Obama says Syria deal could offer lesson for Iran talks

[ProSense]

Obama says Syria deal could offer lesson for Iran talks

By Steve Holland

WASHINGTON | Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:39am EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama disclosed in a television interview broadcast on Sunday that he had exchanged letters with new Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and said diplomacy on Syria, backed up by a military threat, is a potential model for negotiating over Tehran's nuclear ambitions...on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," Obama did not reveal details of the letter exchange, but made clear that U.S. concerns about Iran's nuclear ambitions are a "far larger issue for us" than Syria's chemical weapons.

He and Rouhani will speak at the U.N. General Assembly next week on the same day although there is no plan for them to meet.

<...>

"They shouldn't draw a lesson that we haven't struck, to think we won't strike Iran. On the other hand, what they should draw from this lesson is that there is the potential of resolving these issues diplomatically," said Obama.

<...>

Regarded as a relative moderate, Rouhani has made conciliatory statements toward Washington since coming to office last month. However, Obama said he doubted Rouhani would "suddenly make it easy" to negotiate with the Iranians.

- more -

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/15/us-syria-crisis-usa-idUSBRE98D09C20130915

[leveymg]

1. No shit. Like that lesson is lost on anyone. Just like Iraq and Libya -

prepare to be regime changed - it's no secret. This from 1996: http://www.israeleconomy.org/strat1.htm

[ProSense]

2. There is

"Just like Iraq and Libya - prepare to be regime changed - it's no secret. "

...absolutely no goal of "regime" change in Iran. What does that even mean?

[alsame]

4. Regime change has been the goal

since 1953.

[ProSense]

5. The Iranian President has been in office "since 1953"?

Whose regime is to be replaced and who would be installed?

[alsame]

6. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that

maybe you don't know the history of the US and Iran. Here's a link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

[ProSense]

7. What does that have to do with the claim the current policy is "regime" change? n/t

[leveymg]

10. Please read the link, and tell me how the current policy differs from the 1996 Clean Break plan.

I'd like to hear your thoughts on that question. Thanks.

http://www.israeleconomy.org/strat1.htm

[ProSense]

11. No, show me where "regime" change is the current policy.

You brought it up, and now you're suggesting I go on a fishing expedition through history.

Where is the evidence that the current policy is "regime" change?

[leveymg]

12. The broad outlines of recent history (2003-present) establish that well enough.

As for the particulars, please read the document -- take 15 minutes out of blogging -- and tell us how that is not an accurate outline of actual events and US/Israeli policy during the past 10-15 years.

[ProSense]

13. You can't show it, can you? n/t

[leveymg]

14. OK. Here's a link that touches on it. But, you still should read the 1996 Clean Break document.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023566461

[leveymg]

15. Sorry - gave you the wrong link. Here it is:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023560182

[ProSense]

16. Got anything that shows the current policy is "regime" change? n/t

[leveymg]

17. The current policy is to bleed Syria, disarm it, and then break it up.

That's the inevitable outcome of setting off a sectarian religious civil war in the country. None of that is an accident or unforeseen, just acceptable costs and consequences.

[ProSense]

18. Still can't produce evidence that the current policy is "regme" change in Iran, huh? n/t

[leveymg]

19. Did you read the Clean Break plan? That's what it says. Please comment on that.

[ProSense]

20. This is obfuscation.

Please post the evidence that the current policy is "regime" change in Iran.

[leveymg]

21. Current US policy reflects both a broad strategic plan (regime change) and part tactical practical

measures that have actually been imposed: reinforcement of long-term diplomatic and economic isolation; sustained punative measures intended to deprive the Iranian state of foreign exchange earnings from oil export revenues and access to advanced technology, resulting in lower living standards and rising popular discontent, but without much immediate dramatic sabotage (we some some efforts to disrupt staple food pricing on a demonstration basis about 18 months ago), except of Iran's nuclear and strategic missile programs.

If you think that is inaccurate, let me know.

There are, of course, a cross-currents of thinking that inform that strategy, and you can Google "Iran regime change" and the major strands become immediately apparent.

