Obama: Can't Let U.S. Be "Foil" For Tehran

In Exclusive Interview With Harry Smith, Answers Critics Who Say He's Being Too Soft On Regime

(CBS)  President Obama says the United States has to guard against allowing itself to be used as a scapegoat by the regime in Iran.

In an exclusive interview with Early Show co-anchor Harry Smith, Mr. Obama responded to critics claiming he hasn't spoken out forcefully enough in favor of those who've taken to the streets to protest the result of the recent presidential election in Iran.

"The last thing that I want to do," the president said, "is to have the United States be a foil for -- those forces inside Iran who would love nothing better than to make this an argument about the United States. That's what they do. That's what we've already seen. We shouldn't be playing into that. There should be no distractions from the fact that the -- Iranian people are seeking to -- let their voices be heard.

"Now, what we can do is bear witness and say -- to the world that the, you know, incredible demonstrations that we've seen is a testimony to -- I think what Dr. King called the -- the arc of the moral universe. It's long but it bends towards justice."

Mr. Obama also delivered a message to the regime in Tehran, noting to Smith that, "The world is watching. And how they approach and deal with people who are, through peaceful means, trying to -- be heard -- will I think -- send a pretty clear signal to the international community about -- about -- what -- Iran is and -- and is not.

" ... This is not an issue of the United States or the West versus Iran. This is an issue of the Iranian people. The fact that they are on the -- the streets under pretty severe duress -- at great risk to themselves -- is a sign that -- there's something -- in that society that wants to open up."

In the wide-ranging interview, the president had some tough talk for North Korea, sharp words for former Vice President Cheney, and defended giving the Fed new, broad powers to oversee the financial industry.

While expressing his hope that Pyongyang would decide to start on a path toward "rejoining the international community," Mr. Obama also warned that his administration won't "reward belligerence and provocation in the way that's been done in the past," and stressed that leading world powers, including China and Russia, are on board with the U.S.'s stand on North Korea.

Smith observed that, "North Koreans have basically said that their intention is to fire a missile toward -- Hawaii on or about the 4th of July. Secretary Gates has said there has been a military adjustment and to -- to watch out for something like that happening. But beyond the sanctions and beyond the isolation that has already been tried, what has to happen to get North Korea to at least act like they're part of the community of nations?

"First of all," Mr. Obama replied, 'let's be clear. This administration -- and our military is fully prepared for any contingencies. And -- and --

"Is that a warning of a military response?" Smith quickly asked.

"No," the president responded. "It's just we are prepared for any contingencies. I don't wanna speculate on hypotheticals. But I want -- I do wanna give assurances to the American people that -- the t's are crossed and the i's are dotted in terms of -- what might happen. More broadly, I think the international community has spoken.

"When you've got Russia and China as well as South Korea and Japan, the United States, the entire Security Council -- saying unequivocally that North Korea has violated international law, that -- and -- and is willing to impose tougher sanctions --

"They're still defiant, though," Smith interjected.

"Well, the -- well, well what that sends a signal, though, is of a unity in the international community that we haven't seen in quite some time," Mr. Obama said. "And one of the things that we have been very clear about is that North Korea has a path towards rejoining the international community. And we hope they take that path. What we're not gonna do is to reward belligerence and provocation in the way that's been done in the past."

Turning to former President Bush and Dick Cheney, Smith said, "(CIA director) Leon Panetta ... intimated that the former Vice-president was playing politics with national security issues. The former President has intoned his own displeasure with some of your policy changes. I think they feel like some of the things that you've done, in fact, are treacherous."

Laughing, the president remarked, "Well, you know what? Be -- before you go there, I think if you read President Bush's -- remarks -- I think that that is -- that's not a fair characterization of what President Bush said.

"Well, I think -- I think when it comes to -- Vice-president Cheney, he and I have a deep disagreement about what's required to keep the American people safe. And I think that disagreement -- has been -- amply aired. And -- and certainly he has a right to -- to voice his opinions. I would argue that -- our policies are making the American people safer -- and that -- some of the policies that he's promoted in the past have not."

And when asked about concerns voiced by Senate Baking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd that administration proposals would give the Federal Reserve Board too much power as a watchdog of financial firms, Mr. Obama said, "It wasn't the Fed -- where the -- the (financial) regulations broke down here. And part of what we wanna do is to have somebody who's accountable and clear when it comes to these large systemic firms that could potentially bring down the entire financial system.

"The Fed has the expertise and the credibility I think to do it. // we don't want a situation where taxpayers have to come in and bail out firms because if those firms go under, the whole system collapses. And unfortunately, that's been the situation -- up until now, that's what we intend to get fixed. We wanna make sure that this kind of crisis doesn't happen again."

---

Part One of the interview was aired on the CBS News broadcast Sunday Morning on June 21. To read the transcript, click here.

[CLoverNYC1]

"President Obama says the United States has to guard against allowing itself to be used as a scapegoat by the regime in Iran."
----------------------------

We should be concerned about our 'image' in Iran because, *Beaver in Leave it to Beaver voice* the Iranians might get mad at us Wally!"

[gennx30-2009]

My Gawd how easily you people are suckered

You fell for "Iraq has WMD'!" hook line and sinker-3 years later we find it was ALL BULLSH*T
Now its "IRAN stole the election!" -the very same thing-BULLSH*T or -"OMG! They have WMDs!" v.2; if you will

And in 2-3 years it will gradually leak out that the MOSSAD engineered this whole "opposition" Party
Israel begged and pleaded and threatened to hold their breath until they turned blue, if we didnt go over and turn THAT country to rubble; We declined; This thing seems far too orchestrated and planned- 2 weeks ago the media never even heard of or mentioned M-------- and his 'opposition' party. I keep up with all the news sources-all this is new to me

So it was up to Israel to launch 'plan B'- destablize the county,then draw in the shiites sunnis and Al Queda as Israel stands up dusts off their hands, smiles- and looks at the US and says-"Well, whuddya waitin' for? Dont stand there looking like a fool-get on with it!" And suddenly we are in a third war in the Middle East. Whos gonna pay for it? Where will the money come from?



"____________ has a.election fraud b. a brutal leader c. WMDs"; (fill in ONE country per blank attempts to add more than one country will be disqualified)

(put an 'x' in ONE blank only)
"We must use: sanctions___diplomacy___ payoffs ____invasion____wait untill Israel screams "Help! Theyre murdering us!-------------------------;; Not with white phosphorus I do hope, like was poured on the PEOPLE, locked inside the walled off Palestine compound recently;

"*Requesting country (mandatory) IRAN___ IRAQ____ INGUSHETIA___INDIA____ISRAEL__X___(proxy voting for the USA Inc- /USA_____). (please place an' X' the appropriate countries blank- PRESS HARD)

standardized omnibus Federal War request form 180924609 WY 009111-C; (revised Jan 21, 2000)
please press hard and use ink-this form is 10 pages, Canary copy to requestee-the other 9 to the pentagon drop box
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
**I cannot believe you people were so easily suckered by this 'dog and pony show'
Unbeleiveable !

[Volksstimme]

When is the moron going to stop going on the campaign trail? It can only be that he loves himself so much that he has to see and hear himself every night. Why not tell the people who you really are Barry Soetorro? Guess once someone proofs that you are a liar born in Kenyia than you can start all over again. Your "Certificate of Life Birth" is not sufficient not even in Hawaii.........

[-Lawyers-Guns-n-Money-]

Hey, who left the lunatic assylum door unguarded?

[ajjaxtheleast]

To all late logger-ons,,,

It seems that the Winged Dispatch-Bearer Of
The Gospel Truth had earlier decended from
above and held forth with:,,,

"AMERICA DID NOT HELP SET UP THE IRANIAN PROTESTS!",,,

Henceforth the question was ne'er revisited again.

The gospel truth is the gospel truth!

So as they've already settled that,,, and its
nearing time for dinner,,,,

[Snowhare]

At some point not too far in the future, would you please publish the whole interview?
Not just the transcript but the video?
I'd like it to be as uncut as poss. - fly and all.
Thanks

[Snowhare]

At some point not too far in the future, would you please publish the whole interview?
Not just the transcript but the video?
I'd like it to be as uncut as poss. - fly and all.
Thanks

[hungry1968-15]

by NEWCO123 June 22, 2009 1:34 PM PDT
sure you do, you just don't remember. It's all because of "You might want to google "dissolution of the soviet union"", that led to Poland..... etc that fell out of soviet influence, that and Afghanistan led to Russia blinking first during the cold war.







