I wrote a tweet yesterday
Obama is all ready to cut off the Iranians but does nothing about worse regimes including his own. He's a warmonger. Ahmadinejad is not.
One of my Facebook friends wrote:
My reply turned out to be something I decided to turn into a blog post:
I'm adamantly opposed to the death penalty and torture and have openly criticized the Iranian regime on both counts. Ahmadinejad is wrong to be in favor of the death penalty. Of course, I don't think he'd say he's in favor of torture. What's in his heart on that issue is something I'm not prepared to say. He isn't a warmonger though. I trust you take my point.
My point is one of comparison: Barack Obama versus Ahmadinejad.
Obama is still using "harsh" interrogation techniques that qualify as torture. He's certainly not calling for repealing the death penalty even though we know numerous innocent people have been executed and death row no doubt has inmates who would be vindicated via DNA, etc. Also, Obama has done next to nothing to roll back the police state of Bush-43.
He also tiptoes around the Zionists who have just openly stated that they will do whatever it takes to stop the Freedom Flotilla to Gaza, which means they'd be willing to sink the ships with all hands and passengers on board to drown them rather than let them deliver desperately needed humanitarian supplies.
Our President should be on board rather than hiding behind lies against Iran, concerning whom the Zionists have not shown one speck of evidence has a nuclear weapons program or intentions to create one.
I don't like Barack Obama for these and other reasons; yet, I certainly am open to and advocate his turning from his evil ways — Lord knows I require mercy and forgiveness too. He must repent of his evil though. We all must, and it's right.
Lastly and most importantly to my point is that Ahmadinejad is not bombing innocent people while Obama is.
My point is that Obama here is as the blacker pot calling the black kettle, blacker, when Obama has just been increasing the soot everywhere while mouthing platitudes as pablum for the naive and gullible masses.
So, I don't say that your point is irrelevant, far from it. Iran is still too harsh.
The CIA revving up ethnic and other strife in Iran to destabilize the country isn't helpful though. It drives the government there to harsher countermeasures when the US could use other approaches that would soothe the situation and soften the Mullahs' hearts, which is what's needed all the way around.
Let's not fall for the stupid Churchillian "appeasement" talk where it's not nearly applicable. The people of Iran had elected their leader who nationalized their oil industry and who was overthrown by the greedy Brits and Americans. Of course the Iranians are going to be wary. They also know who was supplying chemical weapons to Iraq and giving them targeting info to gas tens of thousands of Iranians when Iraq started the war in the first place.