Over the last few days, President Obama has taken the stance that the U.S. government will not intervene in the protest. Today, his position seemed to change some, stating that he was "appalled and outraged" by the violence and implied that the Tehran government may suffer consequences if they continue with "the threats, the beatings and imprisonments". When asked by reporters what those consequences may be, Obama declined to detail them. When asked why any actions haven’t been taken yet, Obama said that “We don't know yet how this thing is going to play out…It is not too late for the Iranian government to recognize that there is a peaceful path that will lead to stability and legitimacy and prosperity for the Iranian people. We hope they take it”.
Do I think that we should intervene? I am honestly on the fence. Perhaps I missed it, but Obama did not clearly explain today why we SHOULDN’T get involved. If he feels somehow that intervening will cause a foreign affairs issue or harm to the U.S., I would like to know. Another question to be raised is “if the U.S. DOES intervene, HOW will we do it? What will be the repercussions, if any?” Many have insisted that he intervene, but few have actually proposed how he (or we) can. I have also heard the argument that it’s an internal issue we have nothing to do with. “We wouldn’t want another country interfering with our election.” “Haven’t we interfered with the affairs of other countries enough?”
To address the “Haven’t we interfered with the affairs of other countries enough?” question, I find it interesting when we DO choose to “interfere”. If you look at our history, we have “interfered” often, even when we are not wanted by the local citizens. Yet the Iranians are crying for our help and we have denied them. Are we making the right choice? Is Obama doing the right thing? I sure hope so.