Obama to GOP rivals: War in Iran "not a game"

AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

Updated 4:58 p.m. Eastern Time

(CBS News) At a news conference at the White House on Tuesday, President Obama lashed out at Mitt Romney and the other GOP presidential candidates for "the casualness with which some of these folks talk about war," saying their rhetoric on Iran reflects the fact that they "don't have a lot of responsibilities."

The president was asked about Romney's claim that "If Barack Obama gets re-elected, Iran will have a nuclear weapon." He responded first by pointing to his record, saying his administration has imposed "crippling sanctions" against Iran that have isolated the nation in an "unprecedented" way and significantly damaged its government economically.

He went on to say that while "we will not countenance Iran getting a nuclear weapon," he believes that "we have a window of opportunity where this can still be resolved diplomatically." He later said he does not believe that a decision by Israel on whether to attack must be made in the next two months, saying increasingly tough sanctions should have more time to work.

"Because sanctions are starting to have significant effect inside of Iran -- and that's not just my assessment, that's, I think, a uniform assessment -- because the sanctions are going to be even tougher in the coming months, because they're now starting to affect their oil industry, their central bank, and because we're now seeing noises about them returning to the negotiating table, that it is deeply in everybody's interests, the United States, Israel and the world's, to see if this can be resolved in a peaceful fashion," he said.

Iran: U.N. can visit secret military complex
Isreal impatient, but still mulling Iran strike
Bombs won't stop Iran getting nukes
Video: Obama, Netanyahu talk possible war with Iran

The president also criticized the rhetoric coming from the GOP presidential candidates.

"Now, what's said on the campaign trail -- you know, those folks don't have a lot of responsibilities. They're not commander in chief," he said. "And when I see the casualness with which some of these folks talk about war, I'm reminded of the costs involved in war; I'm reminded of the decision that I have to make, in terms of sending our young men and women into battle, and the impacts that has on their lives, the impact it has on our national security, the impact it has on our economy."

"This is not a game," he said. "And there's nothing casual about it."

In a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) Tuesday, Romney attacked Mr. Obama's approach to the Middle East, saying "hope is not a foreign policy." In an op-ed Monday, Romney laid out how he would deal with Iran and criticized Mr. Obama's policies and tone - despite the fact that his approach is essentially identical to that of the president. 

That's something Mr. Obama seized on during his news conference Tuesday.

"And, you know, when I see some of these folks who have a lot of bluster and a lot of big talk but when you actually ask them specifically what they would do, it turns out they repeat the things that we've been doing over the last three years, it indicates to me that that's more about politics than actually trying to solve a difficult problem," he said.

The president also said that "If some of these folks think that it's time to launch a war, they should say so."

"And they should explain to the American people exactly why they would do that and what the consequences would be," he said. "Everything else is just talk."

Romney is just one of the GOP presidential candidates who have criticized Mr. Obama over his policy on Iran -- and, by extension, Israel. Newt Gingrich has said that America is "being played for fools"; Rick Santorum told AIPAC that "If Iran doesn't get rid of nuclear facilities, we will tear down them ourselves." Ron Paul has broken with his GOP colleagues on the issue, telling CNN Tuesday that "what the other Republicans are saying is very reckless" and reminds him of the run-up to the Iraq war.

Mr. Obama said Tuesday that "those who are suggesting or proposing or beating the drums of war should explain clearly to the American people what the costs and benefits should be," adding, "I'm not one of those people."

"Because what I've said is, is that we have a window through which we can resolve this issue peacefully," said Mr. Obama. "We have put forward an international framework that is applying unprecedented pressure. The Iranians just stated that they are willing to return to the negotiating table. And we've got the opportunity, even as we maintain that pressure, to see how it plays out."

He added that "this notion that somehow we have a choice to make in the next week or two weeks or month or two months is not borne out by the facts."

Mr. Obama's comments echo Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry's criticism of Romney's claim that Iran will get a nuclear weapon if the president is reelected. Kerry told the New York Times that "to be making a blanket statement that if he's president they'll have one, and if Romney's president they won't have one, is the most craven political thing to say." He added: "To make up differences is to play in Iranian hands."

At the news conference, Mr. Obama was also asked about his earlier comment that America will "always have Israel's back."

"It was not a military doctrine that we were laying out for any particular military action," he responded.

The president said that the comment, taken by many as a sign that the United States could support an Israeli military strike on Iran, was "a restatement of our consistent position that the security of Israel is something I deeply care about." He added that "Israel is a sovereign nation that has to make its own decisions about how best to preserve its security."

Obama says he wants lower gas prices
Obama won't judge "sincerity" of Limbaugh apology
Obama's Super Tuesday message to Romney: "Good luck tonight"
Obama details mortgage relief plans

Below, CBS News chief White House correspondent Norah O'Donnell discusses the key moments from Obama's press conference.

[Conservalibmiddle]

I used to think Mormons were good people. As I do more research I question my wisdom. It looks like religion as a business like Scientology.

