As of late, vice Presidential nominee Joe Biden has made some interesting statements in the media. He is Obama’s running mate and everyone would think that he would mostly agree with what Obama has to say. But recently he made a comment about Obama’s problems he will face if he wins the election, and he also commented on the Iran and Israel issue.
Apparently Biden was quoted saying “Israel would have to ‘reconcile’ itself with a nuclear Iran” That got huge attention in the media and of course a spokesman for Biden denied that he ever said that. Someone in the Israeli foreign ministry said that wouldn’t sound like a comment Biden would make, so I thought that was a very controversial incident.
On top of all of that Biden also mentioned that Obama could have some tough times right away if he gets into office. The news of this first broke on ABC about a week or two ago. Biden was quoted saying “Barack Obama will be tested by a major international crisis in the first potential six months of his presidency.” That fueled McCain’s argument and he asked if America should elect someone that invites testing from other countries. Could it be Iran that does that testing? Biden seems to be saying things he might end up regretting in the future.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Obama week 4 pt 1 by Ryan Hanson
The country of Israel is a very touchy subject because it relates to Iran. Israel obviously has their own issues going on with the Palestinians but if Iran ends up building nuclear devices it becomes a threat to Israel, which is one of the United States only allies in the Middle East. So with Iran as a possible threat to ‘blow Israel off the face of the earth,’ that eventually means the U.S. will have to step in at some point, but how will we intervene?
Senator Obama agrees that Israel is one of our strongest allies and we shouldn’t let anybody jeopardize their safety. He mentioned that President Ahmadinejad wanted to try to have another holocaust. Israel is a fellow democracy and we have learned in class the usually democracies do not fight with each other so it is important to have an ally in that part of the world.
Obama said “President Ahmadinejad has denied the Holocaust. He held a conference in his country, claiming it was a myth.” Having a president that even mentions the word holocaust is never a good thing. Obama’s plan is to obviously sanction Iran, but also to try and talk with them, maybe settle this in a peaceful way so no innocent people have to die. Whomever wins the election will have to realize that Iran is possible threat and this situation will be a hot topic in the administration.
Senator Obama agrees that Israel is one of our strongest allies and we shouldn’t let anybody jeopardize their safety. He mentioned that President Ahmadinejad wanted to try to have another holocaust. Israel is a fellow democracy and we have learned in class the usually democracies do not fight with each other so it is important to have an ally in that part of the world.
Obama said “President Ahmadinejad has denied the Holocaust. He held a conference in his country, claiming it was a myth.” Having a president that even mentions the word holocaust is never a good thing. Obama’s plan is to obviously sanction Iran, but also to try and talk with them, maybe settle this in a peaceful way so no innocent people have to die. Whomever wins the election will have to realize that Iran is possible threat and this situation will be a hot topic in the administration.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Week 3 pt 2 by Ryan Hanson
Unlike Obama’s running mate, he has kept the option on the table to meet with Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. This blog is going to be about how the two candidates feel about this man. Everyone knows that McCain doesn’t even want to talk to the president because he thinks that anyone he threatens to blow Israel off the map shouldn’t be tolerated with. In my opinion I don’t think that is the right thing to do because it could make the hatred between these two countries even worse and therefore make the tension increase.
Obama on the other hand has kept the option on the table to meet with him. Obama says that Iran has been acting irresponsible by supporting militant groups in Iraq.
“"We are willing to talk about certain assurances in the context of them showing some good faith," he said."I think it is important for us to send a signal that we are not hell bent on regime change, just for the sake of regime change, but expect changes in behavior.” Obviously he still thinks their needs to at least be a change in attitude there, but he isn’t going to go all ‘Bush’ on Iran and force a regime change. In my opinion I think that’s the right idea and talking never hurt anyone, plus it make our allies look at us in a different, more respectful view.
Obama on the other hand has kept the option on the table to meet with him. Obama says that Iran has been acting irresponsible by supporting militant groups in Iraq.
