that was perfectly balanced in my opinion. This is where Obama made it very clear to the rest of the world that he has reversed Bush's arrogant Neocon foreign policy ideology, that "This cannot solely be America's endeavor," and that "Those who used to chastise America for acting alone in the world cannot now stand by and wait for America to solve the world's problems alone:"

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0909/23/cnr.02.html

CNN NEWSROOM

Standoff at VA Hospital in Chicago; President Obama addresses the U.N. General Assembly

Aired September 23, 2009 - 10:00 ET

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: "Good morning. Mr. President, Mr. Secretary General, fellow delegates, ladies and gentlemen, it is my honor to address you for the first time as the 44th president of the United States...

I took office at a time when many around the world had come to view America with skepticism and distrust. A part of this was due to misperceptions and misinformation about my country. Part of this was due to opposition to specific policies and a belief on, on certain critical issues, America had acted unilaterally without regard for the interests of others.

And this is has fed an almost reflexive anti-Americanism which, too often, has served as an excuse for collective inaction.

Now, like all of you, my responsibility is to act in the interests of my nation and my people. And I will never apologize for defending those interests. But it is my deeply held belief that, in the year 2009, more than at any point in human history, the interests of nations and peoples are shared. The religious convictions that we hold in our hearts can forge new bonds among people or they can tear us apart.

The technology we harness could light the path to peace or forever darken it. The energy we use can sustain our planet or destroy it. What happens to the hope of a single child anywhere can enrich our world or impoverish it. In this hall, we come from many places, but we share a common future. No longer do we have the luxury of indulging our differences to the exclusion of the work that we must do together. I have carried this message from London to Ankara, from Port of Spain to Moscow, from Accra to Cairo, and it is what I will speak about today.

Because the time has come for the world to move in a new direction, we must embrace a new era of engagement based on mutual interest and mutual respect. And our work must begin now.

We know the future will be forged by deeds and not simply words. Speeches alone will not solve our problem. It will take persistent action. For those who question the character and cause of my nation, I ask you to look at the concrete actions we have taken in just nine months.

On my first day in office, I prohibited without expectation or equivocation the use of torture by the United States of America.

(APPLAUSE)

I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed. And we are doing the hard work of forging a framework to combat extremism within the rule of law.

Every nation must know America will live its values, and we will lead by example. We have set a clear and focused goal to work with all members of this body to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda and its extremist allies, a network that has killed thousands of people of many faiths and nations and that plotted to blow up this very building.

In Afghanistan and Pakistan, we and many nations here are helping these governments develop the capacity to take the lead in this effort, while working to advance opportunity and security for their people.

In Iraq, we are responsibly ending a war. We have removed American combat brigades from Iraqi cities and set a deadline of next August to remove all our combat brigades from Iraqi territory. And I have made clear that we will help Iraqis transition to full responsibility for their future and keep our commitment to remove all American troops by the end of 2011.

I have outlined a comprehensive agenda to seek the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. In Moscow, the United States and Russia announced that we would pursue substantial reductions in our strategic warheads and launchers. At the Conference on Disarmament, we agreed on a work plan to negotiate an end to the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons. And this week, my secretary of state will become the first senior American representative to the annual members conference of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

Upon taking office, I appointed a special envoy for Middle East peace. And America has worked steadily and aggressively to advance the cause of two states, Israel and Palestine, in which peace and security take root and the rights of both Israelis and Palestinians are respected.

To confront climate change, we have invested $80 billion in clean energy. We have substantially increased our fuel-efficiency standards. We have provided new incentives for conservation, launched an energy partnership across the Americas, and moved from a bystander to a leader in international climate negotiations.

To overcome an economic crisis that touches every corner of the world, we worked with the G-20 nations to forge a coordinated international response of over $2 trillion in stimulus to bring the global economy back from the brink. We mobilized resources that helped prevent the crisis from spreading further to developing countries, and we joined with others to launch a $20 billion global food security initiative that will lend a hand to those who need it most and help them build their own capacity.

We have also re-engaged the United Nations. We have paid our bills. We have joined the Human Rights Council.

(APPLAUSE)

We have signed the Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. We have fully embraced the Millennium Development Goals, and we address our priorities here in this institution, for instance, through the Security Council meeting that I will chair tomorrow on nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament and through the issues that I will discuss today.

This is what we have already done, but this is just a beginning. Some of our actions have yielded progress. Some have laid the groundwork for progress in the future. But make no mistake: This cannot solely be America's endeavor.

Those who used to chastise America for acting alone in the world cannot now stand by and wait for America to solve the world's problems alone. We have sought in word and deed a new era of engagement with the world, and now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges.