When I told you to google "dissolution of the Soviet Union", that MEANT that I was talking about the Soviet Union, and Gorbachev's dismantling of the nation.

It WASN'T code for "I really mean Poland and the Solidarity Movement".

(You have real issues with "comprehension", "staying on topic", and "following the thread", don't you?)

[hungry1968-15]

NEWCO123 June 22, 2009 1:26 PM PDT
You mean when Englands "Carter" Chamberlain came back with his feeble turn your back on those who need you most, talks with Hitler?






So you made an absurd statement, I called you on it, and you answer with more absurdity.

Typical neo con.

[hungry1968-15]

by NEWCO123 June 22, 2009 1:28 PM PDT
Physician heal thyself. Inaction is the same as no action.






I asked you at least FOUR TIMES: WHAT should Obama do or say, that is going to change the situation in the favor of the protesters, while making it look like America IS NOT meddling in Iran's internal affairs, victimizing the regime?

Do you REALLY think if he says, "We stand behind the Iranian people", that the Revolutionary Guard is just going to lay down it's weapons?



If you're so sure that you're right, then why do you refuse to answer these questions?

[ajjaxtheleast]

Obama is merely saying that we cant let Iran
blame us for the opposition protests, NOT that we
AREN'T to blame for whatever part
we might have played.

As if any of us knows enough to make a call on it.

But we damn well meddled in Palistine, Lebanon and
forced Pakistan into taking a military direction it
didn't, and for good reason, want to take so
"meddling" isn't beyond us.

"The CIA didn't meddle",,,,

If true,,,that sentense waited
a long long long time for it's 15 minutes in print.

[hungry1968-15]

by NEWCO123 June 22, 2009 12:46 PM PDT
Where do you people come up with this garbage? It's disgusting. IF you ask the Polish Union, Solidarity, they will tell you they were aided MUCH more by the American AFL-CIO in their fight than they were ever aided by Reagan. Good grief how desperate are you people anyway?

skyk-2009

Oh you mean when Poland threw off the oppressive socialist yoke? Now it's portrayed as some leftist idealized success, LOL.

That come in the leftist handbook?

BTW you can read all about it in Wikipedia thanks to hungry1968 who had me look there.







We never discussed Poland or the solidarity movement.

As usual, I have NO IDEA of what you're talking about, because you're confused.

[hungry1968-15]

by NEWCO123 June 22, 2009 12:38 PM PDT
Funny too how I've been telling all of you idiots for YEARS that the Iranian people are much more "Western Friendly" than you Fox News watchers believe, but you guys ALWAYS told me that ALL of Iran was the problem.

It takes a revolution by MILLIONS of people to enlighten you, and slap you in the face with reality.

Sad really.

More towards 'pathetic', actually.

hungry1968-15

LOL what a pathetic little man. You can't see past the end of your nose, to all those other countries trying to be free. I could care less about Iran leaders like you seem to be defending.







Defending Iran's leaders?!?!

You might want to try reading my post BEFORE commenting on it. At least have someone fluent in English translate it for you, since comprehension isn't one of your strong suites.

[hungry1968-15]

by NEWCO123 June 22, 2009 12:32 PM PDT
hungry1968-15

Ummm your stick your head in the sand plan has been tried and tried before, the failures are called WW1 and WW2 just to name a few.

Not only that but maybe billions of people who live in totalitarian countries that look up to us are watching now in how we help them.

One thing I do know is if we say nothing, then nothing will change. The thugs want us to keep our mouths shut. Saying nothing is like giving the ol' wink and a nod.







In case you haven't noticed, we haven't said a WORD, and I think things are changing very, very rapidly in Iran.

Curious though - how would our "saying something" have stopped the bullet from killing Arch-Duke Ferdinand, that would have prevented WWI?

Or how would our "saying something" have stopped Hitler, (the neo con mentor and idol), from Invading Poland in 1939, averting WWII?

[newerdeal]

Our president keeps his mouth closed when he does not know what to say.
He likes to think things through.

He voted "present" alot because he did not know what else to do.

Right now he has to rethink his whole middle east game.

He is smart but he is not a fast learner. It took him 20 years to figure out Rev. Wright.

