Obama's June 4th Speech To The Muslim World In Egypt - How Much Did That Have To Do With What Is ...

[global1]

currently happening in Iran?

I know that some are now criticizing Obama for not taking a more definitive stand on the current Iran situation. But I sit back and wonder how much his speech of a couple of weeks ago resonated in the minds of the people and may have been the catalyst of what we are now seeing in Iran.

Was he the little bee that pollinated the people? Did he give the Iranian people the same hope that he gave us back in November?
Seems to me he reached out to the people and the people are now responding. Now he can sit back and let the people do most of the work in order to change the course.

Am I reading too much into this or am I kind of on track here?

[lunatica]

1. Oh Please!

Not another USA cheerleader who ignores the fact that the discontent in Iran has been caused in large part on our actions by overthrowing a Democratically elected government in order to install our dictator the Shah who turned out to be a torturer's dream come true. Most Americans' historical facts may be really shallow and self-centered but I bet the Iranians are very aware of the misery they've lived under since the Supreme Leaders took over.

Remember the take over of the US Embassy? And all the bad blood between the US government and the Iranian government since then? Remember Bush rattling his 'axis of evil' sabers and threatening to bomb them and fighting to go to war with Iran? So what makes you think one speech, no matter how nice and respectful is going to lull them into adoring us?

We cause the fucken crap wars we're up to our necks in and still people refuse to see ourselves as the purveyors of violence.

[TomCADem]

5. Strawmen - Proper Frame of Reference Is John McCain

Your post sets up the impossibly high standard of adoring us as the touchstone of whether President Obama's speech is successful. The proper comparison is the realistic alternative in the U.S., which was a President John McCain who had many neocons on his foreign policy staff, and who favored a much more belligerent stance towards Iran. Indeed, a President McCain might actually tacitly support a move by Israel to bomb Iran. So, what would the result be?

First, Hezbollah in Lebanon might have had a better showing with a President McCain saber rattling in the White House about chasing Islamic extremists to the gates of hell.

Second, I expect Iranians would rally around the flag when John McCain set forth a long list of preconditions that border upon disarmament, before he talks to Iran, AND when McCain did what most presidents do, and ignore Israeli/Palistinian issues in his first term. Worse, can you imagine the situation in Iran, if Israel bombed Iran with a President McCain looking the other way?

So, I think it is a mistake to minimize the significance of having the Democrats in the White House, and President Obama's team in particular. They may be wrong or right on issues, but at least they appear to be driven by what they believe is effective, rather than by some rigid adherence to an idealogy.

I don't think the goal of U.S. foreign policy should be to have Iranians "adore" the U.S. Rather, on realistic goal is to convince the Iranian people that we are not trying to start a war with them, thus they can focus on internal change, rather than defending against the GOP favored attack on Iran. I do think that President Obama does not come off internationally as a guy who is itching to start a war with Iran unlike President Bush, and the alternative of a President McCain.

[lunatica]

7. No, I'm not setting up impossible standards

I am stating historical facts. Obama extending respect in one speech isn't going to convince anyone of anything. Actions always speak louder than words and Obama's subsequent actions will do that. But his one speech to the people of all Islamic countries isn't going to have anything at all to do with the Iranian elections or the violence that goes on now.

Although you're right in your assessment about McCain, Obama has been very clear that he isn't ruling out military intervention against Iran if the need arises. And our Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has stated unequivocably that if Iran attacks Israel she would demolish it. She said this during the Presidential campaign.

Obama has made an excellent start in his speeches, but gaining the respect and the confidence and the friendship of the Middle East is going to take time and patience and above all results.

[Captain Hilts]

2. Iranians hugely voted against the Prez's party in the 2006 elections. The tide began then. nt

[nyc 4 Biden]

3. IMHO his speech probably gave the protesters a boost.

I don't think it was the impetus to cause the protests but it did help. The blatant election fraud and dismissal of the initial protests by Ahmadinejad was the spark that increased the size of the demonstrations.

[scheming daemons]

4. decades from now, Obama's speech in Cairo will be considered a watershed event in history

...

[Solomon]

6. At least one person gets it.

:thumbsup: