One thing I didn't care for in Obama's press conference last night on nukes in middle east

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

I thought the presser was 99.9% phenomenal. Just a wonderful job by our President explaining the economic situation and the jobs bill.

That said, when it came to questions on Iran, I had one fairly large issue with his comments. He kept saying that if someone obtained nuclear weapons in the Middle East that it would spark an arms race and destabilize the region. Did he forget, or was he willfully ignoring the fact that Israel already has nuclear weapons? Frankly, I think it would have aided his nuclear non-proliferation policy if he were to call on them to disarm for the very reasons he stated that Iran shouldn't be developing nukes, yet he failed to do so.

[Howardx]

1. willfully ignoring

obviously

[Kittycat]

2. It's been US policy to not really consider Israel as 'part' of the middle east

when discussing nuclear development.

[blogslut]

3. Why open that can of worms?

Seriously? What good would it do at this point in time?

Of course he knows that Israel has nukes. It's one of the worst kept secrets in the world.

[yy4me]

4. I picked up on the same issue. My thought on the whole press

conference was very positive. Obama is articulate, personable, has a great understanding of our situation. I bet he has found out stuff that he never would have imagined when he was a candidate.

How refreshing to see and hear someone speak, who can do so without notes, without a teleprompter, no smirks, no baloney. Good grief, more than 3 words to a sentance...complete sentences even. I found a degree in comfort knowing he is taking no bull. We need these honest addresses frequently. It gives us hope that things are being addressed and acted upon.

As to the nuclear issue, he would have scored better on that issue if he did mention Israel. What it would accomplish may be an issue but there is no use in pretending that they don't have the bombs.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

7. I totally agree.

I thought he was, to use a cliche, the iron fist with a velvet glove last night. He very articulately explained what was going on while still laying down the law with obstructionists. I was so thrilled for the vast majority of that presser.

[napi21]

5. I believe his intent was to say "anyone else" without openly stating that

Israel, Pakistan & India already have them.

As much as I don't want to see anyone else get nukes, I can understand why Iran would feel the need to get some. I relate it to what my reaction would be if someone in my neighborhood was threatening my home & family...they had state of the art weapons and all I had was a little 5 shot derringer. I would certainly want to level the fight.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

6. That's exactly my point.

Israel having nukes is the reason we already have a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. And if anyone doesn't believe Israel would be inclined to use them hasn't been really paying attention to their policy of disproportionate response going on already in Palestine.

[bdamomma]

8. and no one asked him about Gaza and Israel either.

shouldn't that topic be talked about? am I missing something here. Or he has his men Halbrook and Mitchell out there now.

[Bragi]

9. He fudged because...

I believe that Israel is the only country in the ME with nukes. (Note: Pakistan and India are not in the ME.)

However, it is U.S. policy to pretend that Israel does not have nukes. Obama apparently did not want to challenge this fiction last night.

Personally, I think that was a good choice. If he decides to end the pretense (which I would support) then he needs to do it thoughtfully, not in response to off-topic question at a newser where he is trying to sell a domestic message.

- B

[AllentownJake]

11. Helen knew what she was asking

and Obama knew what he was dodging. She was checking to see if US Policy had changed on that issue.

[rvablue]

13. Yep. Isn't weird that we all know this to be true....

and yet no one will say it outloud?

Asking the question itself was signifigant, though.

[AllentownJake]

15. As soon as we admit Israel has Nuclear Weapons

Than our argument against Iran or anyone else in the region is theoretically weakened. So we just pretend that Israel has no nuclear weapons.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

14. That I don't disagree with.

Thank you for putting it into that kind of a perspective. You're right that it would've been a huge distraction had he changed the policy then and there.

[AllentownJake]

10. His dodging answer had nothing to do with Iran

It was about Israel. Everyone knows Israel has nukes. No one will publicly admit it. It was actually an artful question by Helen to see if President Obama was going to change 40 years of US Policy.

[WinkyDink]

12. Precisely.