Summer Sale! Get unlimited digital access for 13 weeks for $13.
Readers Respond
News Opinion Readers Respond

What will it take before President Obama stands up to the mullahs in Tehran?

The muted communication from a spokesperson for the Navy's Fifth Fleet that it won't tolerate an Iranian attempt to close to Strait of Hormuz and shut off much of the world's oil supply is not an adequate response to the threat. It comes off as another sign of an apathetic, apologetic U.S. foreign policy ("Iran warns U.S. over Strait of Hormuz," Dec. 29).

Why does it always seem that President Obama is out of town when we need him? We see him getting ice cream with his family, which is very touching. However, there is a world going on out there.

Meanwhile, the U.S. continues to lose face as well as the trust of its allies. We need to be a major player in the Gulf Region for both economic and national security reasons.

The president has already let down our best ally, Israel. Iraq, too, seems to be heading down the tubes. Yet, Mr. Obama's extreme passivity only emboldens our enemies and postpones the inevitable.

He should take a lesson from history. When Ronald Reagan replaced a similarly weak president, Jimmy Carter, the American hostages held by Iran were immediately released. The Reagan doctrine of "peace through strength" was and should always be the model we follow.

Throughout his presidency, Reagan stood up to our enemies. He addressed them directly, not through intermediaries or some other form of indirect communication. He put his face on his foreign policy, and it brought major, positive change to the world.

We know President Obama can take his case to the American people because we see him do it for political reasons all the time. Yet here we are on the brink of war with Iran over its nuclear weapons program; now is the time for our president to show some backbone.

Richard LaCourse, Forest Hill

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Iran's dangerous game

    Iran's dangerous game

    With less than a month to go before negotiators for the U.S and its partners are supposed to reach a deal limiting Iran's nuclear program, the talks appear to have stalled over Tehran's resistance to allowing inspectors to visit Iranian military bases and other sites to verify compliance with any...

  • Wishful thinking about the U.S. deal with Iran

    Wishful thinking about the U.S. deal with Iran

    Regarding Ray McGovern's commentary "Is the 'military option' on Iran off the table?" (July 20), much as we'd like to believe this is a good deal for the U.S., the facts suggest otherwise.

  • Iran deal a 'Pandora's Box'

    Iran deal a 'Pandora's Box'

    If we believe that Iran will cease its nuclear program and its support for international terrorism after the agreement is signed, we are living in a fool's paradise ("Sen. Ben Cardin says U.S. negotiators got 'awful lot' in Iran deal," July 23). The argument that Iran will no longer develop nuclear...

  • Cardin, Mikulski should stand up to Obama and reject Iran deal

    Cardin, Mikulski should stand up to Obama and reject Iran deal

    Contrary to the letter "Ben Cardin needs to make up his mind and support the Iran deal" (Aug. 5), this is the time for Sens. Ben Cardin and Barbara Mikulski to demonstrate that they are a statesman and stateswoman respectively and not simply political supporters of President Barack Obama. Their...

  • Congress should have a say in any Iran deal

    Congress should have a say in any Iran deal

    Under normal circumstances, Congress should not get involved in preliminary treaty negotiations, since it has the option of refusing to pass the document by not mustering a two-thirds vote of approval.

  • U.S. negotiations with Iran are a dangerous farce

    U.S. negotiations with Iran are a dangerous farce

    Having missed a July deadline for reaching an agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, the six world powers party to the talks -- the United States, Russia, China, France, United Kingdom and Germany -- have set November 24 as their new deadline. Iran says there will be no extension if a deal...

  • Iran is not at fault for stalled nuclear talks — Israel is

    Iran is not at fault for stalled nuclear talks — Israel is

    Unfortunately, the skilled Iranian negotiators have already won the game against a concession-minded P5-1 array of nations headed by the United States ("Iran's dangerous game," June 5). With funds now flowing into Iran and even more lucrative trade agreements being discussed with that nation, Iran...

  • Iran deal offers hope

    Iran deal offers hope

    When the Iran deal was announced by Secretary of State John Kerry, I was elated that the negotiators were at last able to reach a reasonable agreement. While some people are asking that we hold out for more, I agree with those who say that we have moved Iran as far as we can move her at this time...

Comments
Loading
86°