There has been too much attention to Iran’s nuke deal, hostages, Terrorism, Sanctions, etc.. all very salient points, yet symptoms of a much larger problem.
Let’s review briefly:
1) Carter supported Khomeinist/Islamic movement in the late 1979.
2) Reagan came to power and hostages were released, yet the same regime that took hostages continued to retain power.
3) GHWB didn’t do anything about the regime in Iran.
4) Bill Clinton slapped sanctions on the regime in Iran, yet praised the same regime as being the most democratic in the M.E. and Islamic world for holding x number of elections since its conception. Meantime, certain key Iranian regime figures continued to do trade with the West, namely Rafsanjani (ex regime president), and became rich.
5) GWB labelled Iran the “Axis of Evil”, then proceeded to negotiate with the Mullahs’ regime, among other reasons, to stabilize post-invasion Iraq. The regime in Iran stayed in power.
6) Obama.. well, the latest nuke deal speaks for itself..
Sanctions on Islamic regime in Iran have not worked to overthrow the regime.
Point is, if we don’t want a nuke deal, and we don’t want a terrorist regime, then make sure there isn’t a terrorist regime in power, in the first place!
One or two methods to get rid of the terrorist regime in Iran, without bills, treaties, applying sanctions, or using nukes. It really doesn’t have to be made complicated.
But when president after president (40 yrs on) continues to argue, applies non-effective measures, and refuses to address the CAUSE of the problem, there has to be at least one reason that is not president-specific.
Meant to say: late 1970s re Carter.
1979 was when Khomeini actually seized power in Iran.
I got your “larger problem” right HERE:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2276493/posts
Next time Hillary bleats about a “war on women...”
What’s she doing serving as secretary of state under a President who ate luxury ice cream while this was going on?