An Alternative to a Bad Iran Deal – and War
An Alternative to a Bad Iran Deal – and War
I’d note that while
Netanyahu was in Washington pleading for sanity and hope for survival for his
people, vice president Biden was in Switzerland negotiating with terrorists – Iran
being the foremost state sponsor of terrorism in the world – sponsor of Hamas
& Hezbollah, Houthis in Yemen, Assad in Syria, etc. Who says we don’t negotiate w.
terrorists? And bargain away Israel’s
security? This president continues to
bend over backwards to legitimize rogue regimes, and de-legitimize those like
Israel that are the closest to having our values.
I watched Netanyahu’s
speech and found it powerful and persuasive.
The 50-odd loud, long applauses & standing ovations I think were
symptomatic of the need or thirst for leadership in such a dangerous world – a leadership
we haven’t found in our president. It
was, as some I think have rightly said, Churchillion and Reaganesque.
In keeping with all his
treatment of Israel & Netanyahu, Obama of course dismissed it, saying it
didn’t offer any “viable alternatives.”
And Solomon Obama would know what’s viable and not – he’s proven it so
often (sarcasm intentional). The only
tool in his toolbelt (used in so many other difficult situations) is kicking
the can down the road – that’s his definition of viability. And that’s what his deal does. He must not have listened to the speech (or
if he did, he’s too dense or dogmatic), because, as Bibi pointed out, the
alternative to war & a bad deal is a better deal. And he described it, including sanctions &
restrictions remaining in place until Iran alters its aggressions against
neighbors, terrorism abroad & threats of destruction of Israel. But Obama is so anxious for a politically
expedient deal that he doesn’t care what happens further down the road – as long
as it’s not on his watch. Kerry is the
Chamberlain of our time, just as Netanyahu is the Churchill.
For all the cries by the
Democrats of politicization of the speech, it was the 50-odd Dems who boycotted
who made it partisan – the rest came to show their bipartisan support of Israel,
including for the Iron Dome that protects Israel. And Netanyahu graciously went out of his way
to recognize and be gracious to Harry Reid & President Obama, and point out
that his intent was not political, but looking out for the best interests and
very survival of his country.
Some highlights of his
speech I noted (The complete transcript [& Video] of Netanyahu’s address to Congress is at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/03/03/full-text-netanyahus-address-to-congress/):
:
“America and Israel, we share a common destiny, the destiny of
promised lands that cherish freedom and offer hope.”
I liked his paralleling the story of Purim, in
the book of Esther, where a Persian viceroy plotted to destroy the Jews, and
how “Today the Jewish people face another attempt by yet another Persian
potentate to destroy us.” Their leaders
tweets as much, and they aren’t just speaking of the state, but the people. And he points out that they just as
vehemently call for “death to America,” the “Great Satan.”
I liked his contrast: “America's founding
document promises life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Iran's founding
document pledges death, tyranny, and the pursuit of jihad.” And their founder exhorted followers to “export
the revolution throughout the world."
He cited the long list of Iran-sponsored casualties
globally, including thousands of US soldiers in Iraq, and its domination of 4
Arab capitals. Even in the midst of
negotiations, Iran was blowing up a mock US aircraft carrier in the Gulf.
“Iran and ISIS are competing for the crown of
militant Islam. One calls itself the Islamic Republic. The other calls itself
the Islamic State. Both want to impose a militant Islamic empire first on the
region and then on the entire world….. So when it comes to Iran and ISIS, the
enemy of your enemy is your enemy.”
“the greatest dangers facing our world is the
marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons. To defeat ISIS and let Iran
get nuclear weapons would be to win the battle, but lose the war.
He spoke of the 2 dangers of the current deal
being negotiated: first, leaving their
nuclear infrastructure intact, which gives them a several month break-out time
for producing a bomb. He points out that
Iran has never demonstrated trustability, and inspections have never worked –
in Iraq, N. Korea (who got a bomb), etc.
Iran has continued to hide facilities.
Second, giving them 10 years before they’d be completely unfettered, and
then have a break-out time of weeks to produce not one but many nuclear bombs. And have the intercontinental missiles (not
covered under the treaty) to deliver them anywhere, including the U.S.
“That's why this deal is so bad. It doesn't
block Iran's path to the bomb; it paves Iran's path to the bomb.
Proponents of the deal are banking on Iran’s
radical regime changing for the better. But,
as he says, “Would Iran be less aggressive when sanctions are removed and its
economy is stronger? If Iran is gobbling up four countries right now while it's
under sanctions, how many more countries will Iran devour when sanctions are
lifted? Would Iran fund less terrorism when it has mountains of cash with which
to fund more terrorism?
“Why should Iran's radical regime change for the better when it can enjoy the best of both world's: aggression abroad, prosperity at home?
“Why should Iran's radical regime change for the better when it can enjoy the best of both world's: aggression abroad, prosperity at home?
“we don't
have to bet the security of the world on the hope that Iran will change for the
better. We don't have to gamble with our future and with our children's future.
“We can insist that restrictions on Iran's nuclear program not be lifted for as long as Iran continues its aggression in the region and in the world.”
“We can insist that restrictions on Iran's nuclear program not be lifted for as long as Iran continues its aggression in the region and in the world.”
And here
he lists the 3 aforementioned conditions:
stop aggression against its neighbors, stop supporting terrorism around
the world, and stop threatening to annihilate Israel.
“If Iran
wants to be treated like a normal country, let it act like a normal country.”
He
recognized the presence of Elie Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor, who said “never
again.” He said, “I wish I could promise
you, Elie, that the lessons of history have been learned. I can only urge the leaders
of the world not to repeat the mistakes of the past. Not to sacrifice the future for the present;
not to ignore aggression in the hopes of gaining an illusory peace.”
But,
whether or not the U.S. stands with Israel, he said “For the first time in 100
generations, we, the Jewish people, can defend ourselves. This is why …, as a prime minister of Israel,
I can promise you one more thing: Even if Israel has to stand alone, Israel
will stand.”
And so
the U.S. can invoke either the biblical blessing or curse on itself associated
with those who bless or curse Israel.
Let’s not curse them with this sell-out deal.
Comments
Post a Comment