Archive for Sunday, January 1, 2012

Obama signs defense bill

January 1, 2012

Advertisement

President Barack Obama signed a wide-ranging defense bill into law Saturday despite having “serious reservations” about provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists.

The bill also applies penalties against Iran’s central bank in an effort to hamper Tehran’s ability to fund its nuclear enrichment program. The Obama administration is looking to soften the impact of those penalties because of concerns that they could lead to a spike in global oil prices or cause economic hardship on U.S. allies that import petroleum from Iran.

In a statement accompanying his signature, the president chastised some lawmakers for what he contended was their attempts to use the bill to restrict the ability of counterterrorism officials to protect the country.

Comments

FalseHopeNoChange 3 years, 4 months ago

Could Obama Launch ‘October Surprise’ Against Iran?

Recent statements from the Obama administration have led at least one Israeli observer to suspect that the president is preparing for an attack on Iran — and political considerations would dictate an assault in October.

Writing in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, Chemi Shalev notes that on Dec. 16, Obama switched his rhetoric from “a nuclear Iran is unacceptable” to the assertive “we are determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.”

On Dec. 19, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, who had previously warned about the pitfalls of an attack on Iran, declared that the United States “will take whatever steps necessary to deal with” the Iranian nuclear threat.

The next day, Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said, “My biggest worry is that [the Iranians] will miscalculate our resolve.”

Shalev observes that with the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, there is no longer fear that an attack on Iran would endanger U.S. forces there.

And he discloses that people who have heard Obama speak about Iran in closed sessions believe he would order an attack if he is convinced that a nuclear-armed Iran poses a clear danger to America’s national security.

“There can be no doubt — notwithstanding claims by the radical left and the isolationist right — that a nuclear Iran would be an unmitigated disaster for American interests, above and beyond the existential threat to Israel,” Shalev writes.

“The entire Middle East would be destabilized and America’s oil supplies held hostage by a self-confident and bellicose Iran.”

If an American attack on Iran were to take place, timing it close to the November elections would benefit Obama politically, according to Shalev, who declares that “October would be ideal.”

He adds: “That’s the month that Henry Kissinger chose in 1972 to prematurely declare that ‘peace is at hand’ in Vietnam, thus turning Richard Nixon’s certain victory over George McGovern into a landslide; that’s the month that Ronald Reagan feared Jimmy Carter would use in 1980 in order to free the Iran hostages and stop the Republican momentum; and that’s the month that many of Obama’s opponents are already jittery about, fearing the proverbial ‘October Surprise’ that would hand Obama his second term on a platter.”

(from a source)

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 4 months ago

If anybody but Ron Paul gets the nomination, the Republican nominee (and Fox News and all the other Republican mouthpieces) will be beating the war drums right up to election time.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 4 months ago

You couldn't care less about what happens in/to/from Iran. You only care about trolling.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 4 months ago

It doesn't take pithiness to call your posting for what it is.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.