Joe Biden: Tehran's favorite Senator

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
Wow who would have thought that Mr. Foreign policy Joe Biden would be even weaker when it came to Iran than Obama. But that seems to be the case.

And let's not forget that Biden was the guy who suggested that we split Iraq into three parts.
Obama really screwed up when he picked Biden. I am sure he is wishing he picked Hillary or Sebelius now.
link
In selecting Joseph Biden as his running mate, Barack Obama acknowledged the importance of foreign affairs to this year's election. His Web site trumpeted Biden as "an expert on foreign policy" and a man "who has stared down dictators."

As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden is well versed in policy debates and carefully choreographed trips. But his record on the Islamic Republic of Iran -- perhaps the chief national security threat facing the next president -- suggests a persistent and dangerous judgment deficit. Biden's unyielding pursuit of "engagement" with Iran for more than a decade has made it easier for Tehran to pursue its nuclear program, while his partisan obsession with thwarting the Bush administration has led him to oppose tough sanctions against hard-liners in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

Eleven years ago, on Aug. 4, 1997, Iranian President Mohammad Khatami proposed a dialogue of civilizations. The world applauded. Biden spearheaded efforts to seize the mantle of engagement. In September 1998, for example, Biden told the Czech foreign minister that cutting radio broadcasts into Iran might better encourage dialogue. Not long after President Bush declared Iran part of an "axis of evil," Biden headlined a March 13, 2002, dinner at the American Iranian Council, an organization underwritten at the time by a dozen oil companies and dedicated to ending sanctions on Iran. At the gala (at which Biden also endorsed regime change in Iraq), he spoke of the dichotomy between hard-liners and the reformers led by Khatami. In order to encourage reform, he invited "the elected representatives in Iran, to meet with . . . members of the United States Congress." Biden indicated that it would not be his first meeting with Iranian parliamentarians.

Fast forward a few years. Khatami left office in 2005 without implementing substantial reform. Between 2000 and 2005, in an effort to engage Iran, European Union trade with that country nearly tripled. Yet far from assuming a moderate posture, "the elected representatives in Iran" allocated nearly 70 percent of the hard currency windfall into military and nuclear programs. The November 2007 National Intelligence Estimate affirmed the fruits of such investment when it found that Iran had pursued a nuclear weapons program until 2003. Although Biden's embrace of engagement coincided with Iran's nuclear warhead work, he acknowledged no error. He told reporters on Dec. 4 that Bush had "misrepresented" the intelligence in a drive to war and declared the same day, "You cannot trust this president."

Such poor judgment was not lost on Iranian leaders. Indeed, one of Khatami's top aides suggested that they came to count on it. At a June 14 panel with Iranian journalists and political advisers, former Khatami spokesman Abdollah Ramezanzadeh explained, "We had one overt policy, which was one of negotiation and confidence building, and a covert policy, which was continuation of activities." He advised President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to soften his defiance, noting that: "During our negotiations and so long as we were not subjected to sanctions, we could import technology. We should have negotiated for so long, and benefited from the atmosphere of negotiations to the extent we could import all the technology needed."

Bush has been a polarizing figure, but most senators realize that partisanship should never trump national security. In early 2007, evidence mounted that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps was planning terrorist activities in Iraq. An August 2007 National Intelligence Estimate found that "Iran has been intensifying aspects of its lethal support for select groups of Iraqi Shia militants" and that "Explosively formed penetrator (EFP) attacks have risen dramatically." The next month, the Senate considered a bipartisan amendment to designate the Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization, an important step to aid nonviolent efforts to deny it funds and financing. Biden was one of only 22 senators to vote against it. "I voted against the amendment to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization because I don't trust this administration," he said. Distrust of the U.S. president is the nature of politics, but skepticism about foreign dictators and their Brown Shirts is the backbone of judgment.

No matter. Biden's political games have made him Tehran's favorite senator. As Gen. David Petraeus struggled to unite Iraqis across the ethnic and sectarian divide, Iran's Press TV seized on Biden's plan for partitioning Iraq and featured his statements with the headline "US plans to disintegrate Iraq." Biden's attack-dog statements about U.S. policy failures emboldened Iranian hard-liners to defy diplomacy. In the Dec. 7, 2007, official sermon, Ayatollah Mohammad Kashani speaking on behalf of Iran's supreme leader, declared, "This Senator [Biden] correctly says Israel could not suppress Hizbullah in Lebanon, so how can the U.S. stand face-to-face with a nation of 70 million? This is the blessing of the Guardianship of the Jurists [the theocracy] . . . which plants such thoughts in the hearts of U.S. senators and forces them to make such confessions." The crowd met his statement with refrains of "Death to America."

Obama picked Biden for experience, but he might also have considered judgment. When it comes to Iran, Biden could stare down dictators; too bad he blinks.

Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a senior lecturer at the Naval Postgraduate School.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
How is this anything but a comment-free troll post? Biden has a different view than you on Iran, so he is wrong. Isn't that pretty much the point of this post?
 

Pens1566

Lifer
Oct 11, 2005
12,288
9,120
136
1. That's an op-ed

2. At the time EVERYONE was attempting to "talk" to Iran. This is before they went back to the bat-shit cave.

3. At least we know he knows where Iran is. Can the same be said for Caribou Barbie???

4. You're pathetic.
 

brxndxn

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2001
8,475
0
76
I don't care if Iran is nuclear or not.. I only care if it actually gets used against us. If it doesn't, then there is nothing to care about.

So.. good for Biden.. Though, I think Biden is a jackass because of his intellectual property voting record.
 

Stoneburner

Diamond Member
May 29, 2003
3,491
0
76
Splitting Iraq into 3 parts is a bad idea how exactly? It's nice that you can articulate republican talking points, but if you can't back them up then you just look like that Right Wing gasbag who Chris Mathews embarassed.

You know nothing about Iraq or IRan beyond campaign talking points profjo, so why not stfu?
 

libs0n

Member
May 16, 2005
197
0
76
Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Splitting Iraq into 3 parts is a bad idea how exactly?

Perhaps the Iraqis should be making decisions about their country, rather than arrogant foreigners.
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Wow amazing how fast you guys react to an attack on Biden.

What do you expect? Your OP sucks, there's nothing to argue.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Wow amazing how fast you guys react to an attack on Biden.

You seem similarly motivated to react to attacks on the much less well-qualified Sarah Palin.

At the end of the day I fail to see how the OP really adds anything at all to the rhetoric that surrounds the present matchup. I certainly think Biden is worlds better equipped to face down the Ahmedenijads and Kim Jong-Ils of the world than is Governor Palin.
 

RKDaley

Senior member
Oct 27, 2007
392
0
0
Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Wow amazing how fast you guys react to an attack on Biden.

You seem similarly motivated to react to attacks on the much less well-qualified Sarah Palin.

qft
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
ProfJohn: I see you were really serious in your objection to inflammatory and misleading headlines on threads.
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,302
144
106
Obama is actually pretty damn smart when it comes to Iran.

I watched the Oreilly segment. He clearly stated he will use military force to protect the homeland.

He also clearly stated that he will not tip his hand when it comes to Iran.

He also stated that Iran must never have nuclear weapons.

what more do you want?
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
I think McCain and Palin are gonna start an Iran war that will make the Iraq debacle look like a cakewalk.
 

Stoneburner

Diamond Member
May 29, 2003
3,491
0
76
Originally posted by: libs0n
Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Splitting Iraq into 3 parts is a bad idea how exactly?

Perhaps the Iraqis should be making decisions about their country, rather than arrogant foreigners.

That ship already sailed, sunk, and is now being salvaged.
 

Legend

Platinum Member
Apr 21, 2005
2,254
1
0
Iran isn't a threat.

Why don't Republicans want to conserve our military forces for important issues, like a potentially dangerous Russian state? Why don't they want to conserve trillions of dollars for lowering taxes and keeping the dollar strong? Why all the pro-war liberal spending? Oh, right, because Republicans are liberals.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Give me their favorite senator who 'only' promises to use 'ANY means' to prevent their getting nukes, but will make some effort to avoid war, over Senator War any day.

Kruschev had a hell of a lot higher opinion of JFK than he did of Nixon. Does that make Nixon, who would have started WWIII's nuclear war in the missile crisis, your pick?
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Legend
Iran isn't a threat.

Why don't Republicans want to conserve our military forces for important issues, like a potentially dangerous Russian state? Why don't they want to conserve trillions of dollars for lowering taxes and keeping the dollar strong? Why all the pro-war liberal spending? Oh, right, because Republicans are liberals.

The Democrats are all over Iran as well. It's not just the Republicans.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: Craig234
Give me their favorite senator who 'only' promises to use 'ANY means' to prevent their getting nukes, but will make some effort to avoid war, over Senator War any day.

And WTF do you think "by any means" means?
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
ProfJohn: I see you were really serious in your objection to inflammatory and misleading headlines on threads.
ummm my thread title is almost verbatim what the writer of the OP-ED said.

Although he called him Terhan's favorite Senator. I can change it to that if it will make you happy.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Craig234
Give me their favorite senator who 'only' promises to use 'ANY means' to prevent their getting nukes, but will make some effort to avoid war, over Senator War any day.

And WTF do you think "by any means" means?

What I think it means is that he's willing to escalate up to military action if other efforts don't work.

What the Republicans propagandists think it means is that Obama is lying to try to get power and would not use spitballs if they had too much spit.

I don't have a completely clear position on Iran and nukes. In general, I'm in favor of non-proliferation, but I'm also in favor of justice, and Iran has seen little of that in 50 years.

I don't think the only issue with Iran is their getting nukes; I think the west had a pretty clear aggressive agenda against them, and there's no clear solution to that problem.

Of course, I'm talking to the wall, in terms of how the 'other side' is concinved that we'd never have a bad agenda for our own greed at Iran's expense unfairly, and so they see any opposition to such an agenda as 'anti-American'. It makes for a completely wasteful discussion.
 

NeoV

Diamond Member
Apr 18, 2000
9,504
2
81
well, if there is a dispute with Iran involving fishing - I'll take Palin's advice - otherwise I'm going to side with Biden
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
One thing I've seen in many right-wingers is a petulant, childish glee in 'sticking it to the liberals' by outrageing them, as if they're fighting some adolescent authority issue.

It's why I see so many of them find humor where the joke is nothing more than something terrible but offensive to liberals, or cackle in glee over Bush and Palin nominations.

It's as if they're telling their parents, "HA HA we can ignore your rules and elect who we want and stay up late so F you!!!!!"

They have complete contempt for any 'rational' approaches that actually care about the issues, content to smirk and wink at their fellow miscreants in power.

Well, we've seen the result of letting the kids run the house. The sad thing is how few of the kids realize how manipulated they are by the right-wing propagandists who dole out the praise for them, usually dripping with sarcasm and contempt for some 'weak' group of Americans, all the while getting these bufoons to vote for the interests of their manipulators.

It's a little like watching a stripper milk someone for way too much money, and feeling sorry for the guy until he calls her a lousy whore, then feeling dirty from both of them.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |