| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| How to Defeat the Grand Bargain with Iran |
| 2015-07-30 |
| by Michael Ledeen A taste: [PJMedia] Most of those trying to stop the approval of the Iran nuke deal are going about it all wrong... I think most of those trying to stop the approval of the Iran Deal are going about it wrong. I don’t believe you can stop this thing by going through the text and pointing out its myriad flaws, nor do I think it’s good enough to expose the many lies Obama, Kerry, Rhodes et. al. told us along the way, nor even to uncover secret deals. Kerry and Zarif spent 27 hours alone during the negotiations, and we’re not going to get a transcript of those conversations, nor will either of them tell us what they may have agreed. And even if they did, I don’t think it would produce enough public political rage to stiffen the wobbly spines of our elected leaders. The critics are quite right for the most part: it’s an awful agreement, the administration has behaved abominably, and the deal should be rejected. I’m just talking about the best way to do it, the best tactics to use. Obama understands how to do it: reduce the issue to a simple choice. He does that when he says that Congress must either approve the Grand Bargain or plunge the Middle East–or is it the world?–into war. We should answer it: Iran has been at war with us for 36 years, and this deal–the latest of its kind–gives Iran lots of money to kill even more Americans. Indeed, we’ve been doing it for quite a while. In a single phrase: the war is already ON, and we’re paying the Iranians to kill us. You want to pay them even more? Apparently that’s what Obama wants. |
| Posted by:trailing wife |
| #10 I'm thinking outbreak of dengue hemorrhagic fever among the personel. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2015-07-30 12:26 |
| #9 Why is this 'deal' not considered treason? Because self-destructive suicidal masochism is the cultural consensus of 21st century Western civilization. |
| Posted by: Elmerert Hupens2660 2015-07-30 10:22 |
| #8 Why is this 'deal' not considered treason? Because, though it's difficult to stomach when a leftist holds the office and engages in acts of utter stupidity such as the present fiasco, the President has rather extraordinarily broad powers to conduct the foreign policy of the US. See e.g., Bill Clinton's signature of the Kyoto Accords which would have had the effect of devastating the US economy. Besides, criminalizing the official acts (no matter how stupid) of our domestic political opponents (no matter how cretinous) is far into Banana Republic territory. Granted we're already 99% Banana Republic but .... |
| Posted by: Halliburton - Foreign Affairs Division 2015-07-30 09:37 |
| #7 The trick is to use small words. |
| Posted by: Matt 2015-07-30 09:14 |
| #6 No, a low level staffer will simply trash it. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2015-07-30 08:56 |
| #5 I don't have much confidence that writing to my Senators will stand for much. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2015-07-30 08:31 |
| #4 I just finished writing to my Senators and Representative regarding the "deal." I only wish I had read this PJMedia article first. The phrases: The phrases: "the war is already ON, and we’re paying the Iranians to kill us. You want to pay them even more? Apparently that’s what Obama wants." Certainly gets to the nub of the matter. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2015-07-30 08:21 |
| #3 Obama surrendered but Iran will take the money and not accept the terms of the surrender and continue the war. Congress appears fine with this approach, may even point out the economic stimulus of a new arms race. |
| Posted by: Airandee 2015-07-30 06:55 |
| #2 Why is this 'deal' not considered treason? |
| Posted by: Raj 2015-07-30 01:05 |
| #1 Obama wants, there's a deal killer. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2015-07-30 00:19 |