If we are honest with ourselves, we need to admit that we are not living up to that responsibility. Consider the course that we're on if we fail to confront the status quo: extremists sowing terror in pockets of the world, protracted conflicts that grind on and on, genocide, mass atrocities, more nations with nuclear weapons, melting ice caps and ravaged populations, persistent poverty and pandemic disease.

I say this not to sow fear but to state a fact. The magnitude of our challenges has yet to be met by the measure of our actions.

This body was founded on the belief that the nations of the world could solve their problems together..."

Mitch, to get you to stop posting these mile-long posts when a link would suffice. You've been doing this forever and people have been requesting that you STOP THIS PRACTICE forever. If you're trying to promote your archivist business, this is NOT the place to do it. Kindly find someplace else to unload this stuff.

"Because what he's frittering away ...are the rights we all have as citizens." J. Turley

This was an excellent interview that answered a lot of questions in my opinion. I wish that CNN made a video of this interview but I have not seen it yet:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0910/07/sitroom.03.html

THE SITUATION ROOM

President Obama's War Council; New York Congressman Charles Rangel Under Fire

Aired October 7, 2009 - 18:00 ET

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: "A voice of experience on the battlefield warning of the danger of a military confrontation with Iran. Stand by for my interview with retired U.S. Marine Corps General Tony Zinni.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) GENERAL ANTHONY ZINNI (RET.), FORMER CENTCOM COMMANDER: If Iran were to launch missiles at our troop installations in Iraq or in the Persian Gulf, maybe mine the straits and blow up some oil tankers, you can imagine what happens to the economy of the world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: He was a top U.S. military chief with the Middle East and the Persian Gulf, one of his main responsibilities.

So, retired U.S. Marine Corps General Tony Zinni speaks with great credibility when he weighs in on what is happening there right now.

He's the author of the book "Leading the Charge," and the general spoke with Tom Foreman and me about one prime issue the world is deeply concerned about right now.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: There's a huge issue right now, what to do with that second nuclear enrichment facility they have near the Shiite holy city of Qom.

This is a real perplexing question for the U.S.

ZINNI: Yes.

And I think, obviously, we hope we can resolve this diplomatically now in the dialogue that is going on, if not, through sanctions. We need international support. Military operations are going to be highly questionable.

BLITZER: Is it doable? If you were in charge, could the U.S. launch a sophisticated strike with high-intensity bombs, and knock out, destroy that facility?

ZINNI: I don't think you can make a guarantee that you can completely take it out. Obviously, it's deeply buried. It's scattered around.

But what worries me more than that is, what would the reaction be? If you go back to the Gulf, the Persian Gulf area, you will see that we have troop installations and allies on the other side of the Gulf that could be vulnerable to their missiles, which are very mobile.

BLITZER: So, when the president of the United States says all options are on the table, the implication being the military option, as well, is that just a hollow threat?

ZINNI: I don't think it's hollow, but I think what people have to understand, if you opt for the military strike, a prudent military planner now has to plan for consequences.

If Iran were to launch missiles at our troop installations in Iraq or in the Persian Gulf, maybe mine the straits and blow up some oil tankers, you can imagine what happens to the economy of the world. What if the MOIS, their intelligence service, activates sleeper cells?

What if there is a reaction from the Muslim world about another preemptive attack? And now you have problems that stretch beyond just that region. A prudent commander, General Petraeus in CENTCOM, is going to have to take into account preparations for all that.

This is not just a simple airstrike.

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Look at this facility, if you would, general, and these pictures. This is from DigitalGlobe.

I want you to look at what has happened in this area. That was about 2005, it looked about like this. This is what it looked like in January of this year. You could see deep dug-in areas in this development, big rebar work going on over in here. All of this is excavated dirt, so they have moved a tremendous amount of dirt, digging this quite deeply. And this is from GOI. And I'll try to bring this other image up from just a week ago.

When you look at this sort of thing, what do you think in terms of the ability to strike this and hit these, because these are very deeply dug in?

ZINNI: Well, obviously, the deeper it is, the more difficult it is. We certainly have some capability. I can't discuss all the capability. But the depth is important. The hardening of -- of the facilities underground. And depending on what is where -- how many locations are there, do we know where they all are?

I mean I think these are all issues that -- that our Intelligence Committee will be talking about.

FOREMAN: So these -- these facilities we saw just a moment ago, as you can see now, from last week, from the GOI image, completely buried. This one is not buried. It doesn't look like it will be, but it could be.

ZINNI: You can't tell. That might be just a building over buried site.

FOREMAN: And then we have -- down below here, we have some indication of military support facilities in the area.

When you look at all of this -- and I want to widen out to what you were saying earlier about the region.