“"We are willing to talk about certain assurances in the context of them showing some good faith," he said."I think it is important for us to send a signal that we are not hell bent on regime change, just for the sake of regime change, but expect changes in behavior.” Obviously he still thinks their needs to at least be a change in attitude there, but he isn’t going to go all ‘Bush’ on Iran and force a regime change. In my opinion I think that’s the right idea and talking never hurt anyone, plus it make our allies look at us in a different, more respectful view.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Week 4, Item 1
by Jared Behrend
Sarah Palin and the Media
Sarah Palin has routinely made it a habit to claim the biased "filter" which the media represents. In a recent campaign speech she spoke of her desire to explain herself "without the filter of the media." Palin's repeated claims of the "unfairness" of the media, and its supposed bias hearkens back to President Bush's statements that the history will regard this period of time as successful, no matter what the current approval ratings and general state of dissaray show. If Palin is to become Vice President and have the possibility of being President with an aging McCain, do we as a country want another prominent politician that sees others, including well-educated members of the media, as merely biased, crass, misinformed, unfaithful traitors. Imagine a scenario with Iran that involves scores of members of the media reporting national as well as international thoughts on how best to handle a country like Iran and their nuclear proliferation, and Gov. Palin shunning those thoughts for her own inner circle of ideologues. This is dangerous, and Iran is in a delicate situation right now that requires diplomacy and exploration of many avenues, as is the case with many aspects of national and foreign policy. For Palin to turn her back on the media now reveals a fear of those who present a differing view of what is best for country and each citizen, and it is the necessity of these different views which keeps a democracy running.
here is a video of her recent reaction to the media's "outing" of her wardrobe costs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xoKfee4MpQ
Sarah Palin and the Media
Sarah Palin has routinely made it a habit to claim the biased "filter" which the media represents. In a recent campaign speech she spoke of her desire to explain herself "without the filter of the media." Palin's repeated claims of the "unfairness" of the media, and its supposed bias hearkens back to President Bush's statements that the history will regard this period of time as successful, no matter what the current approval ratings and general state of dissaray show. If Palin is to become Vice President and have the possibility of being President with an aging McCain, do we as a country want another prominent politician that sees others, including well-educated members of the media, as merely biased, crass, misinformed, unfaithful traitors. Imagine a scenario with Iran that involves scores of members of the media reporting national as well as international thoughts on how best to handle a country like Iran and their nuclear proliferation, and Gov. Palin shunning those thoughts for her own inner circle of ideologues. This is dangerous, and Iran is in a delicate situation right now that requires diplomacy and exploration of many avenues, as is the case with many aspects of national and foreign policy. For Palin to turn her back on the media now reveals a fear of those who present a differing view of what is best for country and each citizen, and it is the necessity of these different views which keeps a democracy running.
here is a video of her recent reaction to the media's "outing" of her wardrobe costs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xoKfee4MpQ
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Week 3, Item 3
By Jared Behrend
An article in today's New York Times, titled "Rivals Split on U.S. Power, but Ideas Defy Labels," McCain's and Obama's views on Iran's attempts at enriching uranium are outlined. John McCain's position is bolstered by his experience with war, his interest in war, and certain jokes he has made about war, "bomb bomb bomb Iran," as the article reports. The preponderance toward war, as well as McCain's support of Bush's Iraq War and the statements that the war "was easy" and that we were "greeted as liberators" show a mistaken idea of what war is and when the U.S. should become involved in it. In the case of Iran, a conflict over nuclear proliferation could ultimately lead to military action in a McCain led government it appears. This is not the right direction for our country.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/us/politics/23policy.html?hp
An article in today's New York Times, titled "Rivals Split on U.S. Power, but Ideas Defy Labels," McCain's and Obama's views on Iran's attempts at enriching uranium are outlined. John McCain's position is bolstered by his experience with war, his interest in war, and certain jokes he has made about war, "bomb bomb bomb Iran," as the article reports. The preponderance toward war, as well as McCain's support of Bush's Iraq War and the statements that the war "was easy" and that we were "greeted as liberators" show a mistaken idea of what war is and when the U.S. should become involved in it. In the case of Iran, a conflict over nuclear proliferation could ultimately lead to military action in a McCain led government it appears. This is not the right direction for our country.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/us/politics/23policy.html?hp
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Week 3, Post 1 by Ryan Hanson
A big decision topic dealing with Iran is if, or when we should sanction them. McCain is hard pressed to sanction Iran and basically cut them off from dealing with our country and other U.N. countries. Obama on the other hand, seems to have a different out look on the sanctioning process.
