Kerry backs Obama's careful tone on Iran

The Iranian government is already trying to connect the dissident elements to the U.S., so the worst thing we can do is follow what our would be president, John McCain, suggested that would give the powers that be (for the moment) the excuse to bring all their force to bear to shut down the opposition. As long as we don't directly get involved, as some have suggested we do, they know that they won't get away with it with the rest of the world. Obama is taking the smart option, which is a refreshing change from the way the Cheney puppeted Bush regime handled things.

Iran's Supreme Leader addressed his country and despite very measured statements by West in the wake of the recent election he still proceeded to blame the United States, Britain, and Israel for stoking the fires of unrest that has manifested massive protests over the last several days. Forget the ludicrous nature of the comment because, quite honestly, if the United States, Britain, and Israel had that type of power over the Iranian populace Ahmadinejad wouldn't be in power and they wouldn't have a nuclear program. The accusation is ridiculous on its face. But this is precisely why Obama has stood back from the fray, to avoid becoming the scapegoat for an honest and organic explosion of frustration on the streets of Iran.

Also, let's not forget that while Moussavi has ignited the type of passions on the streets of Iran not seen in quite some time, he is not a "change agent". He was handpicked by the clerics before he could even participate in the "election" His views are not substantially different from Ahmadinejad, even though his words may be softer. Moussavi is making a power play. He is older gentlemen for whom this "elction" may represent his last shot at returning to power in Iran. And similar to how bested politicians linger around long after the results have been decided he is hoping for a concession. He is hoping that by demonstrating his pull with the people that he will be given a seat at the table. It doesn't matter if he is the president, the Supreme Leader has made it clear who the winner is. Moussavi now is angling for something else and he might be willing to push the envelope until he gets it, or until he is silenced. Regardless let's not trick ourselves into believing we are seeing something that we are not. The people on the street's anger is may be genuine but the power players are executing big time stagecraft.

Totally agree. We shouldn't take the bait. Iran's "Supreme Leader" is already trying to make this about America. If any direct intervention by us has the the following problems:
1. We're broke. We can't afford two wars let alone one.
2. It makes Pres Obama look like a hypocrite in the eyes of the Muslim world after the Cairo speech and at war with Islam.
3. Relations with other Muslim countries will quickly deteriorate

The percieved claim of Obamas weakness(commenting on the protest crackdown) in Iraq is as real as horse feathers. One only has to look at all the diplomatic pillars of success the Bush adminstration had by calling Iraq an axis of evil....... There were none. In fact the USA via Bush, set diplomacy with Iraq backwards to the Ayatollah Khomeini era. The USA currently has no business in Iraq, no influence in Iraq, and Obama must reflect this by showing steady, persevering, minimalist policy that hopefully will lead to some breakthrough. Of course Bush and Condi's Iraqi shin kicking and kick butt attitude set the proper tone, insisting we never have an engaging policy.

America lost its way several times during the last century and in this new millenium during the Bush years. "Shoot First, Ask Questions Later" has been proven to be a completely stupid policy that always backfires. I'm glad Obama is ASKING QUESTIONS FIRST, and THINKING THINGS THROUGH before taking in rash actions or "Talkin' Tough" like the Republicans want to do. The Big Stick doctrine doesn't work well in this new century either. However, China has been very successful with their "Talk Softly But Carry a Big Wallet" policy. Unfortunately for America, its wallet is empty and it owes lots of money...so that's not an option. Maybe America needs to return to its roots. It's founders had some great ideas, which were later ignored or discarded by later presidents.

George Washington, the Founding Father, the General who was the Father of the Revolution, the first President had some excellent words of wisdom during his Valecdictory Address.

In it he had a warning against "permanent inveterate antipathies against particular Nations," as well as "a passionate attachment of one Nation for another." The first, he argued, would lead to unnecessary war, while the second would result in unwise treaty concessions, which could arouse the ill-will of other countries expecting fair treatment. Washington counseled the public to be wary of foreign influence. He argued for impartial commercial treaties, but against treaties of permanent alliance, although the United States should fulfill any existing agreements "with perfect good faith." Temporary alliances would be acceptable in "extraordinary emergencies."

All of the above has been violated or discarded or ignored by later administrations. And in doing so has got America in trouble. America today does not look longterm, it is shortsighted, looking for short-term gains, and ignoring long-term effects.

I hope the Obama administration will try to fix this, and put America back on the right path.

Dear John Kerry
Wake up!
You are inconsequential.
What have you done to improve the lives of the ma. voter?
Enough about Gov Palin.
Look at yourself.