.

By: JohnH

JohnH — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:22:46 +0000

Yes, Chris, Wigwag wants war with Iran. (I’ve read Wigwag for a long time.) Wigwag wants all existential threats to Israel slain by the United States. Only problem is that Israel can easily find far-fetched existential threats at the drop of a hat. In Wigwag World, the United States exists mainly to satisfy Israeli whims. Such is the respect that the “super power” gets from its Middle Eastern “ally.”

Wigwag condemns Iranian government brutality and the Goldstone Report, which spotlights Israeli war crimes, with equal vigor. Wigwag condemns the treatment of women in Afghanistan and Iran but has nothing to say about Israeli treatment of Palestinian women. Get the picture?

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 00:47:55 +0000

Who are you WigWag?
The ease at which you throw in the military option is very alarming. Are you really sugesting that the United States should go to war with Iran? For what?

By: WigWag

WigWag — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 20:44:24 +0000

Presumably Ben Katcher is asking a rhetorical question when he queries,

“Why does the Obama administration think that further sanctions will persuade the Iranians to make meaningful concessions related to their nuclear program?”

The Obama Administration doesn’t believe sanctions will work. They are employing sanctions as an intermediate step to appease the numerous parties who are upset about the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapon. This includes tens of millions of Americans, the United States Congress, Israel and the entire Sunni Arab world (with the exception of Hamas-ruled Gaza which is a client of Iran). It also includes all of the major powers in Western Europe, especially the British, French, Germans and Italians all of whom are bigger hawks on Iran than Obama is.

Everyone knows that sanctions have to be tried first before the case for war becomes compelling; at least this is what Obama and his people think.

It won’t be Israel attacking Iran and it won’t be NATO either (Turkey would object).

Anyone want to place odds on the likelihood that Obama will order some type of American military action against Iran in the next 18 months? I say the odds are about even that he does.