The New York Times Editorial Board publishes an editorial that is truly worthy of only wrapping stinky, dead fish. They’re super enthused by the Iran deal, thumbing their noses at Republicans and those few Democrats who wanted to kill it (and still could, if Mitch McConnell had a spine), but, still, inadverdently tell us a few reasons the deal should be killed
Israel and America After the Iran DealNow that congressional Democrats have blocked a Republican effort to kill the Iran nuclear deal, attention is shifting to what America must do to reassure Israel and its American supporters that the agreement will not harm Israel’s security.
Increased cooperation between America and its regional partners, including the Arab gulf states as well as Israel, is vital to ensuring that Iran sticks to the deal, which curbs its nuclear program in return for sanctions relief. America and its partners need to find ways to keep Iran from using billions of dollars, which were frozen in overseas banks but are due to be released, to expand its use of proxies like Hezbollah to stir trouble abroad.
Huh. So, first, the NYTEB admits that the deal only curbs Iran’s nuclear weapons aspirations, not stops it. Big admission.
Second, they’re tacitly admitting that this deal makes the Middle East a more dangerous place with the deal, and puts Israel directly in the crosshairs of Iran’s support of terrorists. Hooray, #IranDeal!
Democrats and the White House are negotiating some sort of aid package to Israel and other ME nations. One would think that this would go nowhere, considering who controls Congress, but, hey, Mitch McConnell and other squishy Republicans.
Then a little Israel Derangement Syndrome
The focus on America’s obligations often ignores the responsibility Israel and the gulf states have for regional security. Saudi Arabia shares much blame for the rise of extremist groups, while Israel undermines stability by failing to negotiate peace with the Palestinians.
There’s the canard about Israel being to blame for the violence of Palestinians, helpfully forgetting the number of times Israel has made offers, only to have Palestinians blow them off, demand much more, and/or violate them with attacks on Israel’s civilian population.
In the end, what’s most important for Israel’s security is the relationship with the United States. Those ties were put at risk by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and congressional Republicans, who polarized the debate over the Iran deal. A crucial sense of trust needs to be rebuilt. It is unclear that this can happen soon, no matter how many promises of aid and cooperation America makes to Israel.
Au contraire, it’s Obama’s shabby treatment of Israel as an ally and Netanyahu personally that has put the ties at risk. But, none of this would matter all that much if the Iran deal didn’t enable Iran to ramp up its support of terrorism in the Middle East, and specifically against Israel, through removal of sanctions and a massive inflow of cash.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Teach after the recent war policies that you endorsed do you still think you have anything worthwhile to post about that area?
also please do not confuse the State of Israel with the government of Israel
25% of the people living in Israel are not Jews
Iran is going to be a regional power whether you like it or not
You used to advocate strongly for bombing Iran that would only insure their building nukes to prevent being bombed
Military experts say that with bombing Iran would still be able to assemble a bomb within 3 years if it chose to do that
Perhaps you still think it possible to invade and successfully occupy a Mideast country 4 times as big as Iraq???
Those Gulf countries AND Israel supported ISIS in the beginning as a wall against Iran
Let them destroy it
It was their baby
Yes, curbs Iran’s nuclear weapons program for at least 15 years. Without the agreement their weapons program was curbed for about 15 months. Even bombing Iran’s facilities would curb their weapons program for a few years, tops, or something.
No. They’re reassuring Israel. There is no evidence the agreement makes things more dangerous for Israel, otherwise you would have presented it, or something.
John, please post 1 link to where I “strongly advocated” for bombing Iran. Email it to me. [email protected].
Furthermore, I noticed that you didn’t 3ven bother refuting what I wrote.
Headline:
Almost all reports describe Iran getting access to no more than $100 billion (not hundreds of billions) of THEIR money, most of which they owe to creditors, such as China.
It’s questionable whether Iran would invest the remainder in terrorist organizations rather than trying to upgrade their current weakened economy (after all, economic sanctions brought them to the negotiating table).
Anyway, you should either support your claim with evidence or correct your headline to reflect the truth.
Besides, according to the ‘lil one, we can always go back to what we were doing before. or something.
“Yes, it curbs Iran’s nuclear weapons program for 15 years.” Yes, and they get to keep all their facilities and police themselves. Sure.
sp,
How many did you suck today? You’re less coherent than usual. Or something.
j,
You should probably read up on the actual agreement rather than just right-wing blogs. On second thought, never mind.
Jeffery,
Maybe you should contact the Iranians because they are inspecting sites without supervision:
gc,
Maybe you should read the entire AP article you abstracted, and then report back.
Jeffery,
Maybe you should just man up and say that you were wrong.
I know the rest of the article says that the inspection was done according to the protocols, but that doesn’t change the fact that it was done without oversight which is something you said would not happen.
Report back to us when you realize that once again, you were caught being wrong.