Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Foreign Policy Journal points out that the new emperor (or at least the vice-emperor) has no clothes...

... but is getting a complete pass from the MSM for not changing Bush Administration policy toward Iran.

From FPJ:

U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden last Saturday outlined the Obama administration’s continuation of the Bush administration’s foreign policy towards Iran.

Reiterating the Bush policy of loosely defined “preventive” warfare outlined in Bush’s National Security Strategy, he said that the “U.S. will strive to act preventively to avoid having to choose between the risks of war and the dangers of inaction.”

Echoing the previous administration’s policy, Biden offered an ultimatum, saying the U.S. would be “willing to talk to Iran” but only if Iran acquiesces to the Obama administration’s demands to abandon its nuclear program.

Translated into meaningful terms, this effectively means the U.S. will continue to refuse to talk to Iran, since its nuclear program would be one of the major points Iran would like to negotiate.

The U.S. has accused Iran of having a nuclear weapons program, despite the fact that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is actively monitoring and verifying Iran’s program and its commitment to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT), has repeatedly noted that there is no evidence that this is so, and despite the U.S. intelligence community’s own assessment that Iran today has no nuclear weapons program.

Iran insists that its nuclear program is solely for civilian purposes.

The New York Times called Biden’s remarks “a departure from the Bush administration”, failing to explain in what way it represented a “departure”.

The Associated Press reported in an analysis that “Biden promises foreign policy shifts”, while failing to observe that his “promises” of “pressure and isolation” if Iran does not submit to U.S. demands were exactly those of the Bush administration.


More. Change. I. Can. Believe. In.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Does Biden represent Obama's views on this issue?

I hope not!

If not, Obama has to reign in what has always been Biden's penchant to shoot off his mouth on his own. Has he forgotten that he is not Senator Biden any more?

Three weeks is hardly enough time for Obama to fully establish and solidify his Presidency. That said, I hope he moves on items like this quickly, otherwise I for one will be extremely disappointed!

Perry Hood

Hube said...

Does Biden represent Obama's views on this issue?

Hey! That's interesting. I wonder if George Bush could have used that excuse: "Dick Cheney does not represent my views on this ..."

Anonymous said...

He could have, Hube, but he never did, because George Bush's views came from his alter-ego, Dick Cheney, and his brain Karl Rove, until close to the end of his Presidency, but much too late to alleviate any of the overwhelming damage already done to our country. I found it telling that Bush refused to grant Libby a full pardon, and before that Rove was replaced.

Perry Hood

Hube said...

He could have, Hube, but he never did, because George Bush's views came from his alter-ego, Dick Cheney, and his brain Karl Rove

LOL! And you're the one who accuses ME of unfounded statements/accusations?? That's rich!

On precisely what basis do you make that claim, Perry? I can't wait to see your "proof."

but much too late to alleviate any of the overwhelming damage already done to our country.

Which damage? Economic? How, precisely, was this "Bush's fault?" What percentage of blame does Bush get for the economic woes? 75%? 80%? 100%?? And, how precisely did Bush cause the crisis in which we now find ourselves?

If you mean foreign policy-wise, I agree that Iraq was a royal snafu for more reasons than I can count, but you're talking about "damage to the country." Iraq is only a part of that foreign policy damage.

Anonymous said...

Simply speaking, Hube, I am talking about tax cuts, mainly for the wealthy, while simultaneously generating an unsustainable national debt by unbelievable spending, practically doubled the debt to 70% of GDP during his two terms. These are facts that everyone accepts.

And then there is the Iraq War, on which you have already commented, on which we are in agreement.

And then, off the top of my head, there is the secret government, the energy policy derived by Cheney in secret with oil company executives, the torture throwing out the Geneva Convention, the renditions, the suspension of habeas corpus, the scrapping of the ABM Treaty and the International Court, the expansion of executive powers, the neocon ideological intervention led by Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice, the refusal to respond to Congressional subpoenas, excessive laissez faire attitude toward big business, the refusal to address global warming, no progress on reducing nuclear proliferation, no progress on the middle east roadmap -- shall I continue, as there is a very long list?

On Dick Cheney, you could start out with: Dick Cheney and the Hijacking of the American Presidency by Dubose and Bernstein, or
The War Within: A Secret White House History 2006-2008
by Woodward, or
Cheney: The Untold Story of America's Most Powerful and Controversial Vice President by Hayes, or
What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception by McClellan

There will be plenty more, I'm sure.

You will probably like the third one best, but you ought to read the Woodward book too.

I don't think anyone doubts the extraordinary influence of Dick Cheney on our foreign policy and on the Presidency. He became President by appointing himself to the ticket. You do know that Cheney was in charge of the VP selection committee, and he selected himself!

Perry Hood

Hube said...

I see, Perry. And precisely how did the tax cuts for the "wealthy" and the spending barrage cause our current economic predicament? I think your Axelrodian philosophy is really screwing you up here.

And thank you, Perry, for providing opinion pieces for "proof" that Bush was just a mere "minion" of Dick Cheney and Karl Rove. Saying I don't think anyone doubts the extraordinary influence of Dick Cheney on our foreign policy and on the Presidency shows right there 1) that you HAVE no proof, and 2) MANY people have such doubts. How utterly David Axelrodian of a answer.

He became President by appointing himself to the ticket.

ROTFLMAO! Am I talking to Liz Allen now??

I'll keep all this in mind the next time you chide me for directing people to an editorial or blog instead of factual proof!