Posted on 07/27/2015 7:14:57 AM PDT by GoneSalt
This is breathtaking in its own fanaticism—and in the ignorance that, one might have hoped, would have been tucked away after Romney’s 2012 presidential defeat at the hands of a lackluster incumbent. A survey of recent Iranian history suggests that its leaders, while starkly fundamentalist in their religious sensibility, conduct foreign policy based on a logical understanding of their national interests and an often brilliant pursuit of them within the context of geopolitical reality.
They certainly never sent an army halfway around the world to overthrow the leader of a sovereign state with the intent of establishing a beachhead for the transformation of an entire regional culture. Now that’s “bereft of restraint.” The only conventional war the Ayatollahs have engaged in ensued when Iran was invaded by Iraq—with American support. True, they align themselves with some nations we don’t like, but those alliances, as unsavory as they may be to us, are in Iran’s interest as a regional power in a nasty neighborhood. One can argue that this renders Iran a U.S. adversary, but there is no evidence that these people are fanatical nihilists who want to destroy the world.
As to the prospect that Iran inevitably would use nuclear weapons if it had them, it is worth noting that the world has nine nuclear nations, and only one has ever used them—and that when no other nation had them for retaliation. Romney is saying here that Iran is more fanatical and suicidal than any other nuclear nation in the history of the nuclear age, even North Korea. That isn’t going to hold up when the American people get down to assessing the arguments of this debate.
Finally, we are told that Iran will cheat on the agreement, that inspections won’t be rigorous enough, that Iran always cheats and is hell-bent on getting nuclear weapons so it will cheat here for sure and thwart all efforts by the agreement signatories and the UN, including UN inspectors, to monitor its nuclear activity until the world is faced with a fait accompli. Perhaps. But how realistic is such a scenario? With satellite technology and the CIA and Israeli intelligence and random revelations, could Iran really spring such a fait accompli on the world before the world caught wind of it? Once again we come to the likelihood factor in risk analysis. The likelihood factor here is very slim.
History tells us that the American people like it when their presidents score big foreign-policy triumphs—and count it as a plus when the incumbent or incumbent party seeks White House retention at the next election. This is Obama’s big foreign-policy triumph. And, while the American people haven’t yet embraced it as such, they will. As the debate progresses, it will become increasingly clear that the consequences of killing this deal or reneging on it are ominous, that America and the world retain plenty of options if Iran proves treacherous, and that the stakes include not only America’s relationship with Iran but also America’s standing in the world. Not to mention the prospects for war if the deal goes down.
If it survives over nearly unanimous GOP objections, as appears likely, it will be a net negative for Republicans, perhaps even a big one. But, if the party manages to kill the deal for America, thus isolating the country and putting it upon a path to war, then the party’s political viability could be placed on ice for a considerable period.
The Republican leadership won’t allow that to happen.
The GOPe always supports Obama since they have the same goals for America.
“They certainly never sent an army halfway around the world to overthrow the leader of a sovereign state with the intent of establishing a beachhead for the transformation of an entire regional culture. Now that’s “bereft of restraint.””
No, you f**king hemorrhoid. They never liberated a continent from tyranny twice and the largest country on earth once, asking little or nothing in return.
0bama ‘warned’ them not to throw a wrench in the works so, true to form, they won’t.
It’s much easier to roll over and play dead. And they still get invited to the cocktail parties on Friday!
“They certainly never sent an army halfway around the world to overthrow the leader of a sovereign state . . . “
Yeah, I was always amazed that the Iranians, with their consistent record of troublemaking, never deployed some of their carrier task forces, never exploited their global network of air resources, never threatened the use of their extensive stockpile of cruise missiles, never put into play their dominant collection of air and sea troop transport capabilities, and never called into action their wide collection of potential allies to do just that.
What a macaroon.
Is Lurch still lying to ensure he gets his commission? Of course. The ba$turds in Washington are confirming to us they are idiots and not concerned about America’ safety one bit as they make a deal with the devil to sell him the blueprints and whatever other tools he needs to make nukes that can wipe us from the face of the earth. C’mon let’s be real about human nature here. You know damn well someone is making BIG money out of this deal. Our own government is exercising extremely bad judgment on this deal. Or should I say the ones colluding with The One. He knows damn well what he’s doing.
A nice frosting of pseudo-intellectual B/S on a poop cake. Cut to the chase, man. Iranian foreign policy can be summed up with the phrases "Death to America" and "Death to Israel." I say we take them at their word and assume that they will engage in a "brilliant pursuit" of same.
> Finally, we are told that Iran will cheat on the agreement, that inspections won’t be rigorous enough, that Iran always cheats and is hell-bent on getting nuclear weapons so it will cheat here for sure and thwart all efforts by the agreement signatories and the UN, including UN inspectors, to monitor its nuclear activity until the world is faced with a fait accompli. Perhaps. But how realistic is such a scenario? With satellite technology and the CIA and Israeli intelligence and random revelations, could Iran really spring such a fait accompli on the world before the world caught wind of it? Once again we come to the likelihood factor in risk analysis. The likelihood factor here is very slim.
There are idiots; then there are IDIOTS. The author is the latter. Can sattelites see underground bunkers. No, idiot.
> As to the prospect that Iran inevitably would use nuclear weapons if it had them, it is worth noting that the world has nine nuclear nations, and only one has ever used them—and that when no other nation had them for retaliation. Romney is saying here that Iran is more fanatical and suicidal than any other nuclear nation in the history of the nuclear age, even North Korea. That isn’t going to hold up when the American people get down to assessing the arguments of this debate.
North Korea hasn’t been going around lining up people to cut off their heads, stoning and raping women, drowning people in cages, etc...and Iran endorses these activities and sponsors them in fact so YES they aremore fanatical than the rest and the only reason they haven’t use nukes is because they DIDN’T have them. So basically your arguments prove you are just naive liberal idiot
And just to bring it down from the macro to the mundane...
When there’s a big earthquake in Turkey, do the Iranians even send ordinary aid?
Silly goose the GOP can’t kill that deal.
“Do you know that in the restaurants of New York, they have an inspection system. You can surprise any restaurant without notice that you can walk in and inspect them… So we are protected in this city from a bad tuna fish. We’re not protected from a bomb but we’re protected from a bad quality of a tuna fish,” [Jackie} Mason joked.
Link (with more comments by Jackie Mason):
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Iran/Jackie-Mason-NYC-restaurants-subject-to-tougher-inspections-than-Iran-under-nuclear-deal-410203
Need something to wipe the goo off your face, Bob?
LOL...
Instead of dropping the soap
A socialist uses it for a writing instrument on the shower floor
“NUKE ME”
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.