So what you're saying is when you have missiles in this area and you're talking about that sort of weaponry -- and we've calculated the range, you can go really quite high up in here. You're talking about our people over here, anybody who comes in here in this area.

ZINNI: Remember, we have bases down in here, in Qatar, in Kuwait, obviously, in Iraq. We have allies with positions there. Obviously, there are oil refineries and -- and natural gas refineries. You -- you know, of course, the tanker transportation through there. Our -- our fleet is out there, the Fifth Fleet. There are a lot of potential targets out there -- fast patrol boats with cruise missiles. There are mobile missile systems. There are ability to throw mines off of dowels in the water that would be hard for us to detect.

There's all sorts of things that could go on. And -- and imagine not just the military impact, but imagine the economic impact around the world if that suddenly happens.

BLITZER: (INAUDIBLE), as does Israel, not that far away, right...

ZINNI: Yes.

BLITZER: ...right over there along the Mediterranean -- a wild card. You know the Israelis. You've worked with them for a long time.

What do you think?

Is it possible they might take their own unilateral action to try to knock out those Iranian nuclear facilities?

ZINNI: Well, I think, clearly, the Israelis see this as an existential threat. I mean they -- Ahmadinejad has said he's going to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. They take it seriously. They obviously feel that this has to do with their very existence.

I would doubt they would do it without us either being informed or in some way acknowledging that they're going to do it, because if they didn't, they would leave us unprepared in those places where we're vulnerable, as I mentioned.

BLITZER: But they have to fly over Iraq. They would have to fly over Saudi Arabia.

ZINNI: Yes.

BLITZER: It's not easy to get from Israel to Iraq.

ZINNI: No. I mean it's Jordan, Iraq into Iraq and -- and those areas. And the obvious issue about who clears that, if it's cleared at all, what can be perceived as an incoming threat, whether we've been notified and we're prepared. Our Arab allies in the region could be vulnerable in some ways. And -- and...

BLITZER: But there's no way the Israelis could launch F-15s or F-16s and fly over Iraqi air space, let's say, or Saudi air space -- without the U.S. government knowing about it.

ZINNI: No. No. We would know.

BLITZER: And so what would the U.S. do...

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: ...if the Israelis had (INAUDIBLE)?

ZINNI: That is a great question.

BLITZER: Yes.

ZINNI: It is a great question.

FOREMAN: Yes.

ZINNI: I don't know what we would do. I think that -- that is something we'd probably discuss with the Israelis. Obviously, it's -- it's not public. But certainly we would be aware.

FOREMAN: We're looking at -- well, it's about 1,200 miles, roughly, if you went from Israel to roughly where we're talking about the missile facilities being, in this area.

BLITZER: There is one other way they could do it and go around from Turkey into Iran, if they wanted to go up there and avoid Iraqi air space.

ZINNI: Well, when you're violating other people's air space, it becomes problematic from a diplomatic point of view, a military point of view -- how well can they penetrate their air defenses or foil them. The longer it goes, the more you need tanker support and other things that could be more obvious and vulnerable. So it's like a (INAUDIBLE)...

BLITZER: Realistically, how much time do you think the president of the United States has right now in dealing with this Iran nuclear issue?

ZINNI: Well, first of all, I think we'll see where the diplomacy goes and the dialogue. And we'll see where the motivation is for international sanctions. If those two fail, then I think we're at a serious crunch point.

At the same time, how fast are they enriching uranium to the point where, you know, we feel that they could actually weaponize it and have the capability.

So I think those two factors that are more condition-based and drive the time lines are -- are where the crunch point is going to be determined.

BLITZER: In your estimate -- and I'll leave it on this note, General -- what would be worse, from the U.S. natural security perspective, Iran getting a nuclear bomb, having a nuclear capability, or the U.S. and/or others destroying -- launching a preemptive military strike to destroy those facilities and living with those consequences, economic and military, diplomatic, that you discussed?

ZINNI: Well, obviously, that's a -- that's almost like a lose- lose situation. Neither one is a good choice.

BLITZER: Two bad options.

ZINNI: Two bad options. But what worries me as -- as a part of that is those young people and those reformers in Iran that have gone into the streets now, that were hoping for support and -- and at least acknowledgement of their efforts. They may be encouraged if the dialogue is -- is forced and the hard-liners are -- come to the table. But more importantly, if the international community now embraces this as a serious effort, gets behind them and is serious about the sanctions, that might give us some breathing room and an alternative.

This is something important about Iran and Afghanistan. We cannot make these American problems. These have to be international global problems. Unfortunately, both are becoming our problems. And I think that's where our leadership needs to focus.

BLITZER: General Zinni, thanks very much for coming in.

ZINNI: Thank you, Wolf..."