Obama’s Big Gamble

A correction to FrogRespect's entry: President Obama quote was "...So for those who question the character and cause of my nation, I ask you to look at the concrete actions that we have taken in just nine months..." The source is the UN General Assembly website: http://www.un.org/ga/64/generaldebate/pdf/US_en.pdf. Obama???s address covered a range of topics???all stemming from his desire for leaders to recognize the common future of a world in which the interests of peoples and nations are shared. He took the opportunity to reflect upon his first 9months in office, highlighting his administration's priorities and looking forward to challenges ahead. I see nothing surprising about that. He also outlined four pillars he believes are fundamental to the future that we seek for posterity: non-proliferation and disarmament; the promotion of peace and security; the preservation of the planet; and a global economy that advances opportunity for all. He closed by offering a fresh take on the crucial choice that faces the United Nations: recognizing that it can either be an institution disconnected from what matters in the lives of the world???s citizens, or an indispensable factor in advancing the interests of the people it serves. This all makes sense to me. Having campaigned on a fierce platform of change, with slogans about a fundamental break with the status quo, once elected, it is hardly surprising (it is in fact expected) that he would embark on effecting significant change on various fronts at once. At a time when the U.S. truly must charter a way out of a failed foreign policy, the Obama administration is shunning standard dichotomies of realist power politics versus liberal idealism, starting from a set of U.S. national interests as old as the nation itself, asking how it can safeguard and pursue those interests in this 21st century world, offering bold and genuinely new thinking about America???s role in such a world. A different conception of American leadership is taking shape, which sees opportunities as well as challenges in the deep and unavoidable interconnectedness of this age, the rise of countries on every continent as emerging powers, and the broadening of the global agenda. International cooperation is essential to America???s own security as well as to international peace and prosperity. The world hasn???t stood still over the past decade or so, waiting for America to reclaim the mantle of global leadership. Its ability to stay ahead requires strategic leadership. Obama strikes me as a realist, leaning toward a pragmatic center on several global issues. For him it???s more about what???s necessary and practical, rather than what???s ideologically expedient. He projects a stark appreciation of today???s world, the need for America to define and pursue its interests in a post-ColdWar world still resistant to tidy categorization ??? to take a step back and consider a fresh strategic perspective. Fareed???s analysis is therefo

I always did think that the US did represent
The strongest nation in the world, at present ???
Economically and militarily, at least,
From the west, all the way to the east ???
How then do you say others are more powerful and confident?

It???s true the gap is perilously closing,
And all our vulnerabilities exposing,
That is why we have to work with others
And treat them like our brothers ???
Without our will and policy on them imposing.

Medvedev's response to the change in missile defense strategy was gratifying. The fall of the Berlin Wall should have been the beginning of a new era in the relationship between the two superpowers. Instead, we in the U.S. treated it as a triumphalist victory over a vanquished enemy. Russia was behind the West in its' embrace of the Enlightenment none-the-less, Bolshevism was Russia's manifestation of the French Revolution. And just as in France, there was no direct line to democracy. France got Napoleon; Russia got Stalin.

There is a lot to be said for a democratizing world anchored by America in the west and Russia in the east. Obama's reset appears to have taken hold. We can hope the relationship continues to evolve positively.

Score one for Obama.

I often disagree with Fareed, but usually find him to be reasonable. This is a far cry from reasonable. The entire piece is a delicately crafted straw man. No one is saying we shouldn't work with the world on important issues. And to pretend that all of the criticism is coming from the "netherworld" of right wingers takes demonization to an explicit level. As for Obama's speech, allow me to paraphrase one segment: "For those of you who doubt America, just look at what I've done the past nine months." How Fareed can't understand why this statement troubles many Americans is beyond me. Apparently we have a leader who thinks the best way to defend his country against criticism is highlight his own minimal accomplishments. The "audacity," or more accurately megalomania, is deeply offensive. Fareed ought to understand that many critics of Obama, even some devilish right wingers, object not to Obama's desire to work with other countries, but to his tendency to implicitly agree with those who bash America while representing himself as its redeemer. Americans elected Obama because we thought he would bring reform, not to save us from our sins.

