Week 5 pt 2 by Ryan Hanson

Today in class we had a presentation about how Europe sees the new presidential candidates and what their opinions are on them. Well today I found an article posted by the Washington Post about how Europe fears Obama might undercut process with Iran. They think that is Senator Obama meets unconditionally with Iran leaders, it could ruin ties between Europe and the United States.
“European officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said they are wary of giving up a demand that has been so enshrined in U.N. resolutions, particularly without any corresponding concessions by Iran. Although European officials are eager to welcome a U.S. president promising renewed diplomacy and multilateralism after years of tensions with the Bush administration, they feel strongly about continuing on the current path.”
So even though Europe would like to see a new president come in and change up some things, they want the current international relations to stay the same. Europe states that it was the ones who tried talking negotiations with Iran’s leaders and they did not work, so why would it be any different if the United States tried it.
Threats of sanctions have been to Iran and still, they don’t listen. So it seems like Europe is glad to have another person in the White House but they just don’t seem to agree with his stand on Iran.

Week 5 pt 1 by Ryan Hanson

As a follow up to the last blog about Biden and his comments about Israel having to deal with a nuclear Iran, I looked up another article that had another side of the story. Apparently to this article published in September apparently these comments were made three years ago. Biden and his press secretary have both denied these comments and they both say Biden supports Israel against Iran.
"This is a lie peddled by partisan opponents of Senators Obama and Biden and we will not tolerate anyone questioning Senator Biden's 35-year record of standing up for the security of Israel," Biden's press secretary, David Wade, said in a statement.”
This just goes to show how the media still has a huge influence on how the elections can go. Even though this comment was apparently said three year ago, the media still brought it back up to try and dampen the name of Obama.
The fact that the topics that was brought up was and issue with Iran made it all the more serious. Iran is going to be a serious threat in the future if they get their hands on nuclear material and they are a threat to Israel, one of Americas strongest allies in the Middle East.

Week 4, Item 2

Sarah Palin on Iran
By Jared Behrend

"Senator McCain has made a solemn commitment that I strongly endorse: Never again will we risk another Holocaust. And this is not a wish, a request, or a plea to Israel's enemies. This is a promise that the United States and Israel will honor, against any enemy who cares to test us. It is John McCain's promise and it is my promise."

This statement from a recent address by Governor Palin outlines her stance on Iran, and potentially sets up a hard-line approach to dealing with a state seeking nuclear weapons. Stating essentially that the U.S. will not allow a nuclear Iran to exist is along the same lines as the arguments used to coax the country into Iraq in 2003. If the UN does not support U.S.-led sanctions on Iran, and broad-based economic sanctions are not organized, will a McCain-Palin administration use military force in order to asssert its "promise" to Israel? In this same speech, Palin discribes the state of women's rights in Iran, clearly an attempt to exploit emotions from western peoples and further establish an "Us vs. Them" dichotomy, extending the assumed intentions of U.S. sanctions and halting of nuclear development to cultural differences and assumed superiority. Is this the sort of conflict we need to be heavily involved in with two other wars to fight?

The full text of the speech is available at:
http://www.nysun.com/opinion/palin-on-ahmadinejad-he-must-be-stopped/86311/