The post North Korea, Iran and 45: a brief study in illogic appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>The post North Korea, Iran and 45: a brief study in illogic appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>The post Nuclear agreement: There is no “better deal” with Iran appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>
Those who think “a better deal” with Iran is possible are beyond just dreamers– they are dangerous and naive fantasizers. Believing that the US can unilaterally kill the deal, that our partners including Russia will think that is just fine and agree to toughen the sanctions (much less just keep the current ones going), and that Iran will be squeezed so badly they will be forced back to the negotiating table and agree to even stronger conditions, is, quite simply, farkakte. (Yiddish for, um, screwed up.)
As it says in this column in Israel’s Haaretz newspaper, US officials are derisive of the claim that this agreement can be reversed, and that…
…the signed agreement would be revoked, the existing sanctions would be tightened, and Iran, rather than breaking out and racing towards a nuclear bomb, would meekly agree to return to the negotiating table in order to hammer out a deal that would inevitably be worse that the one Tehran already has now.
The column also rebuts claims that Obama and Kerry ignored Netanyahu’s objections. In fact, they met several of them head on, and Netanyahu kept moving the goalposts. And it continues,
In any case, even if one assumes that Iran will try to violate its ongoing obligations and try to build a bomb, the advantages of the agreement outweigh its disadvantages. “They will be more transparent, we will have better knowledge of their abilities, we will be partners to the security arrangements on their nuclear installations, they will be without plutonium and without [nuclear facility] Fordow,” the [administration] officials said – and with a lot to lose.
In the real world, and not some fantasy world that the deal’s opponents are living in, this is a good agreement with the toughest inspections in history and the security of knowing that Iran will not have a bomb for 15-20 years or more. Kill the deal, and Iran will have the bomb much sooner, and we will not have the strict inspections to monitor them.
The post Nuclear agreement: There is no “better deal” with Iran appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>The post Republicans’ letter to Iran: Indefensible appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>
Are there no Republican leaders with a sense of decency anymore? Any of them who respect the office of the President, even if they don’t agree with the office holder? Can anyone defend these actions by the leadership of a major party?
In the past week we have seen the Senate Majority Leader tell states to ignore a law upheld by the US Supreme Court, and then send a letter to a foreign leader telling him not to negotiate with the president of the USA.
It is just sick. The most flagrant anti-Americanism I have seen by a party in my lifetime.
Paul Waldman writes, in the Washington Post:
“But as has happened so many times before, Republicans seem to have concluded that there is one set of rules and norms that apply in ordinary times, and an entirely different set that applies when Barack Obama is the president. You no longer need to show the president even a modicum of respect. You can tell states to ignore the law. You can sabotage delicate negotiations with a hostile foreign power by communicating directly with that power.
“I wonder what they’d say if you asked them whether it would be acceptable for Democrats to treat the next Republican president that way. My guess is that the question wouldn’t even make sense to them. After all, that person would be a Republican. So how could anyone even think of such a thing?”
Read the full text of the letter here.
The post Republicans’ letter to Iran: Indefensible appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>The post Reactions–left and right–to the Iran deal: Progressive Blog Digest appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>Editor’s note: Here’s a look at how the left and the right are reacting to the agreement between Iran and the P5+1 [UN Security Council permanent five nations, plus Germany] to a moratorium on nuclear weapons production. This is an excerpt from the daily Progressive Blog Digest. Read the full feed, with additional links, here.
Left
http://my.firedoglake.com/fairleft/2013/11/24/can-the-left-handle-iran-nuclear-deal-good-news/
Can the left handle Iran nuclear deal good news?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/11/24/why-the-iranian-nuclear-deal-is-dangerous.html
Why the Iranian Nuclear Deal Is Dangerous
We Have a Deal With Iran. A Good One.
http://www.samefacts.com/2013/11/international-affairs/middle-east-politics/the-iranian-deal/
Congratulations to Secretary of State John Kerry and his boss. This seems like a remarkably good deal. . . .
I’m curious about whether there’s a single Republican officeholder with the guts, smarts, and patriotism to say out loud that this is good for the country.
Right
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/11/25/obama-crushes-the-neocons.html
The agreement signed with Iran on Sunday is a momentous step forward. Yet Republicans will try to subvert the success by playing to their Obama-hating base. . . .
@JohnCornyn: Amazing what WH will do to distract attention from O-care [read on]
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/corker-claims-iran-taking-advantage-weak
Corker Claims Iran Is Taking Advantage Of ‘Weak’ Obama Administration
The post Reactions–left and right–to the Iran deal: Progressive Blog Digest appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>The post 10 almost-certain predictions for 2013 appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>1. No team will win hockey’s Stanley Cup because the season will be completely wiped out. As frequently is the case, it will be no fault of the players.
2. Grover Norquist will be a name heard less in December 2013 than January 2013.
3. No changes will be made to Social Security.
4. The St. Louis Cardinals’ Carlos Beltran will spend over half of the season on the disabled list.
5. Rush Limbaugh’s ratings will go down.
6. At least five Republicans who are possible 2016 presidential candidates will each visit Iowa five times or more.
7. Iran will not be attacked by Israel.
8. Scott Brown will not be in the U.S. Senate.
9. David Axelrod will shave off his mustache.
10. Neither the home mortgage deduction nor the charitable deduction will be reduced.
The post 10 almost-certain predictions for 2013 appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>The post U.S. should not subcontract Iran policy to Israel appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>Republicans are complaining that Obama should have met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the subject of Iran’s nuclear capability. However, Netanyahu wants the U.S. to announce its “red line” for going to war with Iran. As David Ignatius points out in a recent Washington Post column,
“Obama believes he has drawn the U.S. red line as clearly as a superpower ever should, given that some ambiguity is useful in deterring an adversary. For the record, Obama said in an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic in March that it was ‘a profound national security interest of the United States to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.’ U.S. intelligence would provide ‘a pretty long lead time in which we will know that they are making that attempt …’
… Netanyahu should understand that no country can allow another to impose the conditions under which it will go to war. The Israeli leader wants a tripwire that would trigger military action. But presidents don’t turn over that power of war and peace, even to their best friends. Indeed, it’s precisely because Obama means what he says about going to war that he wants maximum flexibility in how and when he takes action.”
Should the U.S. give up all flexibility and cede its decision-making power to Israel? Ignatius continues,
“The United States needs to take control of the deadly confrontation with Iran, rather than being cajoled and buffeted by its smaller, weaker ally. Obama needs to own the policy of prevention he has declared.”
Read more here.
The post U.S. should not subcontract Iran policy to Israel appeared first on Occasional Planet.
]]>