Obama On Iran II

Liberals defend Obama no matter what, of course. Assassination is good because it keeps us safe and demonstrates that Obama is not a candy ass. Lack of “due process” is a little tougher to defend, but they manage, using the somewhat circular argument that it’s okay when Obama does it because he is a good man and we trust him.

As to his threats of war against Iran, which is a violation of the UN charter and of American principle, there are two camps of supporters. One camp applauds because it makes him look tough and, like Republicans, they love having a tough president.

The other camp is a little more difficult to follow, but apparently they can read Obama’s mind and know that he has no intention of going to war and that his threats are actually aimed merely at persuading Israel that he “has their back” and will go to war for them if it becomes necessary and so they do not need to launch their own attack on Iran. His threats to “utilize a military component” on Iran are actually, therefor, a meaningful step toward maintaining peace in the Middle East.

That's all well and good, and I am so proud of having a president who can play three dimensional chess. My fear is that the rest of the world might not be quite as brilliant as our esteemed president, and what they might hear is what he actually said which is, in effect, “If Iran does something we don’t like we will bomb the shit out of them.”

Regardless of his intentions, what he actually did was threaten war where there is no threat to us, over a cause that is not in our interest, merely on behalf of a client state with which we have no treaties and which bullied him into it. This makes our nation look either stupid or cowardly, or both, no matter how brilliantly conceived the plan may be in the mind of our highly intelligent chief executive.