Obama Lines Up Behind Neo-Conservative Campaign Against Iran

[leftchick]

well this went right under my radar.....


http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/?p=20

Neo-conservatives, some of whom have claimed to see hopeful glimmers in Sen. Barack Obama’s foreign-policy positions of the kind of interventionism that gets them excited , should be further heartened by the presidential hopeful’s sponsorship of a new bill that, if passed, is certain to increase tensions not only with Iran, but with Washington’s European allies as well.

The bill, the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act of 2007, would require the federal government to publish a list of U.S. overseas subsidiaries and foreign companies that have invested more than $20 million dollars in Iran’s energy sector. It would also authorize state and local governments to divest the assets of their pension and other funds from any company on that list and protect fund managers who divest from listed companies from lawsuits by investors unhappy with the results.

<snip>

The bill, which was also introduced in the House of Representatives by Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Tom Lantos and Financial Services chairman Barney Frank, is part of a much broader national divestment campaign spearheaded by some of the most hawkish neo-conservative groups, notably Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy (CSP); the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), and the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, as well as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). I wrote about the neo-con role in driving the divestment campaign last week.

<snip>

Of course, in the context of domestic politics, Democratic presidential hopefuls like Obama are eager to show that, even as they join the growing clamor for an early withdrawal from Iraq and oppose war against Iran (while insisting, along with the administration, that all options should remain on the table), they remain “tough on Iran” – even if that could well make war before the end of Bush’s term more likely, rather than less.

<snip>

While all of these moves may serve, as many Democrats claim, to strengthen “moderates” in the Iranian regime and make it more inclined to meet U.S. and western demands to freeze its uranium enrichment program, they may just as well have the contrary result.

[wakeme2008]

1. Run Gore Run

All we have are DLCers running now.

[William769]

3. Is Obama part of the DLC?

ON EDIT: I am not being a smart ass, I really don't know.

[BeyondGeography]

7. The answer is "no."

[William769]

10. Thank you.

[wakeme2008]

11. Probably yes... Walks like a Duck....

[Hardrada]

4. Edwards too?

O but not KUCINICH!

[leftchick]

24. except Kucinich and Gravel

and that is why they get no money or airtime.

[Virginia Dare]

33. Since when did Gore join the anti-establishment?

I really did miss that....:shrug:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. If they want peace, nations should avoid the pin-pricks that precede cannon shots." Napoleon

"Do you know what astonished me most in the world? The inability of force to create anything. In the long run the sword is always beaten by the spirit. Soldiers usually win battles and generals get the credit for them. You must not fight too often with one enemy, or you will teach him all your art of war. If they want peace, nations should avoid the pin-pricks that precede cannon shots." Napoleon Bonaparte

[leftchick]

6. well that certainly applies

thank you for the quote. :)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. You're welcome, leftchick, I always watch for your posts and appreciate them.

[andykef]

5. OBAMA WHO?

Obama is going nowhere. This guy will not be the nominee in 2008. And on his performance so far I would be surprised if he gets the nod as VP. He is over.
I want to see GORE as the top of the ticket. GORE/ ? that is the question.

[Colobo]

9. Gore is not even running, sorry.

Obama is the man, like it or not.

[andykef]

12. Obama, lol

Don't make me laugh!!!!
If Gore does not run it is Clinton to be the nominee.
Obama is terrible. He is not electable in the the present climate.
He cannot win swing states and his performance has been dire.
Obama is not even going to get to Dean's 04 standoing he is over, sorry

[PVnRT]

16. Gosh, Mr. Psychic, maybe you could try backing up all that nonsense?

n/t

[BeyondGeography]

29. It might help if you support your theories with some facts

Here's a link that debunks your "not electable in the current climate" nonsense:

http://www.lifenews.com/nat3155.html

[xultar]

13. Don't forget your buddy Feingold said all options were on the table with Iran.

Make sure you hate him too.

[William769]

14. Where have you been?

Or have I just been missing your posts? anyways :hi:.

[leftchick]

15. Did I say I hated anyone?

touchy aren't you? And if you actually read the link Mr. Lobe says many Democrats are falling in line with this idiocy. Obama happens to be leading the way with legislation.

[donkeyotay]

19. It's the neo-improved, everything's changed idiocy

Just yell and shove. Demand obedience. Never admit that the other side has a point, never give them respect, never search for common ground. We're even doing it to China. (oh hell, we're even doing it on DU) It's worked so well in the ME. Expect results soon. Or as posted above, just keep up the pinpricks. Keep exercising our military until all its weaknesses are revealed. Oh, and send more money. Definitely more money. Not to worry! We'll turn the corner soon!

:hi:

[leftchick]

22. lol!

well said.

