Hey, Sen. Kerry has an Op-Ed in the NYT on Iran!

[wisteria]

Just like Senator Kerry to put it all into perspective and offer up some common sense.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/opinion/18kerry.html?ref=opinion

[ladym55]

1. It's nice to hear the voice of common sense in all the hype

So it's my guess JK will take lots of cheap shots and criticism.

The conservatives who are all hot and bothered about election shenanigans in Iran don't see the irony, but the rest of the world does. We are not exactly the model of fair elections here, especially in 2000 and 2004.

[wisteria]

3. Oh, so true! n/t

[ProSense]

2. That is a terrific piece.

Someone needs to speak above all the nonsense. Senator Kerry cut through it perfectly.

[wisteria]

4. I agree! n/t

[Luftmensch067]

5. Thank you so much for posting this!

I really hope this voice of reason is heard and heeded. It would take so very little to move us in the wrong direction. I'm glad JK calls out McCain specifically -- a concrete example takes it out of abstract policy talk and makes it real. It also reminds us of how very dangerous it would be to go back to the failed policies (for which McCain was a key standard-bearer) that got us into the current wars.

[wisteria]

6. I know, they push for the same old failed policies. And, JK is correct when he says

they are stepping up the rhetoric in order to blame the US for "flaming the fires" so to speak. Bush was trying to do this when he was in office. Any change has got to come from within Iran, by Iranians. It is so obvious, but yet some people want to play politics with it-how dangerous.

[karynnj]

7. So true

Even on Monday, Kerry did a great job explaining why we needed to not "meddle" when he spoke in the Q & A you posted - a word Obama has also used this week.

This really is why it is great that McCain is not President.

[karynnj]

8. Thanks, Wisteria

This is a great op-ed. (insignificant observation - I notice that he uses hypertext to connect to stands he references - which he always did at Daily Kos and HP, but which I don't think I've seen in MSM op-eds.)

[Luftmensch067]

9. Wow, cool observation!

Not insignificant, in my view, but another way we see him "chase the possibilities" :-)

[wisteria]

10. I wasn't aware of that-interesting! n/t

[ObamaKerryDem]

11. Another excellent, right on target piece from the Senator!

And you know, it's ironic because in the Argumentation course I'm currently taking, we have to read an editorial every day to bring in and discuss. I had another one picked out for today but I'm bringing this one in instead! :D

Look out for all the Freeper types to take cheap shots at him over this (but then again, they always do..) Oh well, doesn't make his words any less correct or relevant.

I'm so proud to have Senator Kerry and those like him representing us. (even though he's not my Senator..you lucky MA folks, you) :)

[beachmom]

12. It's more complicated than that, actually.

Some neoconservatives are actually siding with Ahmadinejad, saying he won, and that this revolution will not succeed. The Mossad has said the same. I find that reaction as abhorrent as McCain's. But the two seemingly different reactions amount to the same thing: all neoconservatives want war with Iran. This is what they want, and they will play the politics to try to get what they want.

I agree with every word Kerry wrote, and think Obama has been pitch perfect thus far dealing with this issue. The trick is whether he needs to recalibrate if this thing continues.

Best place to follow what is happening in Iran is Andrewsullivan.com, by the way. He turned his blog green and last I looked is ONLY reporting on Iran.

[wisteria]

13. I can't believe that some Rebubs are siding with Ahmadnejad. Why?

I understand that the matter is much more complicated than how it appears. I to worry about the continuation of this situation.

[beachmom]

18. Here is an excellent explanation from Andrew Sullivan on the neocons' changing tactics:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/06/the-purging-of-froomkin-ctd.html#more

(also about the firing of WP writer Froomkin, who was a critic of both the Bush and Obama Administrations FROM THE LEFT, apparently unacceptable for beltway types)

He also knows this: on Monday, one leading neocon position was that they wanted Ahmadinejad to win because that would give them a chance to bomb Iran or allow Israel to, and because it was naive folly to believe there could be any opening for democracy in Iran. Once they realized that this looked and was objectively vile, as well as being empirically wrong, most changed tack and argued that Obama wasn't doing enough to support the revolution. The difference lies in their cynicism not my incoherence.