[Conservalibmiddle]

This is cool. If you are a Jew who died in the holocaust the Mormons will convert you posthumously. How nice of them. That will help the dead citizens of Israel after the Iran war so much.

[Conservalibmiddle]

As I do more research the only Mormon fighters I find are all polygamists. Some of them pedophiles. Ohh this is gross I will not explore any farther.

[Conservalibmiddle]

Can anyone find a Mormon who died in the service of America? I see Catholics, Jews, Native Americans, Hispanics, Asians, and pretty much everyone. Where are the Mormons?

[Conservalibmiddle]

There are more Wiccans on the battlefield than Mormons. Might even be more Rastafarians.

[lg144]

The republican party is full of chicken hawks who never miss an opportunity to beat their chest and drums for war. They won't go fight but they are only to happy to send your loved ones into war. Someone reporter should ask Romney if any of his five sons is willing to go fight a war that Romney supports?

[Conservalibmiddle]

Do Mormons join the military? I do not intend to insinuate anything. I actually do not know. I see a lot of the at prime military age recruiting.

[RobAla]

I find it interesting that on most of these posts, that supporters of President Obama fail to list reasons regarding WHY they support him; they fail to list his accomplishments over the past 3 years.

Most of the liberals supporting President Obama say that they support him because he is not President Bush. This is 2012 - not 2008 - President Bush is not running. Supporters of President Obama make smirk comments about Republicans, but they don't list the facts concerning President Obama. Anyone can make goofy comments - and free speech allows it. Supporters of President Obama can only really add credibility to their support by listing the accomplishments of President Obama over the past three years.

The problem with supporting President Obama is that his failures and horrible policies put in place far outweigh any accomplishment.

[Conservalibmiddle]

President Obama has.
1 Prevented a second Great Depression by stopping the economic crash of 2008-2009.
2 Passed a watered down to bow to business and conservatives health care reform.
3 Found and eliminated Osama bin Laden
4 Eliminated most of the upper echelon of Al Qadea
5 Not had to console American citizens after a terror attack on our soil
6 Consistently improved the economy
7 Saved over a million good jobs in Detroit
8 Ended the very ill advised war in Iraq
9 Not passed any anti second amendment legislation
10 Not raised taxes
11 Not started any wars of choice
12 Not been a communist, socialist, fascist, atheist, Muslim
13 Not cheated on his wife
14 Exhibited a positive opinion of Americans
15 Almost stood up to plutocrats
16 Almost stood up to theocrats
17 Reconciled with an unreasonable Congress to pay America's bills.
18 Fought with an economy that causes a rise in oil speculation every time it improves and keeping a positive balance

Need more?

[RobAla]

I doubt very seriously whether there are Republicans who consider a nuclear armed Iran a "game". At least President Obama is finally talking about an issue that matters, rather than the fabricated issue of any need for "free" contraceptives and nonsense like that. However, it seems that President Obama wants to make a political issue out of it - rather than speak of it in a Presidential manner. This is not a serious President.

This is a serious problem for all Americans. Iran arms terrorists all over the world. A nuclear device slipped into the US is a threat to Republicans, Democrats, liberals, and conservatives. This is not a political issue, and President Obama should not attempt to make it one.

[Conservalibmiddle]

You do realize that war with Iran is being stated as an inevitable option by people who lack the itel that the President has? I supported Pres. Bush on Iraq because I knew he had more knowledge than I did. He was wrong. You can not use his example to second guess the most informed individual in America on such a serious matter. I am one of many who is very happy our Commander in Chief is not a pawn of any foreign power. The Pope, Netanyahu, nor Ahmadinejad Have any business here.

[Conservalibmiddle]

How many successful terror attacks on American soil have there been on President Obama's watch? Maybe fewer than any President in the last 18 years.

[robert1129]

The report on Iran's state television quoted Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as praising a recent statement by the U.S. president saying he saw a "window of opportunity" to use diplomacy to resolve the nuclear dispute.Khamenei, who has final say on all state matters in Iran, told a group of clerics: "This expression is a good word. This is a wise remark indicating taking distance from illusion."
----------------------------

As this paragraph shows, Obama's approach potentially is working. Why put our guys in harm's way unless you have to. Except for Paul, all three candidates want to start another war. You think they would have some respect for the intelligence of the American public.

[Chant_USA]

more distraction from the left. for the record no gop'er believes the war is a game. we are scared for our life because we have a clueless commander in cheif. DO NOT BE DISTRACTED BY LIBERAL RHETORIC AND COVER UP!

[repubsplsevolve]

So, you know more than the Israeli President????

Israeli President Shimon Peres: 'Under President Obama We Have The Best Relationship On The Issue Of Security'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fT-B4Mn_hs4

[Conservalibmiddle]

Are you calling the Man who got Osama clueless? I foolishly assumed the Commander in Chief had knowledge I did not. Mr. Bush let me down. Mr. Obama on the other hand has used the advanced info at his disposal to make very bold and intelligent decisions.