Working with the world, not against it.


Actually, alot closer to "working for the rest of the world, at our expense because his super powers of moral perception requires us to do so to fullfill his otherworldly destiny "!

It cost nothing to shake a hand while the other hand has it's fingers crossed behind the back. Sure, we'll play the climate change game President Obama wants to play. We'll talk about a nuke free world and sanctions against Iran. We'll live in this fantasy world of President Obama where everyone plays nice and the lamb lays with the lion. It's cost us nothing. Absolutely nothing in letting President Obama live with this vision he has of himself as President of the world. I can hear the phone call Russia made to China. Can you believe this guy. He ought to be the CEO of Disneyland instead of President of a country like America. Bring the cowboy back, at least he made sense. The world is going to get more chaotic with President Obama because when push comes to shoves, Russia and China are going to tell President Obama, you run America the way you want and we'll run Russia and China the way we want. Which is what China told President Obama about climate change. The daily propaganda speeches we get from President Obama aren't doing what their suppose to do with his government health care and his propaganda speech to the United Nations surely didn't win over the best propagandist in the world. They've heard better bull then that from their own mouths. They see President Obama as someone who just entered the 1st grade.

The US have been seen as a big bully and the greatest war monger on earth under white presidents. Now a black president is trying to rectify the image but the whites are still adamant that the US must be a war monger and continue to be the greatest destroyer on earth. This is a twisted mindset of the whites imbued in their genes with white supremacy but of different tones. Obama won't be able to win a second term.

The big key is that America must be mature enough to understand that it is not the big, sheltered baby of the right's imaginings. We can only deal with the world by acknowledging its realities.

I think, by the way, that the open revolt in Iran is a partial consequence of the new era that Obama has begun. Now Ahmedinijad is looking behind his back, and finds himself unable to control the populace. If Obama went all Bush on Iran, what do you think would happen? All the moderates would be disappeared, and the populace would unite under the crazy right of Iran.

What, in fact, is the harm of this? If it turns out that Ahmedinijad is completely hardnosed about this whole thing, we might eventually need to take warlike actions against him. It is crucial that the world understands that we did everything we could to avoid hostilities.

As I anticipated Iran has began to trample over Obama. In the early hours of Sunday around 3:30 est., Iran reportedly successfully fired two short range missiles. This is just days after the nuclear site that is currently in construction was discovered outside of Qom(pictured right). I had mentioned a few days ago, that if President Obama would not be aggressive with Iran that they would pursue whatever they want. In hindsight this isn't President Obama's sole problem, other leaders from around the world need to act as well. Congress is now calling for more economic sanction be placed upon Iran, but if you believe sanctions are going to hinder their operation, you might want to rethink that. Diplomacy seems to be out of the picture, regardless if Iran say's they are up for it. Iran's actions are being heard much louder around the world, than the mumbling of Ahmadinejad. If that wasn't enough to get your blood boiling, Iran also mentioned it planned to fire a long range missile capable of hitting Israel, and United States Bases in the gulf region on Monday. If that statement alone doesn't require immediate actions, apparently nothing will. Iran agreed previously that it would have nuclear talks with the United States, Britain, Russia, China, and France in Geneva with the United Nations Security Council Oct. 1. Well with all that said, I don't honestly see a peaceful resolution taking place anytime soon. Iran has a lot to lose, I don't see what they expect to gain from displaying these actions.
(politicalpluralism.com)

It is a shame that the article could not have had the title, 'Working with America, not against it.' But that would not have been correct.

