Comments on: Iran: Sarko or Obama – who’s the reactionary?

By: Marc Fauconnier

Marc Fauconnier — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 21:23:15 +0000

I’m french and very proud of my president. I am afraid your Obama knows very well what he is doing. Sometimes, it looks like a sleeper agent infiltrated by hostile foreign power.
You should investigate

PS I’m serious

By: RayJ

RayJ — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 04:43:03 +0000

Europeans need to watch what they wish for.
Franky, I’m done with them and will do nothing if The One decides withdraw militarily.

By: Hans Moleman

Hans Moleman — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:54:36 +0000

A month ago, Sarkozy gave Obama a direct public rebuke.

Sarkozy: “We live in the real world, not the virtual world. And the real world expects us to take decisions.”

“President Obama dreams of a world without weapons … but right in front of us two countries are doing the exact opposite…

“Iran since 2005 has flouted five security council resolutions. North Korea has been defying council resolutions since 1993…

“I support the extended hand of the Americans, but what good has proposals for dialogue brought the international community? More uranium enrichment and declarations by the leaders of Iran to wipe a UN member state off the map,” he continued, referring to Israel. The sharp-tongued French leader even implied that Mr Obama’s resolution 1887 had used up valuable diplomatic energy. “If we have courage to impose sanctions together it will lend viability to our commitment to reduce our own weapons and to making a world without nuke weapons,” he said. Mr Sarkozy has previously called the US president’s disarmament crusade “naive.”

Think about that as our president mulls over whether to commit to the Afghan War. “…the real world expects us to take decisions.” “

By: southernsue

southernsue — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:58:46 +0000

ditto #12.paul

By: Gary Rosen

Gary Rosen — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 09:47:25 +0000

Michael Smith – your link is very reassuring and gives me renewed faith in President Obama’s ability to reach out to the Iranians.

By: Gringo

Gringo — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 04:56:02 +0000

Obama is more willing to talk to the Mullahs than he is to Fox.

By: Paul

Paul — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 13:32:23 +0000

France. More hawkish and reality-based than the US.

The sad fact is: I am not surprised. There are really only two possible causes of this. Either Obama knows exactly what he’s doing or he has no idea what he’s doing.

Which is more frightening?

By: Terrye

Terrye — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 11:13:44 +0000

Obama honestly seems to think he can talk these people into behaving. As if they had any desire to behave.

By: Delia

Delia — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:19:59 +0000

4. Rich:

“Does anyone really believe that the mullahs will be kept bomb-free without the use of force by the good guys?”

I sure as frick don’t. These are the type of scum that will send a child or a woman to ‘ALLAH’ via self-explosions.

We have to face that we are up against a mindset that is viral and indoctrinated by evil and the only way we can ameliorate this sitch is to either educate the insane ones [impossible] or nuke the nukes [plausible but somebody gets hurt in the interim via collateral damage].

I pray that war does not need to happen. I pray for my enemies to be enlightened to the word of God, I hope for sanity to take over INsanity.

I’m scared.

By: Roger L Simon

Roger L Simon — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 21:00:06 +0000

BH, that was COMPLETE MISREADING of what I just wrote. Go back and reread. I had no intention of deriding the US in this. Moreover, if you had read my book Blacklisting Myself, you would know that my father was peripherally part of the Manhattan Project. I completely support the Manhattan Project. I am merely stating the obvious – governments (good and bad) hide what they do over nuclear weapons. They have to. End of story.