He thinks and speaks from the brain, not from the heart.

GWB on the other hand would speak from the heart, not from the brain.

Ronald Reagan did both.

[skyk-2009]

by NEWCO123 June 22, 2009 7:30 AM PDT

Sure Sure it was what ended the cold war (Soviet defeat in Afganistan), DUH!

Reagan took on the Soviet Union and won, left the mop up to Clinton, who bungled it. Couldn't even kill/capture one man LOL!!!!!

Where do you people come up with this garbage? It's disgusting. IF you ask the Polish Union, Solidarity, they will tell you they were aided MUCH more by the American AFL-CIO in their fight than they were ever aided by Reagan. Good grief how desperate are you people anyway?

[hungry1968-15]

by skyk-2009 June 22, 2009 12:30 PM PDT
We have NO business in the middle of any Civil War or for that matter in the middle of this dispute. This is about POWER and TWO top level people who are struggling to gain it. The President has played this very close to the vest and very smart. We already KNOW where we end up if we go to far and War's NEVER just take 6 months without people dying... We have ALL the War we can handle right now and there is NO reason for Obama to imply, like Bush 1 did in Iraq, that we are going to come to the aid of any side in this conflict.







I agree 100% my friend.

[skyk-2009]

We have NO business in the middle of any Civil War or for that matter in the middle of this dispute. This is about POWER and TWO top level people who are struggling to gain it. The President has played this very close to the vest and very smart. We already KNOW where we end up if we go to far and War's NEVER just take 6 months without people dying... We have ALL the War we can handle right now and there is NO reason for Obama to imply, like Bush 1 did in Iraq, that we are going to come to the aid of any side in this conflict.

[hungry1968-15]

by NEWCO123 June 22, 2009 12:13 PM PDT

Is that the new leftist policy? The new realist one where we turn our backs on all countries trying to throw off a tyrannical government, (soon to a neighborhood near you). That's why your a leftist not a "liberal" as you et. al. like to call yourselves.







Funny too how I've been telling all of you idiots for YEARS that the Iranian people are much more "Western Friendly" than you Fox News watchers believe, but you guys ALWAYS told me that ALL of Iran was the problem.

It takes a revolution by MILLIONS of people to enlighten you, and slap you in the face with reality.

Sad really.

More towards 'pathetic', actually.

[hungry1968-15]

by NEWCO123 June 22, 2009 12:13 PM PDT

Is that the new leftist policy? The new realist one where we turn our backs on all countries trying to throw off a tyrannical government, (soon to a neighborhood near you). That's why your a leftist not a "liberal" as you et. al. like to call yourselves.







Who is turning their backs on anyone? Did you even LISTEN to the Ayatollah's speech the other day? He is DESPERATELY trying to tie America to the revolution, and painting us as an evil, underlying influence on the whole process, and trying to paint the regime as a victim of "the American Empire".

Obama is handling the situation PERFECTLY by deliberately keeping us out of it, letting the regime know that the WHOLE PROBLEM, is their problem alone, and that it has NOTHING to do with America.

This is how we should have been handling these types of situations for decades.



I'm still waiting for a response though: WHAT should Obama do or say, that is going to change the situation in the favor of the protesters, while making it look like America IS NOT meddling in Iran's internal affairs, victimizing the regime?

Do you REALLY think if he says, "We stand behind the Iranian people", that the Revolutionary Guard is just going to lay down it's weapons?




You're too busy listening to the party of "Oppose Obama!, Oppose Obama!, Oppose Obama!" rather than thinking rationally and logically.

[hungry1968-15]

by USASTILLONTOP June 22, 2009 12:08 PM PDT
Obama needs to grow a pair.






For the tenth time, exactly WHAT should Obama do or say, that is going to change the situation in the favor of the protesters?

Do you think if he says, "We stand behind the Iranian people", that the Revolutionary Guard is just going to lay down it's weapons?

You Fox News watchers are really, REALLY stupid, and that's being kind.

[skyk-2009]

It does make you wonder doesn't it? LOL I'm a Combat Veteran who sits in amazement when I hear things like that. There is NO WAY mear words will make the leader of Iran change his position, especially words from our Radical Right. THEY and all they stand for are a JOKE in the Middle East.