President Trump yesterday announced that the U.S. would no longer consider itself bound by the deal his predecessor had made with Iran. His critics, both here and abroad, are writhing and hissing like Gollum with the Elven-rope around his neck:
To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, only someone with a heart of stone could witness their pain without laughing.
If they wanted a deal that would survive Mr. Obama’s grip on power, they ought to have made the thing in the light of day, not based it on Iranian lies and secret side-deals, not bribed the mullahs with pallet-loads of untraceable cash delivered by aircraft in the middle of the night*, made Iran commit to no-notice inspections, made them forswear their support of terror and destabilization of the region, made them actually sign the damn thing (which they never did), not have squashed ongoing investigations into Hezbollah drug and money-laundering for fear of irking Tehran, and — above all — sought the consent of the Senate, as the Framers intended.
The arrangement President Trump has now terminated was never an agreement by the United States, in accordance with the Contitution’s prescriptions for entering into such things, and so it was never binding upon the United States. It was nothing more than a smarmy little “understanding” between a man temporarily in control of a nation he does not love (egged on by his Iranian-born Wormtongue) and a ruthless enemy permanently committed to our destruction. That man and his cadre having been to our astonishingly good fortune ejected from power, his crooked little backroom deals and his eight-year legacy of cramping and maleficent executive orders may now be swept into the gutter. Thank you, Mr. Trump, for doing so.
*Where did that money come from, anyway?
18 Comments
I think before getting high and mighty about Obongo’s deal with Iran, we should look at who we are friends with.
Anyone who thinks that Riyadh shouldn’t have been glassed for their role in the 9/11 attacks has a broken moral compass.
Not a great deal, but the best that could be achieved after intense negotiation. It stopped Iran from developing nuclear weapons, although maybe just pushed it back a few years. It also gave Iran a measure of economic success, which it’s people might be loathe to lose if they get used to it for a while and bring greater pressure to bear on their government to continue to negotiate to retain it.
If this agreement disintegrates now iran will continue to develop their weapons immediately.
They will also bear greater animosity towards the US as they have stuck to the agreement assiduously and will feel betrayed if we do not.
Isn’t this the way we live together peacefully? Everyone gives a little and becomes a little economically entwined and we gradually grow closer until we one day can be friends and then don’t feel the need to develop weapons to chuck at each other?
Satire.
I certainly hope so.
Quite, Mr. Milk.
However small beans though it was we, at least through our respective Congressional delegations (I know I called each and everyone of mine) overrode at least the one we know was broken.
“The U.S. Congress on Wednesday overwhelmingly rejected President Barack Obama’s veto of legislation allowing relatives of the victims of the September 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia, the first veto override of his eight-year presidency.”
http://www.newsweek.com/september-11-victims-bill-becomes-law-504010
“Greater” Debbie?
“Assiduously”?
Roger,
As someone who knows people who died in those towers (my daughter watched from a schoolroom across the street as they fell), I understand the temptation. The sandy conditions around Riyadh would produce a satisfyingly glassy effect.
Back in the real world, however, it will be interesting to see how the 9/11 lawsuit (made possible under JASTA, Obama’s only veto override) proceeds. And it’s worth noting that things are changing in Saudi Arabia.
All that aside, I’m glad to see us out of the Iran deal. Those who wish it were still in effect now have a splendid opportunity to negotiate an agreement, on far more favorable terms, that is actually made in the name of the United States of America.
And Malcolm,
A negotiated agreement sent to and ratified by Congress.
Well, JK! Your comments appeared as I was typing mine.
“Great minds think alike”, they say.
(Or is it “fools seldom differ”?)
“Isn’t this the way we live together peacefully? Everyone gives a little and becomes a little economically entwined and we gradually grow closer until we one day can be friends and then don’t feel the need to develop weapons to chuck at each other?”
Nothing like the smell of oxytocin in the morning. Gotta love that 19th Amendment!
