April 26, 2015

When It Comes to Iran, Obama Is No Jimmy Carter

Mindy AlterRebel Blogger

The sorry spectacle of Barack Obama, so-called leader of the free world, bowing and scraping to Iran's megalomaniacal theocrats, can't help but bring to mind the sight of another leader in another era and his breathless announcement of "peace in our time." 

But, as Mark Steyn observed a couple of months ago, to conflate Barack Obama with Neville Chamberlain is a grievous insult--to the latter. After all, writes Steyn, Britain's then-Prime Minister…

…got the biggest issue of the day wrong. But no one ever doubted that he loved his country. That's why, after his eviction from Downing Street, Churchill kept him on in his ministry as Lord President of the Council, and indeed made Chamberlain part of the five-man war cabinet and had him chair it during his frequent absences. When he died of cancer in October 1940, Churchill wept over his coffin.

So please don't insult Neville Chamberlain by comparing him to Obama...

Point taken, Mr. Steyn. But how about comparing Obama to Jimmy Carter, another clueless, far-left Democratic president who had his innings with Iran? Well, it's true that during the crisis that saw the Shah, an American ally, deposed as the Ayatollah Khomeini and his Islamic "revolution" swept into power, the Carter administration did not exactly act in a strong or creditable manner.

In that sense at least, Carter and Obama are entirely in sync. However, when 49 Americans were taken hostage at the U.S. embassy in Tehran, Carter did grow a semblance of a backbone. He warned Iran's new leaders that there would be hell to pay if even one hostage was harmed.

The Iranians took heed of the warning, and, as recounted in the Canadian documentary Our Man in Tehran, began treating their captives much better as a result (even though they were not released until Ronald Reagan took office).

I wonder: would Barack Hussein Obama, who is determined to secure a deal with Iran even as the Ayatollah Khomeini's successor is screeching "Death to America" for the umpteenth time, have been able to muster the same sort of spinal fortitude? When you consider that Obama is willing to sign his "peace in our time" pact even though several Americans, including former American Marine Amir Hekmati, are being held captive in Iran, the answer to that is glaringly - and sickeningly - obvious.

That being so, it must be said: Please don't insult Jimmy Carter by comparing him to Obama.


JOIN TheRebel.media for more news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-04-29 16:18:52 -0400
The peanut farmer for all he wasn’t, got all 50? hostages out of Iran, after a failed rescue attempt. He arranged to give back most of the money seized by American, British and? banks and refused to lift the heavy sanctions he had on Iran, until they were set free and unharmed. Carter said he would attack if they were hurt. He managed to get all the arrangements made, ( get this), the nite before Reagan’s inauguration. The hostages were in the plane on the tarmac in Tehran but the Ayatollah wouldn’t let it take off until Jimmy was no longer Pres. The minute Reagon was signed in, the plane took off. The Ayatollah’s way of sticking it to Carter, wouldn’t let him claim the glory of it in his presidency. So what ever you want to say about Carter, he had more gonads than Obama dealing with Iran.
commented 2015-04-29 16:01:26 -0400
No, but I watched one with Barbara Walters,last night on you tube when I was looking for it. He seemed a bit cranky with her questions. Boy he sure was a complicated guy. Had a vision but couldn’t pull it off, was a bit flip flop and unsure. They called him the suitcase Shah because he always had his suitcase packed. When the people rose up against him,he wanted Carter to tell him what to do. He ended up telling his people he wouldn’t go against their wishes and gave it up to the Ayatollah. I think he appointed someone when he left but it didn’t stick. He died of cancer in Egypt. He tried to modernize his country, he made many mistakes, and his gains have been lost. In the 70’s some Iranians were dancing the Watusi in disco’s and on Egypt’s beaches, were donning bikinis. Anwar Sadat was another modernizer. Talk about backwards momentum.
commented 2015-04-28 17:31:19 -0400
Does anyone here remember Adrienne Clarkson interviewing the Shah of Iran?
commented 2015-04-28 12:28:03 -0400
I wonder how long it will take to set things straight again, or if any of it is even going to repairable?
commented 2015-04-27 23:27:19 -0400
Obama may very well be one of the worst Presidents in US history….but the bigger story may be how Democrats and most of the mainstream media continue to blindly follow and support both him and Hillary Clinton, in the face of widespread corruption and flaunting of the American Constitution during their reign of terror.
commented 2015-04-27 23:17:33 -0400
Hopefully you’re being sarcastic, Rick Hemmingson. Or are you another imbecile who just throws that word at anyone you disagree with?
commented 2015-04-27 18:49:08 -0400
One should keep in mind Obama’s past.
commented 2015-04-27 15:23:21 -0400
…but, but , Bo’s parents are happy.
Obama does not love America, period. How on earth is it possible that we are stuck with such a hateful and vindictive man for an American president. America had the wool pulled over its eyes when they voted that treasonous skunk in. “Hope and Change”, more like rope and change. He is not to be trusted. He wants America to go down. He’s looking for a seat in the new house of global power, the UN. He has only just begun.
commented 2015-04-27 14:33:29 -0400
Donald Allan – exactly. Obama is a co-conspirator with Iran’s goal of “Death to America”.
commented 2015-04-27 13:10:04 -0400
Obama’s dealings with Iran are not a negotiation. They are a “collaboration”.