Iran Is The New Tiananmen

"We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.

America's vital interests and our deepest beliefs are now one. From the day of our Founding, we have proclaimed that every man and woman on this earth has rights, and dignity, and matchless value, because they bear the image of the Maker of Heaven and earth. Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self-government, because no one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave. Advancing these ideals is the mission that created our Nation. It is the honorable achievement of our fathers. Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation's security, and the calling of our time.

So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world."

I understand that we as a nation can not saddle up and ride around the world ousting dictators.  The application of force is a serious issue that should be applied only when we truly have a legitimate national security interest (like most of us agreed in 2003).  What is going on in Iran could be a major turning point for the Muslim world.

Surely, President Obama could spare a few words.  Surely he can find a way to use his soaring rhetoric to inspire the people (and who could not be moved by the courage of the brave, brave Iranian women) of Iran to hold firm in their convictions.

Soviet dissidents speak to the power of Reagan's words in bringing down the Soviet Union.  They took strength knowing that a powerful leader on the other side of the Iron Curtain stood with them.  I pray President Obama is moved to use his gift of speaking to provide similar comfort to Iranian protestors.

It's the right thing to do.  It's the type of decision that George Bush could make easily.  The Muslim world is watching, and the actions President Obama takes in the next few days will matter more than all of his speeches.  Pray he does the right thing.

As for me - I stand with the people of Iran. 

Comments

[Clark]

Um, the fastest way for us to discredit the reformists is to make them an easy target for the propaganda of the hardliners. If Obama speaks firmly for their side, they'll be painted as tools of the US government.

[Jim Durbin]

Clark, I hear what you're saying, and if you happen to be a realpolitik State Department employee or a Middle East Commenter looking for a book deal, then you can state your comment as a fact.

The truth is the Iran government will use the US (and the jews) as a scapegoat no matter what we do if they're threatened. Refusing to comment substantively wins us no points, but it does hurt our long term credibility with freedom-seeking oppressed people around the world.

Read through what the Soviet refuseniks say sustained them in dark times. Take a look at what our own revolutionary leaders said about the possibility of support from foreign nations. It is a powerful tool, and it is the right thing.

How much of the hatred towards America comes from our failure to live up to our values? How does supporting (and silence is a support) a regime that murders its own citizens with foreign troops fit into our ideals in any manner? It doesn't.

Obama has spoken, but not strongly. The truth is he wants this to go away, so he can focus on his country, rather than recognizing that we are at a historical point with Iran. If a few strong words from a gifted orator could help moderate the Islamic Regime, we could avoid a bloody Middle Eastern War that could spell the end of a global civilization. The one-two punch of a military invasion of Iraq followed by a freedom seeking Iran would benefit the world, and the Iranians themselves, immensely.

I want that. I think you do too.

Btw - thank you for commenting. I consider Show Me Progress an important, independent voice in Missouri politics, and though I may disagree with much of what you write, it's important that real grassroots voices are promoted and encouraged.

[Clark]

I'm glad you feel good because you're on the side of the people of Iran. I think we all are. But what Obama has publicly stated is stronger than anything you've written here. I also think it's funny that you can read his mind and somehow "know" that he wants this Iran situation to go away just so he can deal with domestic matters.

And thanks for the praise. I also can't say that I agree with anything you write, or that I read this site for anything more than a chuckle, but I'm glad that you keep it up. If nothing else, ordinary people should be very involved in the public discourse (not kept at arm's length like DFHs) and you and I are part of making that happen.

[-Jim Durbin]

Clark - Obama says he has deep concerns. It's the type of thing you say about Minnesota, not the shooting of people in the street. Watch this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4vqWamoQgM

That's what is happening. The shooting of citizens the street by a government Obama is trying to negotiate with. Obama sas "This is a debate among Iranians about Iran's future." How is that a strong response? Call it what it is.

Obama is telling the Iranian protestors they are on their own, and the United States will deal whoever is left, even if that means they are slaughtered in the streets.

Sarkozy can come out and say it. Lieberman can too. Obama is the leader of the free world. What exactly has to happen before he stands up and uses his gift of oratory to bring about a resolution? He can't because he's out of his depth, as evidenced by the way he answered these questions.

Watch him speak - and tell me this is something he cares about at all.

Well I do care. And I want a president to stand up for people who are shot in the streets because they don't want to live under the yoke of tyranny anymore.

[Clark]

Oh please. Obama has said more than that he's a little concerned about this.

I also find it amusing that you denigrate Obama as a man of little more than words on the one hand, but you expect him to bring peace to the Middle East and halt a tyrannical regime from repressing its own citizens with nothing more than words.

[-Jim Durbin]

Clark, sometimes I'm too subtle with my sarcasm. I've never been impressed with Obama's rhetorical skills - it's a dig at the fact that this is supposed to be his strength, and yet at a time when it's actually needed, he can't even muster up the same level of support that Canada, Germany and France have managed.

And as you notice, Iran already has accused us of meddling - yet the youth of Iran are saying that they won't forget Obama for abandoning them.

It's a missed opportunity based on the idea that he can use his rhetorical "gifts" to convince whoever emerges to play nice and give up their interests.

Looks like Hillary was right about his lack of experience.

[Clark]

Except that Obama never claimed to be able to give a speech that would solve the problems of the Middle East. He's only claimed that the hard work of diplomacy is superior to saber rattling and chest beating. Which it is.