Iran & Proper Perspective

Congress hasn’t given up entirely on standing up to the Iran deal. The House voted its disapproval and now the Senate leadership (?) promises to have another vote. Most believe it will come to nothing because even if they reach the 60 votes to stop the filibuster, there is no way they can make it to 67 to override Obama’s veto.

As I said in a previous posting, the sad part of all this is the Senate’s acquiescence to the terms of the debate, accepting the idea of finding 2/3 opposed to it rather than handling it as a treaty—as the Constitution requires—that needed 2/3 approval. Under those conditions, it never would have passed.

Constitutional President

If only the first scenario had played out.

This puts the Obama administration and the Democrat party in a strange position, trusting in an Iranian leadership that has publicly stated its desire to destroy Israel and seeks to eventually do the same to America:

Jolly Good Mullah

 

We’re told, of course, not to worry—this will keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons for a few years, even as news breaks that Iran has “unexpectedly” discovered new uranium sources within its boundaries that they didn’t know were there before. If you believe that . . .

But neither America nor Israel have a real reason to be concerned, right?

Relax

Well, maybe it just depends on one’s perspective. That perspective can be sharpened, though, by events:

Perspective

President Obama tells us we are safer now. There are others who don’t see it that way:

Patience

As someone who lived through the Reagan years and saw him deal with other nations through strength, what I’m witnessing now is a truly sad spectacle:

Great Nation

The difference couldn’t be more stark.

On This New 9/11

Today is another 9/11, potentially worse than the one we experienced in 2001. What do I mean? As I write this, no one has yet died in a massive terrorist attack. We fervently hope the day will pass with no repeat of that horrific act.

Yet yesterday, on the eve of this new 9/11, the United States Senate, in effect, voted to give $150 billion and a clear path to the development of nuclear weapons to the world’s most aggressive terrorist state.

By doing so, we may be ushering in a future 9/11 that will make the one in 2001 pale in comparison.

Brighter Tomorrow

Acceptance of this Iran deal never should have happened. Republicans started us down the wrong path when they passed a bill that didn’t call for the deal to be handled as a treaty, as the Constitution clearly specifies it should be. If they had stayed true to our founding document, it would have taken 67 senators to allow the deal to be ratified.

Instead, they accepted the Obama administration’s ground rule that it wasn’t a treaty, and that it would now take 60 senators to stop it and then 67 to override the president’s veto. They did everything backwards, thereby assuring Obama would get his way.

So the Democrats, who have overwhelmingly lined up with Obama, simply had to filibuster the bill, which they did effectively, and the Republican leadership couldn’t muster the 60 votes needed to move to a vote on the measure.

Despite a personal plea from Benjamin Netanyahu and the prescient warnings of many that this will lead to all-out nuclear weapons development, not only by Iran, but by other nations in the Middle East, Democrats put the interest of their party ahead of the national security of the United States.

Pledge Allegiance

Money will now flow to the Iranian terrorist regime, which, by the terms of this agreement, will now do its own inspections of its nuclear program, a provision that reaches a new low in diplomacy:

Works for Us

This is Obama’s Neville Chamberlain moment, as he declares peace in our time and the Iranians prepare to start the countdown to Armageddon:

Arms Race

But all that matters to our president is his so-called legacy. He believes he now has attained the prestige of a visionary world leader. He wanted a historic document. Well, it’s historic, to be sure. It’s the end product of all his failed policies toward terrorism.

Citizen of the World

I’m always cautious about using Biblical prophecy as a lens through which to see every political action. In my lifetime, there have been many individuals that some have called the Antichrist—Henry Kissinger and Mikhail Gorbachev, to name just two. All such pronouncements eventually cause embarrassment when their foolishness is exposed.

There’s also much ambiguity and disagreement about how to interpret the book of Revelation, so I hold back from being definitive about some act being the harbinger of the end times.

But if any development might be called the next step toward the end of all things, we may have just witnessed it.

Obama’s Iran Fantasy

When Congress reconvenes after its summer recess, the Iran deal will be front and center. We now know some details about a secret side-deal agreed to by Iran and the IEAE, which is supposed to be the international inspector of nuclear development. We now know that the IEAE is allowing Iran to conduct the inspections itself.

