yes, a great achievement, truly great.
with regard to NKorea, unfortunately that leadership is either insane or living in an alternate reality, which is about the same thing. no agreement with them would be worth the paper it's written on, even if that leadership actually negotiated/agreed/signed off on it.
The only way this would happen with NKorea is if Kim were overthrown.
with regard to NKorea, unfortunately that leadership is either insane or living in an alternate reality, which is about the same thing. no agreement with them would be worth the paper it's written on, even if that leadership actually negotiated/agreed/signed off on it.
The only way this would happen with NKorea is if Kim were overthrown.
4
Interesting development just before the Iowa caucuses. While I fully respect President Obama's diplomatic focus and achievements, one has to ask what did we offer the Iranians in order to secure this 'diplomatic victory' at this crucial time in the election cycle. If I were to be skeptical, it would appear that this deal is simply a politically motivated transaction with the Iranians, not some watershed event where they actually changing their views or politics. And if this is true, then the only thing of substance here is that we got our prisoners back and the Democrats have a political victory to spin. But at what cost? Time will tell what the actual transaction here was and what lasting effect there will be between the US and Iran.
2
I think we owe John Kerry, Barak Obama, Hassan Rouhani & Javad Zarif (and their "teams"), a debt of gratitude for their time, perseverance & optimism as well as a demonstration of "Diplomacy".
There are benefits to seeing a glass as half-full rather then half-empty, despite historical *sensitivities.
* I probably should leave well enough alone, but we have not always acted "honorably" toward Iran.
There are benefits to seeing a glass as half-full rather then half-empty, despite historical *sensitivities.
* I probably should leave well enough alone, but we have not always acted "honorably" toward Iran.
35
Nuclear weapons were first developed to secure the peace. They soon evolved into a means of achieving world domination. More recently, they have taken on a regional significance. The U.S. just revealed that we are retooling our arsenal in favor of tactical weapons, whose principal use is local. The justification was basically that our arsenal had not changed in sum -- a nonsense excuse. I'd say Obama has taken one step forward and one step back. No Nobel Peace Prize this year, please.
5
It is critical that we can deal with those with whom we share no friendship. Iran celebrates death to America day and calls upon its god to destroy us. My boss is a liar. The dog down the streets growls at me. All of these are unpleasant but iran will not become rational and secular anytime soon, I need my job, and I can't outrun the dog. We adapt and sometimes well.
3
Thank goodness that we have a President who understands and can play a long game to strengthening US position in the world.
Thank goodness that the conservative warmongers are not in power. Where they would start a war over the sailors, Obama makes a phone call and releases them. Only possible after years of negotiating and establishing a relationship.
Bravo Mr. President
Thank goodness that the conservative warmongers are not in power. Where they would start a war over the sailors, Obama makes a phone call and releases them. Only possible after years of negotiating and establishing a relationship.
Bravo Mr. President
27
If you want to avoid the possibility of a bad nightmare tonight, try to avoid thinking about the very real possibility that if Hillary and Bernie don't look like they can beat Trump, the Democrats
will find a way to nominate John Kerry.
will find a way to nominate John Kerry.
5
Whenever I see or hear John Kerry, I can't help but remember the savage attacks on his patriotism in the 2004 Presidential election. Remember Swift Boats? How clever it was of that crowd of scoundrels to tarnish the service record of a brave American, and turn him from a war hero to whatever it was that made him less deserving to occupy the White House than the incumbent, George Dubya.
That worked out well, didn't it.
Thankfully, Kerry chose not to retire from public service to his country and the world. That is true patriotism. Well done, sir.
That worked out well, didn't it.
Thankfully, Kerry chose not to retire from public service to his country and the world. That is true patriotism. Well done, sir.
29
The fundamental problem with the GOP is in their methodology.
They make a decision first and then collect the facts to justify it.
That was the case with the Bush tax cuts. First they claimed that economy was too strong and the tax revenues were too high so they slashed the taxes. Then they concluded that the economy is too weak so they decided to cut the taxes even more. Finally, they got into habit of reckless cutting of the taxes so they insisted on them or they would move the corporations overseas, just because they are such true patriots.
