海角大神

From Tehran to Berlin, commentators are chewing over聽President Barack Obama鈥檚 speech last night on fighting the self-named Islamic State (IS). And while the prospect of expanded US intervention in the Middle East alarms some, he gets plaudits from others for his combative message.聽

Mr. Obama鈥檚 speech wasn鈥檛 top news in many outlets, and more reactions will likely follow. Here鈥檚 a sampling of responses, from countries that Obama hopes will join his 鈥渃oalition of partners鈥� to those with frostier ties.

In the Middle East, , according to translations of local media reports provided by the BBC.

Syria bristled at the threat of US airstrikes in its territory, which Obama said he could do in pursuit of IS fighters. Syrian state TV said:

Obama's strategy against the Islamic State exposes Washington's lack of seriousness regarding combating terrorism, as it fights against only one group while arming others.

Iran's Fars News Agency didn鈥檛 publish a direct response to the speech, but its top story online聽:

Iran's Judiciary Chief Sadeq Amoli Larijani voiced concern over the negative impacts of Washington's politically-tainted policy towards campaign against terrorism in various countries, saying that alleging attack on the ISIL in Iraq and arming the same group in Syria means a full lack of logic.

In Israel, a columnist for the left-leaning Haaretz newspaper 聽for his speech:聽

U.S. President Barack Obama wasn't Rambo or Captain America on Wednesday night, but his聽聽got the job done [鈥�]

Though he didn't mention him by name, Obama took pains to remind everyone that despite his combative message, he was not George Bush the cowboy who sent hundreds of thousands of soldiers to Iraq and managed to isolate America in the process. But he also made clear, without admitting as much even to himself, that he is no longer the old Obama either 鈥� not the bright eyed and bushy tailed Obama who thought he would win Arab hearts with a聽, nor the jilted and disillusioned Obama who wanted to put it all behind him and pivot to Asia.

A commentary in Lebanon鈥檚 Al-Akhbar English, published the day of Obama鈥檚 speech, writes that 鈥渢he US war on ISIS for many reasons.鈥� Among them:

1) The US is relying on allies, like Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who share the very ideology of ISIS.

2) The US is relying on Arab and Muslim allies who have very bad standing among their own local populace.

3) The US has an established track record: it usually replaces a bad monster with an even worse monster in the Middle East.

In Europe, the response focused both on Obama鈥檚 delivery and on his relationship with the US Congress.聽听飞谤辞迟别:

American Presidents become solemn when they announce new wars or military conflicts. They explain why the fight is necessary, how they will win in the end, and why America must lead. President Obama also聽聽from the White House. He described the crimes of the 鈥溌�,鈥� (IS). He outlined his plan to defeat the Islamists with help from the Iraqis, Kurds, the Free Syrian Army as well and numerous allies. He became emotional when explaining why only America is capable of leading a coalition against IS.

叠谤颈迟补颈苍'蝉听听飞谤颈迟别蝉:

In the space of a single primetime address on Wednesday night, Barack Obama dealt a crippling blow to a creaking, 40-year old effort to restore legislative primacy to American warmaking - a far easier adversary to vanquish than the Islamic State. Obama鈥檚 legal arguments for unilaterally expanding a war expected to last years have shocked even his supporters.

RT, Russia鈥檚 official news agency, ran a critical with anti-war activist Brian Becker. Among his responses:

The Obama administration said that they have the right to strike forces whomever they declare to be the enemy in Syria without the consent of the Syrian government and, in fact, they made it clear they will not work with the Syrian government. That is the violation of the international law.聽The US government has no right whatsoever to arrogate itself to use force in Syria, a country that is technically at peace with the US. I think what is even more here what we have seen is the dishonest presentation to the American people.

In a commentary before the speech, Mexican daily newspaper, La Jornada,聽 in US policy toward the Middle East:

"These facts are a clear 鈥媏xamples of the inconsistencies characterizing U鈥婼鈥� politics, and Western politics in general, in the conflicts unfolding in the Middle East, Central Asia鈥�,鈥� and the Islamic world: 鈥嬧�媏xtremely pragmatic, fluctuating鈥�,鈥� and unscrupulous 鈥媝olicies, in which the villains of today are the allies of tomorrow and vice versa.'