Speaking of calling Representatives (which I’ve just seconds ago, hung up the phone – not bothering with the local office rather I punched in the 202 area code).
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/house-immigration-discharge-petition/
“My guy” telling me “It’s complicated” – House rules I’m reckoning, queen of the hill something or another. Still I assured him I’d still support him next time he has to defend his seat.
Sausage!
Thankfully, it would still have to pass the Senate.
In reference to your daughter here Malcolm and what she saw (my God!), I’ve found The Thinking Housewife to be a bit too much nowadays with her conspiracy theories. Over the last few years I think she’s just gone off the deep end, nullifying her other hard-edged but thoughtful commentary (I’m very much with her Europhilia, for instance). Thanks for your suggestion though.
JK, I’m afraid I didn’t quite understand your point in a previous thread about weak men. While I’ll admit that there may be a “just so story” aspect about it, my argument is that in the past women needed desperately strong males who would protect them from the saber-toothed tiger or the neighboring tribes who would rape them in the case of war. This feminine instinct survived over millennia and very much operates in relations between the sexes today. Am I missing something here – please tell me.
Riyadh should “have been glassed”. ? Historical context! Oil dependence.
Worry not Jason!
My quibble has solely to do with the use of the specific evolutionary.
Stay with me here Jason ’cause I’m gonna have to travel The Way Back Machine which has to do with me as a wee lad and my MD Presbyterian Dad. The guy whose name appeared on my birth certificate and “somehow” managed (until his death) to remain in cahoots with the woman (my Mom) who, together, managed putting the kibosh on, seemingly, practically all my well-laid schemes.
You’ve maybe heard Jason “a dog year” reckoned as seven in human terms?
Well now – let’s switch that lifespan to that of birds? (Yes yes I know parrots have been recorded to live for centuries but, for the purposes of my presentation might we go with hummingbirds?
Anyway (and this short bio Jason ought explain mine and Malcolm’s “affection” for the other) My Dad post-Korean War made himself [with the help of the GI Bill] an MD. Malcolm’s Mother [see Malcolm’s top-linked Allison Calder Pollack] and my Mother, very closely, sharing the same birthdate.
Both our Dads could reasonably be considered scientists. Malcolm’s and my own birthdate spaced barely three weeks apart.
We were “E-Introduced” through the auspices of a mutual friend who, for the past decades[?] enjoys a tenured professorship at a university based in the ROK.
Allow me again to begin “Anyway”?
My Dad and I were in transit via car on an Arkansas gravel road (which was common until I returned some period after I left the service of Uncle Sam) … Somehow I noticed the adult birds which, at the time, nested and raised the hatchlings very close to the edge of the gravel road – seemed to exercise “a Death Wish” by very nearly always flying directly into the path of Dad’s vehicular behemoth.
I cannot recall my (about eight years old) question/observation to my Dad, “Why don’t they [the adult birds] learn to avoid that?”
However I do recall with absolute certitude my Dad’s response:
“Evolution will take care of that.”
And now as I’m “enjoying” my 60s – it [evolution] seems to have done just that. For birds at any rate. Evolution apparently goes slower for terrapins and armadillos “a good thing” I consider the buzzards would say if buzzards shared the mimicry gene with parrots. Buzzards have, lucky for the kind, learned to take flight prior to becoming Possum food. (I suppose evolution far as possums are concerned, takes longer too – I can’t recall a trip of mine to the liquor store which hasn’t featured a buzzarding possum picnic.)
You perhaps Jason recognize my peculiar methodology far as my think-process goes?
Well Jason if you don’t, join Malcolm in the same boat.
The thought occurs Jason before I tap “Post Comment” that maybe this little bit of the rhetorical, When will they ever learn, might help.
(Probably not though Jason – Malcolm, a decade on still pesters me about clarification.)
Either this Pollack fellow is an idiot – or he’s convinced the people reading this drivel are
Daniel,
It could be both!