The same was with the Afghan War. We were attacked on the 9/11 by the radical Wahhabists, mostly the Saudi and Egyptian citizens that were financed, trained and led by the same people. However, since those countries were our nominal allies, the Bush Administration launched the war in Afghanistan. No wonder that we are still fighting the terrorism.
The same happened with Iraq. Bush and Cheney decided to invade that country regardless whether they had the WMD or not. They just kept changing the justification – replacement of the tyrannical dictator, spread of the democracy across the Middle East, containment of Iran or else.
The same is valid for the free trade. Initially we were told that would be instrumental in providing us with the better paid jobs and increasing our standard of living only to end up with a need to compete with the Chinese workers to produce the goods cheaper.
Iran is the same story...
They make a decision first and then collect the facts to justify it.
That was the case with the Bush tax cuts. First they claimed that economy was too strong and the tax revenues were too high so they slashed the taxes. Then they concluded that the economy is too weak so they decided to cut the taxes even more. Finally, they got into habit of reckless cutting of the taxes so they insisted on them or they would move the corporations overseas, just because they are such true patriots.
The same was with the Afghan War. We were attacked on the 9/11 by the radical Wahhabists, mostly the Saudi and Egyptian citizens that were financed, trained and led by the same people. However, since those countries were our nominal allies, the Bush Administration launched the war in Afghanistan. No wonder that we are still fighting the terrorism.
The same happened with Iraq. Bush and Cheney decided to invade that country regardless whether they had the WMD or not. They just kept changing the justification – replacement of the tyrannical dictator, spread of the democracy across the Middle East, containment of Iran or else.
The same is valid for the free trade. Initially we were told that would be instrumental in providing us with the better paid jobs and increasing our standard of living only to end up with a need to compete with the Chinese workers to produce the goods cheaper.
Iran is the same story...
10
Over the last 100 years we fought in two world wars against Germany. Today Germany is one of our major partners in the world.
Over 240 years ago we fought two wars against Britain, on our own soil, as a matter of freedom and survival. Today Britain is another one of our major partners.
In the late 1970's Iran bloodied our noses a bit on the international stage and we have been in a hissy fit ever since.
For the sake of all that is true we are talking about Persia. One of the great nations in the history of mankind.
Let's get on with the future and leave the past behind.
President Obama has done more to help insure the future of the world than any of his predecessors since FDR.
Over 240 years ago we fought two wars against Britain, on our own soil, as a matter of freedom and survival. Today Britain is another one of our major partners.
In the late 1970's Iran bloodied our noses a bit on the international stage and we have been in a hissy fit ever since.
For the sake of all that is true we are talking about Persia. One of the great nations in the history of mankind.
Let's get on with the future and leave the past behind.
President Obama has done more to help insure the future of the world than any of his predecessors since FDR.
22
iran has made a great sacrifice by giving up its nonexistin(as)per u s inteligense) development of a nuclear capability. so now like libya iran can be seen as vulnerable to a u s attack when we determine the time seems right. oh well it has all been played out before. you think the iranians know this history?it is not too big a history really and well within recent memory.
Give Pres Obama a little more time and we will make a friend of North Korea too.
4
i understand that we have good reasons to be wary of Iran. Their theocracy is opposed to our American belief in seperation of chuch and state, a seperation that allows citizens of diverse backgrounds and beliefs to live in peace. They have supported terrorism.
What I don't understand is why we are not equally wary of Saudi Arabia -- another theocracy whose citizens have supported and participated in terrorism against the United States.
What I don't understand is why we are not equally wary of Saudi Arabia -- another theocracy whose citizens have supported and participated in terrorism against the United States.
5
It's nice to see that the Editorial Board has been vacationing in Fantasyland. By the time we realize that the Iran deal was a real blunder, it'll be too late to undo it.
5
Is this satire?