Forget about the US of A and any Barack Obama urgings of global cooperation to combat nuclear proliferation. It all boils down to the Mullahs vs. God's little bomb makers that Obama out of political necessity protects.
Hard reality: 40 kg of plutonium a year enough to make ten atom bombs (1.7 kg a week 4k=atom bomb) and which happen to be the old production rate at Dimona
This is not to dismiss the tritium produced in the production of thermonuclear bombs (Israel's first thermo-nuclear device was ten times more powerful then that dropped on Hiroshima.)
By the 1980' Israel made between 100-200 atom bombs making Israel the 5th largest nuclear power in the world.
Today it is estimated that the 'religious state' (a moral joke,) has swelled their inventory to over three hundred nuclear bombs.
Israel has been granted an inspection free zone status by the United States. (Who among us does not know that Israel whom seriously kicked the US Navy's a** also knows how to keep our politicos in line???Obama first in line here.)
In other words Iran is seriously facing the Ugly Head of Semitism. If the mullahs do not get their arsenal together they will soon become god's chosen people's next batch of castrated desert losers.
L'Chaim.

It seems All People everywhere are scared, afraid of losing what they have and not getting what they want, no matter what the need. Sacrifice is a gain to some and a loss to others. and while these decisions are being made we will soon All drink from the thimble, and eat from the barren fields. What is man's greatest Fear ? His greatest need ?

Admirers of the UN and President Obama have something in common: the love of empty rhetoric. The words, ???we should???, are ubiquitous pronouncements in both cases. Let???s see, ???we should??? stop the genocide in Darfur, ???we should??? intervene in Rwanda ??? and ???we should??? prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.


If the UN and our new multi-lateralist president really want to get together and scare Iran into stopping their nuclear bomb development, they simply have to declare the nuclear sites as ???UN Safe Havens.??? The last few UN ???safe havens??? were either bombed by the Israelis or the population massacred (Srebrenica.)

Ron Monsen
Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

I would agree with SaenYim mostly in that the effect of rightwing crazies don't have the influence they think they do, but right is becoming increasingly extreme. And that is worrysome. Politicans certianly regonize the fear and anxiety that such vitriol can produce. For example, my Senator Vitter is working for the far right vote and he'll probably get it. This will not serve america well. The "your either with us or against us" mentality of the Bush adminstration was absurd and dangerous but people still buy into it. It's sad, lies don't have to be clever or believable, they simply have to be loud

It seems that the erstwhile Silent Majority has been replaced by the Loud Mouth Minority, starring Limbaugh, Hannity and Ingel. These right wing noisemakers whose speech borders on sedition, have no real influence on anyone as proven by the last elections. They may have a lot of listeners/viewers but that is purely for the entertainment value, like people who watch professional wrestling. Everyone knows it's "make pretend" but it's fun to watch people that disturbed, as long as we know they will never hurt us in real life.. As hard as they tried to paint then Senator Obama as a communist, Islamic fascist, white hating, mad bomber, drug user and all around bad guy, the American people elected him president. Now they are trying their damnedest (and I use that word in the most Biblical sense) to sabotage anything he might accomplish that would make their views proven even more insane. The truth is that all of these anti-Americans spout their vitriol for only one reason - they make money at it. I would bet anything that with their average IQ as low as it is, without getting paid to be obnoxious their views would have been more like everyone else's, i.e. wanting to see things get better in the United States and around the world.

President Obama has launched a Preemptive strike in favour of a MultiPolar World. Rather a delicious upending of things.
aly-Khan Satchu
www.rich.co.ke
Twitter alykhansatchu

The author said - (the UN) "it does have considerable legitimacy. And that means power" No you are 100% incorrect on that. Power does not come from legitmacy as the UN certainty does have that. What it does not have is a committment to action, it's a paper tiger with no power, because there is no 100% unified committment to act on Iran's violation. Obama has a non binding agreement from these nations who do not act when the time comes to act. Big Deal. We all oppose wha Iran is doing, the point is what are we actually going to do to stop it?

Go Barack !

Fight the RED-NECK Horde !

Keep up the good work !