Obama's Concentration on other conflicts

Is he doing it all? or is he just IGNORING Middle Eastern conflicts?

It has become very odd for me to go through a whole week without hearing about a President's speech, actions, or major talks regarding Middle Eastern conflicts. After all, don't they account for the country's most controversial foreign issues?

This week, I've witnessed that our president has made comments, visits, and possible changes in many other foreign nations such as Cuba and Venezuela. It has been since last week, since the Turkey speech, that i've heard anything about Obama and the Middle East.

Speech on Turkey:

This could be a good and a bad approach, it could be a positive approach because the president is paying attention to other conflicts around the world rather than SPEND ALL HIS ENERGY on only the Middle East, spending more time to make proper decisions in that region, and it could be that he is asking for assistance from other nations in the world. 

It could however be a negative approach because the President might be; ignoring these conflicts for them being TOO COMPLEX, adding more on his plate with other nations' problems, or delaying such conflicts as they get worse. 

Over all, while I approve of many of his approaches that he says he will take, I and many other people waiting for actions get very anxious while waiting for the President to take actions of all these steps he only SAID he will do.... its the matter of the unknown that I hate to be in, time will eventually answer many of our questions though. 

Grassroots - Disbelieving Obama

The action of political resistance has always been deeply rooted into individuals coming together as masses and uniting their voices for remarkable impressions. Unity and freedom are key words in our American constitution, a constitution that's guided under "freedom, liberty, and justice for all."

Grassroots organizations, or political resistance groups in the U.S., take advantage of the First Amendment; which allows them the freedom to comment, organize, and speak against the political environment. However, remembering that these are grassroots organizations, they do not have the needed resources to spread their m

essage through EXPENSIVE MEDIA... and they therefore, rely solely on donations and volunteers to stand up against the powerful voice of the media. 

If we date back to President Bush's presidency, we vision many of the rallies on the streets of Washington to have increased around that time. These gathered voices against the presidents' decisions were organized by grassroots organizations, and therefore, what these organizations think of the president makes a huge difference of other people's approach on presidents as well.

As of President Barack Obama, we can witness that many grassroots organizations who are in support of Middle Eastern conflicts are DISLIKING how the President is handling the following controversies:

1. Palestine-Israel - apparently, the President is made a major shift from pro-Palestine to pro-Israel dating his campaign.

2. Iraq - according to members in ANSWER Coalition, president is promising too many actions of withdrawing troops from Iraq, but they will not be going home and will instead transfer to Afghanistan.

3. Afghanistan and Pakistan - ANSWER members are also stating that while Obama might end the war in Iraq, he will be intensifying a different war in Afghanistan, and possibly Pakistan.

Here is a list of some of the grassroots organizations in Washington D.C. for Middle Eastern conflicts:

• ANSWER Coalition.
  
• United Palestinian Appeal.
• Muslim American Society.
• ADC.
• U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation.

To Date, since the President's Inauguration, ANSWER Coalition has already organized a massive Anti-war protest against America's interven

tion in the Middle East. Generally, the rally called to ending the occupations.

Response to Obama's

As a response to Barack Obama's Nowruz message, 

Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Kahmenei dismissed these overtures and has said that Iran does not see any change in U.S. policy under Obama's administration.... Hmm, does not sound too hopeful!!!

He Talks the Talk, But Does He WALK THE WALK?

It was during a speech last Saturday that Khamenei stressed that relations with the U.S. and Iran will not change unless Obama puts an end to U.S. hostility towards Iran and brings real changes in U.S. foreign policies... How "impressive"; the quick judging and instant negativity from Iran that is. 

In last Saturday's speech from Khamenei, we can conclude the following:

• Iran is dissatisfied because they have yet to see any promised changes in U.S.'s relations with Iran. "They chant the slogan of change but no change is seen in practice. We haven't seen any change," said Khamenei.
• They say a change of U.S. words is not enough, "we will watch and we will judge. You change , our behavior will change," said Khamenei.
• Iran is been dissatisfied with U.S.'s intervention since Iran's Islamic Revolution of 1979... therefore, its not Bush they had a problem with, its all of America's policy in Iran.
• Khamenei asks Obama how he could congratulate Iranians on the new year while they CONTINUE TO ACCUSE Iran of supporting terrorism and making nuclear weapons.

Khamenei's Speech:

In this matter, I agree with both Barack Obama's action to congratulate the Iranians on Nowruz and with Khamenei's response. First of all, through the message sent to the Iranians, I witness an honorable approach from our President to new beginnings with Iran... however, words of hope and sympathy aren't enough to do the job. But, instead of completely dismissing and mistrusting such wishful thinking, Khamenei is at fault by OVERREACTING and QUICK JUDGING of Obama's policies. After all, he has only been a president for about 5-months.