3
"The value of increased American-Iranian engagement was obvious last week when Iran quickly released 10 American sailors after their two patrol boats mistakenly drifted into Iranian waters in the Persian Gulf." Actually, according to Glen Greenwald, the administration has admitted that this narrative, which was originally given by Joe Biden, is completely false. The current narrative is that the US Navy sailors did not know how to use their GPS navigation equipment and went 90 miles in the wrong direction and that their command boat did not know how to use it's tracking or communications equipment to say, "hey guys, you're going the wrong way". The reason we have pictures of our sailors kneeling with their hands up is that this capture was front page news in Iran on the eve of the sanctions being lifted, with headlines trumpeting the humiliation of the 'Great Satan." Coincidence? I truly hope so, but the cynic in me says that the US Government knows more than it is saying. If the administration, with the cooperation of the press, somehow facilitated this event to help the Iranians sell the deal, it's a sad day.
5
I deeply appreciate you giving a measure of credit to President Obama's "patient diplomacy" and "visionary determination" despite opponents dresser to sabotage the initiative. This may be one of this President's most significant contributions to leaving the world a better place than when he arrived on the world's stage.
Yet, as you indicate there are many fears and challenges that lie ahead in dealing with Iran and North Korea and nuclear proliferation.
May other leaders develop clear motivations to pursue peaceful solutions to the
problems associated with nuclear proliferation!
Yet, as you indicate there are many fears and challenges that lie ahead in dealing with Iran and North Korea and nuclear proliferation.
May other leaders develop clear motivations to pursue peaceful solutions to the
problems associated with nuclear proliferation!
6
All of the scholarly books and papers that have ever been written documenting
the lack of concern exhibited by the NY Times for the Jews of Europe during World War II -- and there have been many of them -- will probably have to be updated now in view of this editorial, which never once mentions Israel.
the lack of concern exhibited by the NY Times for the Jews of Europe during World War II -- and there have been many of them -- will probably have to be updated now in view of this editorial, which never once mentions Israel.
7
What about American ballistic missile tests?Another American monopoly?
1
The NYT Editorial Board's shortsightedness and stupidity are unmatched. Iran will not hold up their end of the DEAL and they will get away with $150 billion of money that was previously denied them for sponsoring terrorism and sell their oil on the open market causing even more damage to the World economy. In a few short years they will hit Israel with atomic bombs and Israel will be no more. Does the World or the US have a plan for that eventuality?
5
"Saving face" is something that's a top priority in any negotiation. Yet the punitive way Iran is described by President Obama, John Kerry and others (even if what they state is accurate) makes it sound like that proud country is being allowed out of "time-out" for good behavior with a warning they better mind their p's and q's or else.
I hope my impression is incorrect. Yet, by not dealing with this sensitive issue (the power of pride) more delicately allowing Iran to save face while at the same time achieving the same nuclear goals, that more than anything else might be a reason for some kind of sneaking around to prove to themselves they aren't second class citizens of the world.
I hope my impression is incorrect. Yet, by not dealing with this sensitive issue (the power of pride) more delicately allowing Iran to save face while at the same time achieving the same nuclear goals, that more than anything else might be a reason for some kind of sneaking around to prove to themselves they aren't second class citizens of the world.
1
An agreement is better than no agreement, That is plain as day. But this agreement is a modest accomplishment. It adds nine months to Iran's breakout period. And viewing it in context, it is impossible to forget that Iran has been subject to inspection before and regularly violated its commitments. Even with the most rigorous oversight, Iran's insistence that its nuclear program is peaceful portends endless disputes over what may or may not constitute a violation. It is not presently possible to determine whether Iran has had a change of heart on its intent to go nuclear, or whether it is just posturing. The plethora of thank yous, Nobel Prize nominations, and declarations of greatest President ever suggest to me a pent up frustration among Obama supporters. Anyone with any understanding of the situation is modestly encouraged. The euphoria that is expressed in the comments and the recommendations is a sad statement on the state of the world and what constitutes an assurance of peace. When it comes to his place atop the great peacemakers of the recent past, Nelson Mandela has nothing to worry about
2
And, putting Iran oil back on the world market further cripples Putin. When will the GOP acknowledge that?