:)

[SPKrazy]

36. Geez Louise!

Let's get all up in arms here.

:D

[Connie_Corleone]

17. Obama, Edwards, Clinton say the same things about Iran.

That doesn't mean that they're going to act like The Chimp and invade or bomb Iran into oblivion.

[andykef]

18. Edwards and Obama, why worry?

Dont' worry about what Obama or Edwards sat, these guys are dead in the water.
Neither will be on the ticket.
Obama is a lightweight who has blown it in debates.
Edwards is a fraud and should not even be running, he should be home looking out for his wife.
I tell you if the Democrats go to the country with Edwards, they will lose big time, he is a joke!

[William769]

21. Welcome to DU andykef

Just a little friendly advice, please tone it down a little. People are more apt to listen.

[MadBadger]

23. How many ways to point out the idiocy in your post.

I'll just point out one thing and let the others attack you even harder.

Obama couldnt have blown it in debates because there has only been one for which he did a fair job. So if you would like to judge somebody because of one debate, well then you have some irrationally high standards for voting for president.

[andykef]

27. Debates don't matter, sorry I forgot!!!

You are out of luck! The Debates are the thing that the public watch.
Bush won the 04 election on one line which exposed Kerry, remember
"You might not agree with me but at least you know where I stand"
Kerry's position on Iraq and the $84m was exposed, he was toast.
Ford lost in 1976, Carter in 1980, Mondale in 1984, Dukakis in 1988, Bush in 1992, Gore in 2000.
WHY, WHERE???
Because the public judged them on one debate. OBAMA did not do well in the first debate he is all over the shop in terms of policy. He cannot and will not win in 2008. Deal with it.
By the way wish Feingold had actually run as he would have brought something to this but he did not.
GORE '08

[MadBadger]

28. I believe there will be 15 debates or so

You are talking the actual election and not the primary where I believe there are only three and in front of a much greater audience. Obama said absolutely nothing that would hurt him so greatly or really help him for that matter.

[Virginia Dare]

34. So why do you want Gore to run?

you say he lost to Bush based on one debate, why give him another shot? Obama hasn't even debated a Repuke yet.

[in_cog_ni_to]

25. Edwards is a fraud who should be home looking after his wife?? and Obama is a lightweight

who blew it in the debates??:rofl::rofl:: WOW!!!! trashed TWO candidates in ONE post!!:rofl::rofl:

:eyes:

[Connie_Corleone]

26. First of all, there has only been one debate.

Obama didn't blow it in that debate. Yeah, he could've done better, but he didn't hurt himself.

Second, I'm no Edwards' fan, but it's none of your business what he's doing when it comes to his wife's health.

You got something other than attacks to say?

PUT UP OR SHUT UP!

[andykef]

31. OK

OK the reality is that there are only a few candidates that can be elected in 2008 on both sides.
The media will destroy a number of Democrats if it gets the chance.
Personally I think that Clinton is the strongest in the field. Edwards and Obama are not.
Gore in my opinion would be the best candidate.
But remember whoever the Democrats nominate they have to not only beat the GOP but the corporate media.
If the candidate is questionable in any way this will be exposed by the biggest political attack machine in history the GOP and their media buddies.
You can attack my as much as you like but in just over a year we will have a candidate.
They better be fire proof or they are going down.

[Connie_Corleone]

32. Every Dem candidate will be targets of the GOP attack machine.

No one is fire proof, not even Gore.

Every candidate will be exposed. Every candidate will be "questionable" in some way.

Whoever is the Democratic nominee will have to fight back.

It's called politics.

[jillan]

20. We need someone that knows what they are doing to win in '08

I really like Obama, but when it comes to all of the problems in the world right now, I don't think he is the right man for the job.
Same with Edwards.

I want experience.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

30. Unfortunately, Vladimir Putin and Hu Jintao are barred from running.

Both of whom have plenty of experience and seem to be using their experience to their country's advantage..unlike some, one in particular, I could mention.

[TwilightGardener]

35. It's a good plan. We need to take a firm stand with them. Good on Obama.

[Lasher]

37. Oh look, Obama's declared open season on his own foot.

Obamacare this morning and now what's this? Let's all get behind Lord Vader's next phase of world conquest?

Do any of these candidates realize they can't get any Republican votes unless they first make it through the Democratic primary?

[NCarolinawoman]

38. I support Wes Clark, who is the only one who calls out AIPAC for what they are,

and gets a lot of grief in the process. He also goes after the Military Industrial Complex.

Of course, he hasn't said he will run, but he hasn't said he won't.

I really like Al Gore, but I will need to do more research on his stance. We need both of these fearless truth-tellers in the debate.

[mdmc]

39. kick

cause I can