A feckless generation elected a feckless Man!
2010
– Preparing to Eat another Feckless Burger!
Will 2010 be another feckless year of dealing with Iran?
Feckless, an interesting word used by Charles Krauthammer,
It is the perfect word to use in describing Obama’s Administration
Feckless means “weak, ineffective, thoughtless, careless, Irresponsible”
Obama, like the Exodus Egyptian Ruler, is the perfect end time US President!
December 28, 2009
http://www.tribulationperiod.com/
II Timothy 3:1-4 – This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. [2] For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, [3] Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, [4] Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
Begin Excerpt from THE JERUSALEM POST
The year of living fecklessly
December 27, 2009
Charles Krauthammer , THE JERUSALEM POST
On Tuesday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not just reject US President Barack Obama’s latest feckless floating nuclear deadline. He spat on it, declaring that Iran “will continue resisting” until the US has gotten rid of its 8,000 nuclear warheads.
So ends 2009, the year of “engagement,” of the extended hand, of the gratuitous apology – and of spinning centrifuges, two-stage rockets and a secret enrichment facility that brought Iran materially closer to becoming a nuclear power.
We lost a year.
But it was not just any year. It was a year of spectacularly squandered opportunity. In Iran, it was a year of revolution, beginning with a contested election and culminating this week in huge demonstrations mourning the death of the dissident Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri – and demanding no longer a recount of the stolen election but the overthrow of the clerical dictatorship.
Obama responded by distancing himself from this new birth of freedom.
First, scandalous silence. Then, a few grudging words. Then relentless engagement with the murderous regime. With offer after offer, gesture after gesture – to not Iran, but the “Islamic Republic of Iran,” as Obama ever so respectfully called these clerical fascists – the US conferred legitimacy on a regime desperate to regain it.
Why is this so important? Because revolutions succeed at that singular moment, that imperceptible historical inflection, when the people, and particularly those in power, realize that the regime has lost the mandate of heaven. With this weakening dictatorship desperate for affirmation, why is the US repeatedly offering just such affirmation?
APART FROM ostracizing and delegitimizing these gangsters, we should be encouraging and reinforcing the demonstrators.
This is no trivial matter. When pursued, beaten, arrested and imprisoned, dissidents can easily succumb to feelings of despair and isolation. Natan Sharansky testified to the electric effect Ronald Reagan’s Evil Empire speech had on lifting spirits in the Gulag.
The news was spread cell to cell in code tapped on the walls. They knew they weren’t alone, that America was committed to their cause.
Yet so aloof has Obama been that on Hate America Day (November 4, the anniversary of the seizure of the US Embassy in Teheran), pro-American counterdemonstrators chanted “Obama, Obama, you are either with us or with them,” i.e., their oppressors.
Such cool indifference is more than a betrayal of our values. It’s a strategic blunder of the first order.
Forget about human rights. Assume you care only about the nuclear issue. How to defuse it? Negotiations are going nowhere, and whatever UN sanctions we might get will be weak, partial, grudging and late. The only real hope is regime change. The revered and widely supported Montazeri had actually issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons.
And even if a successor government were to act otherwise, the nuclear threat would be highly attenuated because it’s not the weapon but the regime that creates the danger. (Think India or Britain, for example.)
Any proliferation is troubling, but a nonaggressive pro-Western Teheran would completely change the strategic equation and make the threat minimal and manageable.
What shoul d we
do? Pressure from without – cutting off gasoline supplies, for example – to complement and reinforce pressure from within.
The pressure should be aimed not at changing the current regime’s nuclear policy – that will never happen – but at helping change the regime itself.
Give the kind of covert support to assist dissident communication and circumvent censorship that, for example, we gave Solidarity in Poland during the 1980s. (In those days that meant broadcasting equipment and copying machines.) But of equal importance is robust rhetorical and diplomatic support from the very highest level: full-throated denunciation of the regime’s savagery and persecution. In detail – highlighting cases, the way Western leaders adopted the causes of Sharansky and Andrei Sakharov during the rise of the dissident movement that helped bring down the Soviet empire.
Will this revolution succeed? The odds are long but the reward immense. Its ripple effects would extend from Afghanistan to Iraq (in both conflicts, Iran actively supports insurgents who have long been killing Americans and their allies) to Lebanon and Gaza where Iran’s proxies, Hizbullah and Hamas, are arming for war.
One way or the other, Iran will dominate 2010.
Either there will be an Israeli attack or Iran will arrive at – or cross – the nuclear threshold.
Unless revolution intervenes. Which is why to fail to do everything in our power to support th
is popular revolt is unforgivable.
Charles Krauthammer is a syndicated Washington Post columnist.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.
We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more detailed information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
You may use material originated by this site.
However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.