Yes, you read that correctly.

Inspected by Iran

How does this not defy all reason and logic? How can anyone believe it is wisdom to let the nation developing nuclear weapons be its own inspector? It will report to the IEAE what it “discovers.” Right.

Yet President Obama is relentless in his push to get congressional approval for this deal. Hey, he got Iran talking, didn’t he? Isn’t that a major accomplishment in itself?

Iran Finally Talking

He was counting on his party to back him, but some are balking, like New York Senator Chuck Schumer.

Enough About Him

Only one other Democrat senator has come out against the agreement thus far, but others are wavering, while Republicans are forming a fairly solid block against it. It may be that Schumer has come out simply because there are enough Democrats who will go along with it that he has been given permission to oppose it publicly for his own political gain. His character in the past shows that could be the case. We’ll see.

Obama’s people also have hinted that even if Congress disapproves and is able to override his veto, he will depend on the UN’s approval and proceed as if Congress is non-existent. Well, that’s been his pattern already, so it’s not too hard to believe.

It is obvious that our president is far more amenable to Iranian leaders who have pledged to wipe Israel off the map and who are in the process of figuring out how to hit America with nuclear missiles than he is to anyone who goes against him politically:

One Response

Combine this fantasy Iranian deal with his fantasy about Cuba, with whom he has now normalized relations while Cuban dissidents continue to languish in its prisons, and you have his worldview clearly on display:

Peace in Our Time

In the sixth year of Barack I, emperor of America, we are in grave danger. We need a radical regime change:

Voting for Trump

Is there anyone besides me who sees a problem with that solution?

The New Munich & Yalta–Only Worse

Although the details of the new “agreement” with Iran have not been fully released, enough of them have become public to make it clear this is one of the all-time great sellouts in American history, going beyond even the Yalta Conference at the end of WWII when the store was given away to the Soviets.

Nearly every Republican lawmaker and presidential candidate have already come out against it. The comparisons to former British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, who infamously sold out Czechoslovakia to Hitler at the Munich Conference in 1938 have begun to proliferate—and rightly so.

Chamberlain-Obama

What do we already know about this agreement? Only that the negotiators on the American side, led by Secretary of State John Kerry, backed down on every point that they had told us they would not compromise.

Despite Obama’s rhetoric yesterday in his announcement, the agreement gives the green light to Iran to develop nuclear weapons. Oh, they are supposed to put it on hold for now, but in about a decade, all constraints are lifted.

What else was dropped from the discussions? They don’t have to be held to immediate inspections to be sure they are keeping their word. Any request to carry out an inspection must first come to a committee—on which Iran is a member—for a decision. And that committee has up to 24 days to make the decision. So much for “snap” inspections.

But that doesn’t bother our president or secretary of state. They have Iran’s word, and that is sufficient for them.

Got Nukes

All economic sanctions against Iran are now dropped, and the result will be billions of dollars that this terrorist nation can now devote to more terrorism. They can even obtain ballistic missiles.

What a great deal—for Iran.

It's a Deal

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, clear-headed as always, immediately denounced this deal, knowing full well that Israel is now more threatened than ever, given that Iran has never walked back its promise to wipe that nation off the map. Netanyahu put the world on notice that the deal will not be recognized as legitimate by Israel; they will defend themselves as necessary.

This comes down to the biggest problem of all: Obama’s naïve and foolish belief that once Iran is welcomed into the so-called community of nations, it will magically become civilized and change its very nature. He continues to see the U.S. as the problem in the world; if we are just “nice” enough, all evil will drain out of terrorists.

The academic word for that is “baloney.” Even while these negotiations were ongoing, Iran’s leaders were publicly giving voice to their true intentions:

Famous Last Words

Then there’s the constitutional issue. Article II, section 2, of the Constitution states, rather clearly, “He [the president] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.” Notice the 2/3 requirement. Any treaty negotiated with foreign nations must come before the Senate and get the approval of 2/3 of that body.

That’s not happening in this instance.

Verbal slight of hand is being used to say this is not a treaty, but merely an “executive agreement,” an entity that doesn’t exist in the Constitution. So the administration argues that it can go into effect without the 2/3 concurrence of the Senate.

