Posted on 02/25/2015 4:04:20 AM PST by onyx
On Tuesday’s Special Report, Charles Krauthammer said the United States’ ongoing negotiations with Iran are misguided and make President Obama’s other foreign policy blunders look favorable by comparison.
“This [deal] will mean a lifting of the sanctions, so Iran will be with a very strong economy, undeterred, nothing in any way holding it back; it’s simply catastrophic,” Krauthammer said. “It is an unbelievably bad deal. It makes the Cuba deal look like a really good bargain.”
Krauthammer explained that he thinks the United States is negotiating from a place of weakness, which has shifted the Obama administration’s original objective of stopping the Iranian nuclear program. He added that if this deal goes as poorly as he expects, it could allow Iran to become a “legitimate nuclear power.”
Does Dr. K yet regret voting for the Tyrant?
This treason is only catastrophic ... for America.
For Iran, and Val and Obola and their
friends in Cuba, N. Korea, and Turkey,
it is a WIN.
Too late the hero this. Like the bristling media indignant because Walker did not stamp his fist and say "I BELIEVE! [that Obama is a Christian]," Charles doesn't understand the policy and posture from which Obama's State Department does anything.
It is not from a place of weakness - it is from allegiance and collusion.
Why would Zero ever think anyone will vote for an Iranian nuke agreement. It’s a fools errand.
What the hell are you talking about? Dr. K is a republican. He used to be a rat a long time ago ... much like what Reagan did.
*
“Does Dr. K yet regret voting for the Tyrant?”
Is that true? Did he really say he voted for him. I pray not.
What ever happened to the 2/3 majority in the senate needed to ratify treaties? I guess the regime gets around that by calling it an agreement...
I have no idea whether Krauthammer voted for Obama or not, but I think it is utterly foolish to attack Krauthammer every time somebody posts an article by him.
His articles are always worth reading, whether you entirely agree or not. However, Freepers never even make it to the article because somebody, usually by the third post, runs forward and starts ranting about Charles Krauthammer and his real or imagined offenses.
For pete’s sake, for once in our lives, can’t we focus on what a writer says and not what we think about him personally? Acting the way we do makes us look just as stupid and crazy as we are depicted by the left.
I don’t think Obama plans to have anybody vote for or against an Iranian agreement. I read some place that he was trying to do it in some way that didn’t require approval.
That said, if it does get to the legislature, I bet you’d find there are Dems out there who’d vote for it.
Also, this is getting very little public attention. I’ve seen a couple of good articles about it (more detailed than Krauthammer’s opinion) but I’d like to see a little more concern from our esteemed legislators.
Did I do that?
“Does Dr. K yet regret voting for the Tyrant?”
If by ‘tyrant’ you mean Obama....you’re delusional.
“Kraut is a Dem”
NO, he isn’t. He was, years ago, but so was Reagan.
Here, here!
What’s your problem?
All I did was ask a question about whether Krauthammer voted for 0bama or not.
Your childish rant calling FReepers “stupid and crazy” was uncalled for.
Grow up.
It's not true. I don't know where Diogenesis is getting that from.
Krauthammer wrote an October 2008 editorial for the Washington Post in which he ripped Republicans who might cross over to vote for the most liberal & inexperienced presidential nominee in history (HIS words).
It defies logic to believe Krauthammer would have changed his mind and voted for Obama after four years of total disaster.
Krauthammer is an optimist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.