Posted on 03/03/2015 12:34:11 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Not sure why he’s mumbling about “viable alternatives” when the refrain from his own team over the past 24 hours, starting with Susan Rice, is that a bad deal with Iran is worse than no deal, which is precisely Netanyahu’s point. Bibi’s plan is clear enough, though: Keep the pressure on Tehran by keeping sanctions in place until they’re willing to give up more than just the 10-year temporary freeze that Obama’s currently asking for. O also complained here to the press that there was nothing new in Netanyahu’s speech, which is true — for a reason.
Double-talk from WH. Warns Bibi not to reveal Iran talk details. Then blasts Bibi for "no details." http://t.co/BNbyRODkjy #NetanyahuSpeech
— Anne Bayefsky (@AnneBayefsky) March 3, 2015
Good luck finding something new to say during a six-year rolling debate when you’re not allowed to delve into the only important recent development.
Obama did end up making his strongest argument for his own plan in the course of his shpiel here, that a deal that gives nuclear inspectors real eyes on the ground to track Iran’s program would give the west a better sense of whether they’re cheating by trying to build a bomb than we have now. As he told Reuters yesterday:
“If, in fact, Iran is willing to agree to double-digit years of keeping their program where it is right now and, in fact, rolling back elements of it that currently exist … if we’ve got that, and we’ve got a way of verifying that, there’s no other steps we can take that would give us such assurance that they don’t have a nuclear weapon,” he said.
The U.S. goal is to make sure “there’s at least a year between us seeing them try to get a nuclear weapon and them actually being able to obtain one,” Obama said in the interview, carefully timed by the White House a day ahead of Netanyahu’s polarizing speech to Congress.
If we’re not willing to attack their program now, we might as well try to improve our intelligence so that we’ll know for sure when an attack is necessary. (That’s what the “breakout” period is all about.) Just one problem: Realistically, the White House will never attack Iran. If you doubt that, go remind yourself that Obama’s deputies have actually boasted to reporters that the endless nuke negotiations with Iran have crippled Israel’s own ability to attack. Obama’s not going to wreck his own legacy-establishing rapprochement with Iran by trying to blow up their enrichment facilities, setting off a regional war, particularly when lots of defense experts believe that even a U.S. attack would merely set back the program rather than destroy it. Obama won’t strike unless he has absolutely no choice, and there’s no scenario before he leaves office where he’d have no choice, i.e. where Iran’s nukes would pose an immediate threat not just to Israel but to the U.S. The deal he’s working on is transparently a punt to the next president: Iran probably won’t cheat before Obama leaves office, and if they cheat once his successor is on the clock, hey, that’s his/her problem. And once Iran does “surprise” everyone by building a bomb, that can be laid at the feet of the UN’s inspectors in failing to smoke it out rather than at Obama’s feet for failing to attack. Best-case scenario if Iran tries to “break out” is that we’ll hit them with the harshest sanctions we can muster, as if that’ll stop them. Really, if Netanyahu’s determined to block them from building a weapon, he’d better have a battle plan of his own. At least until January 2017.
In a nutshell:
The commentators were all hardened liberal ani who performed marvelous rhetorical backflips while attacking Israel and Bibi in the nicest liberal code words possible.
They also delivered not-so-veiled threats from Team Obama:
"...we maintain Israel's Iron Dome and that has nothing to do with Congress
We are Israel's Major Weapons Supplier and that has nothing to do with Congress.
In other word's, Bibi Bubelah, you really ought not to foxtrot uniform The Mombasa Mike Foxtrot, or you Bubelah, will be the one getting Foxtrotted.
This has a political/international-law term reserved to describe it: Safe Harbor.
Well,Mr President...I take you back to a day in June 1981.It was the 7th of June if I recall correctly....
Yes, exactly! However, this time the stakes are much higher!
Simple. Get out of Israel’s way; let them fly over Iraq (Jordan will likely let them pass over) and bomb every known centrifuge site in Iran. Heck, give them some air support, refueling planes, etc. They are our allies, remember. Allies with balls. Unlike Obama.
No one is going to complain. No one wants Iran to have a Nuke. However, some of our enemies do business with them. Guess what? There is more business when they have to start building centrifuges again.
Everyone wins.
I like your style! Carpet bomb them with nukes - and start it all off with one on mecca!
We need to take a play from the Obama playbook.
Anyone who dares to criticize Our Glorious Leader for any reason is labeled a racist. Anyone who dares to question the “right” to homosexual sodomy marriage is labeled a homophobe.
So we need to start labeling all of the Democrats who criticized Netanyahu as antisemitic. Loudly and consistently.
Call me crazy but it would not surprise me in the least if “Obamas plan” is to actually help Iran get nukes.
I’d call you stupid if you DIDN’T think that that’s the plan.
We may stand alone, but WE WILL STAND
Except Iran’s credit ain’t gonna be that good after the 5 smoking craters appear. What are they gonna pay with, $50/bbl oil?
I will gladly accept that badge of honor!
The only way the Muslim World (Iran) will feel loved by the world is if they are an Equal at the bargaining table regarding World Affairs, The only way to make them an EQUAL is to GIVE THEM NUKES.
I would think even Obama could figure out Bibi’s plan. O is clueless.
Do you notice that no one ever has a plan but Obama ? Wow... He’s so smart / s
I just don't buy this argument. This would require trust in a brutal, deceitful, terrorist dictatorship to be honest about what they're doing, when, and where.
In reality, they could give inspectors full access to the friendly nuclear power development aspect while secretly continuing development of nuclear weapons in a different facility. This "deal" just gives the Iranians plausible deniability which is great for them. Then they'll have a nuke or ten and the world will be a potential target either directly by the Iranians or indirectly through their supported terrorist groups.
Guess who their first target will be?
Or perhaps a blockade.
No oil out — no cash or anything else in.
" Well, Barry, I'm going to take YOUR plan, and I'm going to rewrite it so that it says the exact opposite of everything you wrote. It'll be a slam-dunk success."
Regime Change.
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.