5
What state is the chief sponsor of terrorism in the world? What is the official position of this state towards the United States and Israel? Whether the 130 billion dollars is directly utilized to fund more terrorism is irrelevant if it frees up other funds to be utilized for that purpose, which history has shown that it will. While the price per barrel is presently very cheap that will not last and Iran now has the ability to receive billions of dollars in new revenue from the sale of oil on the open market. There can be little rational debate that these new sources of income will combine to fund more terrorism and instability in the world. Next we are to believe that a nation who has repeatedly ignored and lied to the UN and the international community as a whole, will not endeavor to cheat on an agreement that has more holes than Swiss cheese. The "Supreme Leader" of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is the son of the man who took the US hostages in 1979, does anyone believe Iran has changed its core beliefs since 1979?
7
You have no idea of the history between the USA and Iran. We toppled a democratic Iran government in 1953 that was replaced by the puppet Shah with his SAVAK secret police. A generation of Iranians were subjected to repression, torture etc, with the blessings of our great country. This all came back to roost a quarter of a century later in 1979 with the taking of the US Embassy hostages. I am a loyal American ready to fight for the USA. But I am not blind to our history and the reasons why a lot of countries still hate us.
9
"What state is the chief sponsor of terrorism in the world?" I would argue that it is not Iran, but Saudi Arabia, our great "friends". Who staged the 9/11 attack on New York City and the Pentagon? Saudis! Who set up the madrassas in Indonesia and other parts of the Muslim world? Not Iran, but Saudi Arabia! Who supports ISIS? Not Iran, but Saudi Arabia! And yet, we keep selling them all the latest armaments so they can carry on a war in Yemen. Who helped the Sunni overlords in Oman against their Shiite majority? No, it was not Iran, it was Saudi Arabia! Why do we keep buying their oil and selling them our weapons???
8
The funny thing about Iran is that the Ayatollahs are waiting on return of Mehdi to fix their problems.
If he ever returned, he would have to fix the Ayatollahs first.
No Messenger can overrule the Almighty.
In the Holy Book there are no Sunnis, no Shiites, no clergy, no mosques, no minarets, no Hadiths, no madrassas (you don’t need any school devoted to a single book; you just to have to implement the simple recommendations), no Sharia Law, no dress codes, no official language of faith, no preferred culture, country or nation...
In the Holy Book there is nothing that the Ayatollahs zealously insist on.
That’s their worst problem, not America, Israel or a lack on the nuclear technology...
If he ever returned, he would have to fix the Ayatollahs first.
No Messenger can overrule the Almighty.
In the Holy Book there are no Sunnis, no Shiites, no clergy, no mosques, no minarets, no Hadiths, no madrassas (you don’t need any school devoted to a single book; you just to have to implement the simple recommendations), no Sharia Law, no dress codes, no official language of faith, no preferred culture, country or nation...
In the Holy Book there is nothing that the Ayatollahs zealously insist on.
That’s their worst problem, not America, Israel or a lack on the nuclear technology...
4
Your message could apply equally to Christians who await the return of Christ. We all know it is a myth that will never occur, but many still want to believe it because it releases them from responsibility for their life.
2
I hope that the original, genuine, gods return to the region and straighten it all out.
1
having read the comments obviously posted by GOP'ers, it is clear why the bush admin was happy to see NK get the bomb and why they did nothing but encourage Iran to go the same route.
Gop'ers clearly want someone/anyone to throw a nuke our way.
Gop'ers clearly want someone/anyone to throw a nuke our way.
11
A deal is a deal. And no blood spilled. Well done.
7
Thanks, WORLD ! It does not happen often..........
It’s really hard to determine who is more radical, the Ayatollahs from Tehran or the GOP presidential candidates.
See, the former want to be in power so the long lost Mehdi could return to the Earth and fix all the problems.
In full contrast to this religious dogma, the GOP candidates want to have Jerusalem controlled by Israel and the Palestinians expelled from their homes so Jesus could finally return and fix all the problems.
Who cares that in the Koran there are no Sunnis, no Shiites and no Mehdi or that Moses and Jesus directed us not to kill, not to steal, not to be the false witnesses, not to crave for anything belonging to our neighbors and to love them because the Almighty created all of us...
