Do You Think Obama Turned The Other Cheek In The Iran Deal?

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:10:52 -0400

President Obama’s deal with Iran over its nuclear program will have catastrophic consequences for U.S. security and that of our allies, not to mention the millions of innocent civilians now doomed to a prolonged and bloodier Islamic civil war that might well ultimately be settled by a nuclear confrontation when Iran gets the bomb—which is only a matter of time now.

On Monday, Iran’s nuclear program was illegal and by Tuesday it was not only legal but on a path to fulfill all that the mullahs have envisioned of it. As the public and the Congress review the agreement in detail, we’ll see even more clearly what is already evident: the United States gave up its most important redlines in exchange for Iranian promises that an inadequate inspections regime are to verify.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/15/obama-turns-the-other-cheek-in-iran-deal/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=039812d8eb-RSS_The_Federalist_Daily_Updates_w_Transom&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-039812d8eb-83810921

Obama Turns The Other Cheek In Iran Deal

Iran gave up almost nothing and got most of what it wanted, maybe more than it dreamed possible.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 16 at 2015 4:16 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:16:39 -0400

sick egotist

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jul 16 at 2015 4:16 PM

PO1 John Miller — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:16:50 -0400

Whatever he's doing, he's definitely negotiating with terrorists!

Response by MSgt Manuel Diaz made Jul 16 at 2015 4:19 PM

MSgt Manuel Diaz — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:19:08 -0400

I think potus took one from the ayatolla a few times while Putin held his hand and took a selfie with the other

Response by CPO Joseph Grant made Jul 16 at 2015 4:20 PM

CPO Joseph Grant — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:20:36 -0400

One more for his legacy

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Jul 16 at 2015 4:23 PM

Capt Seid Waddell — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:23:55 -0400

I think he turned his lower two cheeks to the U.S.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 16 at 2015 4:28 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:28:04 -0400

We couldn't trust Iran when Pres. Carter was in office. They have not changed their ideology. Iran is just as deceitful now as they were then. Their war cry is, always has been, and will continue to be, "down with the USA and destroy Israel." They can"t be reasoned with, what have they done to convince the American people...NOTHING!

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made Jul 16 at 2015 4:42 PM

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:42:18 -0400

Obama’s news conference was a case for American weakness ...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-press-conference-was-a-case-for-american-

weakness/2015/07/15/bca75e1e-2b3a-11e5-a250-42bd812efc09_story.html?hpid=z4

Obama’s news conference was a case for American weakness

His defenders call it realism; it also may amount to ratifying retreat.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Jul 16 at 2015 4:53 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:53:49 -0400

SGT Private RallyPoint Member, to be honest I don't think this deal with Iran will be considered a historical victory. For instance the Camp David Accords hammered out between Israel and Egypt during President Carter's administration in 1978 between Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar el-Sādāt and officially titled the “Framework for Peace" were considered historical at the time and since. The brief period in historical terms during the Arab spring and winter when the Muslim Brotherhood dominated Egypt notwithstanding. Israel and Egypt have generally maintained a cooperative detente first when dealing with Hamas and know with ISIS.
President Obama wants to add an international agreement feather to his cap. I expect this current deal with Iran will go the way of similar deals with Iran and Saddam era Iraq - unenforceable failures.

Response by CPT Ahmed Faried made Jul 16 at 2015 4:59 PM

CPT Ahmed Faried — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:59:50 -0400

At the risk of distorting the echo chamber I'd like to post another article that discusses the deal:

https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/07/14/its-a-damn-good-deal-iran-nuclear-agreement-joint-comprehensive-plan-of-action/

It’s a Damn Good Deal

Don't listen to the inevitable naysayers right now — there's a decade of juicy "leaks" about Iranian malfeasance to come.

Response by LTC John Shaw made Jul 16 at 2015 5:36 PM

LTC John Shaw — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 17:36:09 -0400

SGT Private RallyPoint Member too soon to say if we are really hosed. I want to see what additional details come out of the discussion and debate in Congress...