He agrees with wanting to sanction Iran but he seems to be looking at it in a bigger picture. What McCain fails to realize is that if we cut Iran off they will probably just end up looking to deal with other countries, countries that may not be the best of allies with the United States. For example, countries like China and Russia may be prime options for Iran to deal with. The huge fact in this is that Russia as a lot of nuclear material that Iran could get their hands on.
Obama wants to make sure the ties between the U.S. and these two countries are strong and reliable. Russia is a huge country and could be a power threat, and China’s economy is growing rapidly. These are concerns to the United States and I think that Obama will try to make a connection with them.
Although Obama and McCain seem to have the right idea on what to do with Iran, they still seem to have different outlooks and Obama seems to be looking at the situation in a more reasonable way than McCain.
He agrees with wanting to sanction Iran but he seems to be looking at it in a bigger picture. What McCain fails to realize is that if we cut Iran off they will probably just end up looking to deal with other countries, countries that may not be the best of allies with the United States. For example, countries like China and Russia may be prime options for Iran to deal with. The huge fact in this is that Russia as a lot of nuclear material that Iran could get their hands on.
Obama wants to make sure the ties between the U.S. and these two countries are strong and reliable. Russia is a huge country and could be a power threat, and China’s economy is growing rapidly. These are concerns to the United States and I think that Obama will try to make a connection with them.
Although Obama and McCain seem to have the right idea on what to do with Iran, they still seem to have different outlooks and Obama seems to be looking at the situation in a more reasonable way than McCain.
Week 2 Post 2 by Ryan Hanson
On October 7th the second presidential debate took place. The questions were asked by audience members and although it seemed like the questions were geared more towards issues in our own country, until there was a question about protecting Israel. That then opened up the option of talking about Iran.
McCain answered his “his friend’s” question by being very stern on how they should go about protecting Israel. Mentioning that he wouldn’t wait for the U.N. to help, he thinks that China and Russia will be a problem. He was basically looking at it in a realist’s perspective.
Obama on the other hand seemed to look at it in a more liberal way. “We cannot allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. It would be a game-changer in the region. Not only would it threaten Israel, our strongest ally in the region and one of our strongest allies in the world, but it would also create a possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. When President Bush decided we’re not going to talk to Iran, we’re not going to talk to North Korea, you know what happened? Iran went from zero centrifuges to develop nuclear weapons to 4,000.”
He points out that the republicans way of dealing with this international issue hasn’t seemed to be working so far, so how would McCain’s point of view be any different. Obviously we need to take a different direction on this topic and it seems like Obama is the man for that job. He is open for talking with other countries, and maybe that will make other countries look at the United States in a different, yet better way.
McCain answered his “his friend’s” question by being very stern on how they should go about protecting Israel. Mentioning that he wouldn’t wait for the U.N. to help, he thinks that China and Russia will be a problem. He was basically looking at it in a realist’s perspective.
Obama on the other hand seemed to look at it in a more liberal way. “We cannot allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. It would be a game-changer in the region. Not only would it threaten Israel, our strongest ally in the region and one of our strongest allies in the world, but it would also create a possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. When President Bush decided we’re not going to talk to Iran, we’re not going to talk to North Korea, you know what happened? Iran went from zero centrifuges to develop nuclear weapons to 4,000.”
He points out that the republicans way of dealing with this international issue hasn’t seemed to be working so far, so how would McCain’s point of view be any different. Obviously we need to take a different direction on this topic and it seems like Obama is the man for that job. He is open for talking with other countries, and maybe that will make other countries look at the United States in a different, yet better way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