Instead, it will go to the Senate for a vote, and if 3/5 of the senators (60 of them) disapprove, it will be rejected but subject to the president’s veto. Should that occur, the Senate will then have to come up with a 2/3 vote to override the veto.

Notice that the entire approval process has been reversed. Rather than a 2/3 approval up front (67 senators in favor), this agreement could go into effect provided only 51 approve of it. The burden will be on those who disapprove to get to 60 votes. And then they will have to round up 67 to override a veto.

This is blatantly unconstitutional. But what else is new in a Barack Obama presidency?

This deal is worse than Munich or Yalta because neither of them allowed the development of nuclear weapons in a terrorist state. Republicans need to stand firm. Democrats who say they are opposed to terrorism and are in favor of remaining a strong ally of Israel need to find a backbone somewhere. That’s the only way this abomination will be defeated.

The Iran Fantasy

If you are tired of hearing about Iran and the “deal” now being negotiated with that terrorist nation, I apologize up front. You may now go to another website and revel in recipes, entertainment news, or other such essential topics for your day. Staving off a nuclear attack on America is obviously not something you want to think about. Don’t let it bother you; go ahead and concentrate on what’s really important.

For the rest of you, let’s have some straight talk. I’ve written rather extensively on what I perceive of President Obama’s fantasyland picture of the world. With respect to his views on other nations, this has now come to the forefront, and it’s on the verge of hurting us in ways we thought incomprehensible earlier. What was only a vague threat before has now become stark reality.

If you never realized it before, you have to come face-to-face with the fact that this president loathes Israel and its leader, yet somehow thinks that Iran and its leaders, even when they tweet out “Death to America,” are somehow trustworthy. This is a fantasyland beyond the pale. To what can this be compared? Providing Hitler with secrets to the atomic bomb? Giving the Soviet Union access to national security documents? It boggles the mind.

Yet what does the news media concentrate on? A letter written by Republican senators telling Iran that agreements must be approved by the Congress, a simple declaration of how our constitutional form of government is supposed to work. For making this public statement, those senators are pilloried by many Obama apologists. Yet what danger did that letter introduce? Again, let’s be honest about the real problem:

Which Is Worse

Yet the Obama-Kerry initiative seems oblivious to that real threat. Their perception of Iran is somewhat skewed, to say the least:

Deal

As in the movie The Wizard of Oz we’re supposed to ignore what’s behind the curtain, so to speak:

Teeny Weeny

President Obama, not only by his insistence on finalizing this deal, but by his overall foreign policy, has put his country on the edge of a cliff, as if it were his goal all along to destroy us. Is that his real intent, or is he just that foolish, blinded by his ideology? Either way, we’re in the worst shape with regard to national security than we have ever been, and I say that as a historian of American history with a lot of research on the Cold War under my belt. So that’s saying a lot.

Former vice president Dick Cheney has publicly called Obama the worst president in his lifetime. To be fair and balanced, I feel I must offer the other side’s view as well:

Disagree

I report, you decide.

Iran Negotiations vs. Reality

The negotiations with Iran have been as front and center lately as the Hillary Clinton e-mails. As we know, the administration deplored the invitation to Benjamin Netanyahu to speak to the Congress. That speech went well for Netanyahu, not so well for the administration.

Netanyahu’s concerns are obvious: the survival of Israel as Iran moves steadily toward a nuclear capability; the fear that these negotiations will lead to disaster for his people because they don’t seem to rule out that continual development of nuclear weapons.

This rising concern over the Obama administration’s approach to Iran led 47 Republican senators to sign on to a letter addressed to the Iranian government, letting that government know that any agreement with Obama that doesn’t go through the Senate’s ratification process for treaties is an agreement that has no legs and can be dismissed by the next president.

Tom CottonThe letter is no more than a simple statement of fact. They could have sent a copy of our Constitution to Iran and the same point would have been made. Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas was the principal senator behind the letter, and now he is being roundly attacked for “interfering” with the executive’s authority to negotiate with another nation.

One of the more delusional responses to this letter is to drag out the Logan Act, written just before the turn of the nineteenth century after a private citizen, George Logan, went to France and tried to work out some arrangement with the French government after the XYZ Affair. Some have called the senators who signed this letter “traitors,” and a petition to prosecute these senators, based on the Logan Act, has received more than 100,000 signatures.