Response by COL Charles Williams made Jul 17 at 2015 12:21 AM

COL Charles Williams — Fri, 17 Jul 2015 00:21:36 -0400

No, I do not.

Response by COL Ted Mc made Jul 17 at 2015 3:35 AM

COL Ted Mc — Fri, 17 Jul 2015 03:35:19 -0400

SGT Private RallyPoint Member - Sergeant; I got as far as "On Monday, Iran’s nuclear program was illegal ..." turned off.

The fact of the matter is that there is not now, and never has been, any evidence that Iran was acting "illegally".

The Iranian government may (and undoubtedly was) doing something that the US government did not want it to do - but that does not make what the Iranian government was doing "illegal", it only makes it something that the US government did not want to see done.

I do agree, however, that Iran "gave up practically nothing" because what it gave up most likely didn't exist in the real world and only existed in the minds of some members of the US government. [The possibility that the Iranian government deliberately put that thought into those minds so that it could negotiate away something that it didn't have in return for something that it wanted cannot be discounted - after all, that's what Qaddafi and the Libyans did.]

However, there is more to the situation than just slamming President Obama (although the article's author really doesn't seem to think so).

The reality of the situation was that either the US gave Iran something it wanted in order to stop doing what the US thought it was doing (which Iran probably wasn't doing, but was quite content to have the US think it was doing) or the US had to actually wage war on Iran (and risk finding as much "Iranian Nuclear Weapons Development Program" as it found "Iraqi Vast Stockpile of WMD").

Either way, the US was going to "lose" something and the Iranians were going to "win" something. The only question was "How much?".

Once the UN sanctions are lifted, the US can impose all the American sanctions on Iran it wants to and can bluster all it wants to about an "Iranian Nuclear Threat" but neither the Iranians nor anyone else is going to care one little bit - not even if the US imposes American sanctions on every country that trades with Iran, and on every country that trades with a country that trades with Iran, and on every country that trades with a country that trades with a country that trades with Iran.

Did the US get snookered? No.

Did the US snooker itself? Yes.

The time to "take out" Iran (if there ever was such a time) was in 2007 - but there was an election year coming up and there was a "legacy" to protect.

Response by COL Ted Mc made Jul 17 at 2015 12:59 PM

COL Ted Mc — Fri, 17 Jul 2015 12:59:25 -0400

Here is the full text of the agreement

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/full-text-iran-deal-120080.html

Here is one take on it

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/16/obama-agrees-to-massive-stimulus-plan-for-iran/

The $150,000,000,000 that Briebart is talking about turns out to be Iranian money currently "sequestered" but which would probably have to be returned to Iran in any event - eventually.

Full text of the Iran deal

Read the full text of the historic Iran nuclear agreement.

Response by TSgt Kenneth Ellis made Jul 17 at 2015 1:09 PM

TSgt Kenneth Ellis — Fri, 17 Jul 2015 13:09:17 -0400

It's all about Obama legacy. We blow off North Korea as a nut job. But now Obama has started a new arms race in the Middle East. And Iran as up to 150 billion to support terror. And I hate that smirk on Obama face when he tells Congress you come up with a better plan. How many times did he move his own red lines. And I can see Kery begging please, please, pretty please. Kerry has one talent and it is not negotiating. He is a number one Giggalo. Now Obama is going to the United Nations to sell it. We will have to wait and see what the Congress and Senate does. The Constitution is cut and dry about ratifying a treaty. But Obama calls it an agreement not a treaty. And now you need a supper majority to do anything. And I do not trust the Democrats.

Response by MSgt Jim Bain made Jul 23 at 2015 1:14 PM

MSgt Jim Bain — Thu, 23 Jul 2015 13:14:12 -0400

He'll do what he want's to do, just like he always has, no regard for what the people think......2016 can not come fast enough!!!!!