Biden Questions Vote but Sticks to Policy on Iran

[FreakinDJ]

Source: New York Times

WASHINGTON — Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. cast doubt Sunday on the legitimacy of the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, but reaffirmed the administration’s intent to try to engage the Iranian government.

“It sure looks like the way they’re suppressing speech, the way they’re suppressing crowds, the way in which people are being treated, that there’s some real doubt” about the result, Mr. Biden said.

But the vice president made clear that despite the uncertainty surrounding Mr. Ahmadinejad’s contested victory, the United States would not abandon its Iran policy.

“The decision has been made to talk,” Mr. Biden said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “Our interests are the same before the election as after the election, and that is we want them to cease and desist from seeking a nuclear weapon and having one in its possession and, secondly, to stop supporting terror.”


Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/15/world/middleeast/15diplo.html?_r=1&hp

---

a good read - explains why Obama is being so quiet about the matter

[timeforpeace]

1. After what just happened, and is still happening at this moment,

they still think Iran will be reasonable and would give up nukes and supporting terror?

[FreakinDJ]

2. you've got a very good point there

but to say any thing against those that hold the power right now seems futile. They have already squelched an uprising, rig an election, and gotten away with brutalizing and murdering untold numbers of their own countrymen.

[Moonwalk]

3. What would you rather they do? Last time we interfered in Iranian politics...

...we paved the way for this theocratic regime that is still ruling the place with an Iron Koran. And look what happened when we decided to march in and get rid of that evil dictator in Iraq. Do you like the results that came out of that?

It's one thing for the world to unite in its disapproval and, with sanctions and such, make it clear to such leaders that their injustices won't be tolerated. It's quite another for the U.S. to storm in like some action hero, telling everyone in the country, "We know what's best for you."

I think that this time around, U.S. leaders have decided to let the people who actually live there fight for the changes that they want, however hard and difficult a fight that might be, rather than sticking our nose in where it doesn't belong, and doing something that might make things worse rather than better. Which also means we pretty much have to play the hand we've been dealt, however poor a hand it is.

But if you've a better idea, I'm open to hearing it.