How silly. The senators are not private citizens interfering with government negotiations; they are duly elected representatives of the people/states who have an obligation to ensure that the Constitution is followed. My only caveat with their action is that perhaps the letter should have been addressed to President Obama himself instead of to the Iranian government. But the letter only states the truth of how our government is supposed to operate. The Obama administration, however, chiefly through Secretary of State John Kerry, is trying to go it alone, hoping to circumvent the Senate entirely.

Nuclear Clubhouse

John KerryKerry, testifying before Congress yesterday, walked back earlier statements about making sure Congress approves any agreement that arises out of these negotiations. Keep in mind that all treaties with foreign governments must be ratified by a 2/3 vote in the Senate. To avoid that, Obama and Kerry are saying this is not a treaty, but merely a “non-binding” agreement with the executive branch.

Think about that for a moment. If this so-called agreement is “non-binding,” of what value is it? Does anyone with even half a brain believe that Iran will abide by a “non-binding” piece of paper? In a sane world, that would be branded as ludicrous. It comes down to this: Obama and Kerry think they can trust Iran’s leaders to keep their word, but they cannot trust the Congress.

Dangerous Lunatics

We are in a dangerous world situation with Iran as the primary instigator of the danger. Yet we are willing to trust that government over our own elected representatives?

Little League

That kind of thinking—if it can be called that at all—will ultimately lead us to disaster.

The Iranian Deal: Realism vs. Idealism

Obamacare has been so front and center lately—and will continue to be so because of its effect on everyone—that our foreign policy with respect to Iran has taken a back seat in the public’s mind. Foreign policy usually takes a back seat, as we’re nearly always more concerned about what we see happening here at home. Yet what happens here in the future is vitally connected to what’s happening over there.

Iran DealWe have blustered for years now about Iran’s development of nuclear weapons. Presidents Bush and Obama have pledged not to allow such development, the basis for that concern being the radical Islamic ideology that motivates Iran. The first country to be menaced by any nuclear weapons in Iran will be Israel, which is our only staunch ally in the Middle East. Turning our backs on Israel would be a betrayal of the highest magnitude, yet this new “deal” that the Western nations have just agreed to with Iran seems to do just that.

Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, calls this deal a “historic mistake.” James Carafano, in National Review, calls this “Munich II,” the classic sellout of Czechoslovakia by the Western powers to Hitler in 1938. The first Munich rested on the “ridiculous notion that Hitler could be satiated.” Carafano says it is  “equally ludicrous” to believe that Iran is really open to giving up its nuclear development. Sanctions were working, to some extent; that’s what brought the Iranians to the table. Now, in this new deal, we are easing most of those sanctions. Carafano then writes about the two different worldviews in our approach to Iran: realism vs. idealism.

The realists, he says, know that sanctions were only there for one reason: bring down this regime. Idealists believe that sanctions were the “magic button” that would make the Iranians reasonable. He continues:

The parting of the ways between realists and idealists is not about two different visions of the path to a peaceful future. In the case of this particular foreign-policy conundrum, the realist approach is based on a full awareness of whom the West is really dealing with. The idealists’ assessment is delusional. . . .

The only “fact” offered so far to prove that the pact will lead to something other than a good deal for Iran is the blithe assurance that the deal was negotiated by really smart people who know what they are doing.

Are these the same “smart people” who orchestrated our response to Benghazi? We also need to realize that President Obama has a soft spot for Islamic radicalism and a seething disdain for Israel. How comforting is that? He’s always been far more willing to negotiate with Islamists than with others he perceives as his enemies:

Negotiations

I, for one, am not in my comfort zone when I think about his negotiating skills and his promises:

Iran Nuke Deal

Obama is one of those idealists Carafano wrote about, who think the Iranians will see the light, and with whom we can negotiate in good faith. As he said, this is delusional:

Bridge

Then again, maybe we just don’t know how clever he and John Kerry have been in all this. Perhaps we don’t understand their trump card:

Secret Plan

Yes, that might do it—a sure pathway for the destruction of any enemy.