Isn't that positively SICK? These people flip flopped in their tactics, but their objective remained the same: they seek war with Iran.

[karynnj]

20. and with your post today, John Bolton proved him correct!

That op-ed is beyond disgusting. Not confirming him in 2005 or 2006 was one of the few victories of that Congress - even though Bush recess appointed him. He is a truly disgusting person and neo-con.

that they want a third war when we can't easily handle the 2 is ridiculous.

[Muttocracy]

14. got it in my email, loved it - perfect. nt

[Inuca]

15. Excellent

as were his appearances on CNN (happened to hear most of it on the radio driving home) and Hardball (home by then :-)). He is really pushing this, and rightly so. Khamenei's speech today just shows how right Kerry and Obama were. OTOH as mentioned upthread if things take a turn for the worse as unfortunately is likely to happen... I don' t know, I suppose the very cautious and "it's not an American problem" approach is still the best. I am absolutely riveted by what is happening in Iran and have been obsessively refreshing Sully's and the HUffPo live blog pages for several days now (easy time at work, fortunately). Fascinating on so many levels.

[Inuca]

16. Meanwhile...

Hope and Change -- but Not for Iran (Krauthammer) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061803495.html?hpid=opinionsbox1 and 'No Comment' Is Not an Option (Wolfowitz; Wolfowitz???? :wtf:!!!) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061803496.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

[beachmom]

17. Steve Clemons had a good post up about this:

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/06/john_kerry_is_r/#comments

John Kerry is RIGHT: This is an "Iranian Moment"

I am really proud of Senator John Kerry for getting out into the public sphere and explaining to Americans that the US needs to be cautious and nuanced at this fragile moment in Iran's political course.

Barack Obama was wrong to comment at all in his offhanded comparison of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Mir-Hossein Mousavi. Many Iranians felt as if Obama -- who has invested so heavily in trying to communicate with Iranian citizens in the past -- dissed their aspirations for change.

That said, America ought not to be injecting itself into Iran's political debate either in ways that make it an easy target for Ahmadinejad's thugs or in ways that undermine the democratic and reform aspirations of the impressive, risk-taking protesters.

John Kerry, who chairs the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, shared the following on CNN's The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer:

Go to the link for the rest.

[beachmom]

19. A war like response from John Bolton:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/01/AR2009070103020.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Time for an Israeli Strike?

By John R. Bolton
Thursday, July 2, 2009

With Iran's hard-line mullahs and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps unmistakably back in control, Israel's decision of whether to use military force against Tehran's nuclear weapons program is more urgent than ever.

Iran's nuclear threat was never in doubt during its presidential campaign, but the post-election resistance raised the possibility of some sort of regime change. That prospect seems lost for the near future or for at least as long as it will take Iran to finalize a deliverable nuclear weapons capability.

Accordingly, with no other timely option, the already compelling logic for an Israeli strike is nearly inexorable. Israel is undoubtedly ratcheting forward its decision-making process. President Obama is almost certainly not.

He still wants "engagement" (a particularly evocative term now) with Iran's current regime. Last Thursday, the State Department confirmed that Secretary Hillary Clinton spoke to her Russian and Chinese counterparts about "getting Iran back to negotiating on some of these concerns that the international community has." This is precisely the view of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, reflected in the Group of Eight communique the next day. Sen. John Kerry thinks the recent election unpleasantness in Tehran will delay negotiations for only a few weeks.

Let's be clear: war is ALL that neoconservatives love. Of course, none of them to care to actually fight in one, but it's all they want. It is just despicable. Does Mr. Bolton not get that the Iranians who protested will also be bombed?

[wisteria]

21. What a jerk Bolton is. He has not even a trace of diplomacy in him so all he knows is to attack.

Yuck, Yuck, Yuck, that is all I can say. Bolton is disgusting.