Obama's Peace Offensive

Seeing things in a conceptual framework is possibly the first refreshing 'change' obama seems to bring in. Added to that, the thought of doing a proper home work,evaluating the pros and cons of iran's nuclear ability , a fully nuclearized middle east, and the behaviour of coming elections in iran and others concerned, is an expression of a new mindset that obama administration is expected to carry ,when it comes to solving the isreal-palestine problem. this again seems more practical and effective. as the never dying coflict between the two has many roots, it has to tackled in that comprehensive manner.
lets expect many interesting solution processes will unfold, may be just on j20th -jan, itself. that will really be a new year wish to the whole world. from a new america ofcourse.

How can you possibly believe that the appointment of Dennis Ross as chief Middle East advisor represents ???a brand-new U.S. approach????. In October 2002, Ross unabashedly called for an invasion of Iraq, telling Americans that Saddam Hussein ???has chemical and biological weapons now??? and ???is on the verge of a nuclear capability???. which would be used if Saddam is not disarmed quickly???. http://www.international.ucla.edu/burkle/article.asp?parentid=2338
Now, in an eerie déjà vue, Ross is using almost exactly the same line against Iran,
(http://www.newsweek.com/id/171256) saying that ???Tehran clearly wants nukes for both defensive and offensive purposes??? despite the NIE report saying Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003. His stated ???new thinking??? is nothing more than using stronger carrots and sticks to force Iran to stop enriching Uranium ??? i.e. it is basically the same failed policy the US has followed for years. For instance, he wants to block gasoline supplies to Iran (which imports 43% of its gasoline because of inadequate refining) ??? will Ross be happy when ambulances can???t take Iranians to hospitals? Doesn???t he understand, as do most Iran experts, that trying to force a proud country, with extremely strong popular support for its right to enrichment, only strengthens the hardliners, and makes negotiation less likely to succeed? Is Ross even aware of far more realistic existing proposals to combine limited enrichment by Iran with intrusive inspections (http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/03/opinion/edluers.php), and with easing of tensions so that any Iranian motive to develop nuclear weapons would be greatly reduced? Does Ross understand that Iran could be of enormous immediate help to the US in Iraq, Afghanistan, and stopping Afghan drug exports, and perhaps in the long term, with Israel-Palestine? Can we really expect a neocon to change his stripes?