Now, tell me how the Clean Break document is not reflective of actual US and Israeli policy toward other states in the region.

[ProSense]

22. Still no evidence, huh? n/t

[leveymg]

23. What might constitute evidence to you?

Go ahead, answer the question.

Really, if you won't respond in good faith this is just a game of repeat the same words,and get in the last word, until the other person gets angry enough to say something that can be Alerted, or else just grows tired of the game and leaves you with the last word

Seems a stupid game.

[ProSense]

24. An official document from the Obama administration. n/t

[leveymg]

26. I am not Edward Snowden or J Assange. Please put in your order through the proper channels:

[ProSense]

27. LOL! Why didn't you just admit that you were stating an opinion, not a fact? n/t

[leveymg]

28. The long-term strategy of regime change against Iran is a fact. The particulars are more fluid and

manifest in a thousand particular threats and actions, none of which, singly or in aggregate, necessarily have a high chance of succeeding. So, there are contingencies and some public statements of accommodation, such as the ones you just posted. But, that doesn't prove that regime change hasn't been and isn't still the default agenda. Those statements don't disprove my point.

[ProSense]

30. The claim that current policy is "regime" change is not a fact, and

"But, that doesn't prove that regime change hasn't been and isn't still the default agenda."

...you know it, which is why you can't provide any evidence of the policy.

[ProSense]

25. BTW, here are two WH statements

2009:

Statement by President Barack Obama on Iran

Thirty years ago today, the American Embassy in Tehran was seized. The 444 days that began on November 4, 1979 deeply affected the lives of courageous Americans who were unjustly held hostage, and we owe these Americans and their families our gratitude for their extraordinary service and sacrifice.

This event helped set the United States and Iran on a path of sustained suspicion, mistrust, and confrontation. I have made it clear that the United States of America wants to move beyond this past, and seeks a relationship with the Islamic Republic of Iran based upon mutual interests and mutual respect. We do not interfere in Iran’s internal affairs. We have condemned terrorist attacks against Iran. We have recognized Iran’s international right to peaceful nuclear power. We have demonstrated our willingness to take confidence-building steps along with others in the international community. We have accepted a proposal by the International Atomic Energy Agency to meet Iran’s request for assistance in meeting the medical needs of its people. We have made clear that if Iran lives up to the obligations that every nation has, it will have a path to a more prosperous and productive relationship with the international community.

Iran must choose. We have heard for thirty years what the Iranian government is against; the question, now, is what kind of future it is for. The American people have great respect for the people of Iran and their rich history. The world continues to bear witness to their powerful calls for justice, and their courageous pursuit of universal rights. It is time for the Iranian government to decide whether it wants to focus on the past, or whether it will make the choices that will open the door to greater opportunity, prosperity, and justice for its people.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/statement-president-barack-obama-iran

August 2013:

Statement by the Press Secretary on the Inauguration of the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran

On the occasion of Dr. Hojjatoleslam Hassan Rouhani’s inauguration today as the Islamic Republic of Iran’s seventh president, we again congratulate the Iranian people for making their voices heard during Iran’s election. We note that President Rouhani recognized his election represented a call by the Iranian people for change, and we hope the new Iranian government will heed the will of the voters by making choices that will lead to a better life for the Iranian people. The inauguration of President Rouhani presents an opportunity for Iran to act quickly to resolve the international community’s deep concerns over Iran’s nuclear program. Should this new government choose to engage substantively and seriously to meet its international obligations and find a peaceful solution to this issue, it will find a willing partner in the United States.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/08/04/statement-press-secretary-inauguration-president-islamic-republic-iran

[leveymg]

29. Addressed immediately above.

[rug]

3. "They shouldn't draw a lesson that we haven't struck, to think we won't strike Iran."

That's promising.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Oh, joy! More saber rattling from Obama.

Will the British Parliament go along with his strutting?

[ProSense]

9. The question is

"Will the British Parliament go along with his strutting? "

...will Congress?

Why is it the U.S. responsibility to prevent Iran pursuing its nuclear program?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023587381