See, the chronic conflicts and antagonism have nothing to do with the nuclear weapons but with the ancient religious dogmas and distortions.
Allegedly, it’s not the Almighty that determines a potential return of his Messenger but the Tehran ayatollahs and the American politicians...
They believe the more we disobeyed the God Commandments, the faster would Jesus return.
If we acted in such a way, Jesus would return only to lead the fight against all of us...
We would be the bad guys, all of us - the Muslims, the Sunnis, the Shiites, the Christians and the Jews.
Let those among us that didn’t wage a war cast the first stone...
See, the former want to be in power so the long lost Mehdi could return to the Earth and fix all the problems.
In full contrast to this religious dogma, the GOP candidates want to have Jerusalem controlled by Israel and the Palestinians expelled from their homes so Jesus could finally return and fix all the problems.
Who cares that in the Koran there are no Sunnis, no Shiites and no Mehdi or that Moses and Jesus directed us not to kill, not to steal, not to be the false witnesses, not to crave for anything belonging to our neighbors and to love them because the Almighty created all of us...
See, the chronic conflicts and antagonism have nothing to do with the nuclear weapons but with the ancient religious dogmas and distortions.
Allegedly, it’s not the Almighty that determines a potential return of his Messenger but the Tehran ayatollahs and the American politicians...
They believe the more we disobeyed the God Commandments, the faster would Jesus return.
If we acted in such a way, Jesus would return only to lead the fight against all of us...
We would be the bad guys, all of us - the Muslims, the Sunnis, the Shiites, the Christians and the Jews.
Let those among us that didn’t wage a war cast the first stone...
1
If, even one single country is prevented from developing nuclear weapons, it is a great achievement.
We already have too many nuclear weapons in too many hands that can start a nuclear war and destroy humanity. A total elimination of all nuclear weapons by all nations should be our goal.
America will have to lead this effort, because no other country will.
We already have too many nuclear weapons in too many hands that can start a nuclear war and destroy humanity. A total elimination of all nuclear weapons by all nations should be our goal.
America will have to lead this effort, because no other country will.
6
Let's see. American prisoners released. Sailors freed. Centrifuges shut down. Enriched uranium supplies shipped abroad. What a catastrophe! The mind reels in imagining what the GOP will spin to vilify this signal achievement of President Obama and Secretary Kerry.
We don't have to imagine for long. The mindlessly scripted Republican bad news bile bus is already rolling grimly along. Thank you, especially, Marco Rubio, but you're only the leading carriage in the choleric clown convoy.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
We don't have to imagine for long. The mindlessly scripted Republican bad news bile bus is already rolling grimly along. Thank you, especially, Marco Rubio, but you're only the leading carriage in the choleric clown convoy.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
19
Shall we petition Kerry's name for that Nobel Peace Prize now? Obamas got one, right? Maybe he can keep it next to his medals from Vietnam!
Thanks to President Obama and his diplomatic team for proving that diplomacy can work. the Republican negativity following the signing of the nuclear deal and the release of prisoners is so tiresome--it's untruthful, misguided and verging on the seditious. Blowhards have rarely solved any problems.
The shipping of 8.5 tons of enriched uranium to Russia makes me a bit uneasy--Russia doesn't play well with others. But overall, our President has brought better results on the world front by intelligent analysis, thoughtful action, and the wisdom not to pick fights just for photo ops.
The shipping of 8.5 tons of enriched uranium to Russia makes me a bit uneasy--Russia doesn't play well with others. But overall, our President has brought better results on the world front by intelligent analysis, thoughtful action, and the wisdom not to pick fights just for photo ops.
19
Obama is embarrassing the GOP. After the dire predictions about Iran's refusal to comply with the terms of the deal and the omission of a return of prisoners, a matter properly not part of international negotiations, it finds itself reduced to muttering about the slight numerical disparity between the release of five Americans and the release of seven Iranians for violating sanctions. Or to outright lies: some claim that the Iranians have not complied with the terms of the treaty at all.
What this latter response means is that the greatest threat to this country form the GOP is not its particular policies, but its resort to the denial of facts which define history and determine policy. Ignorance is bad enough--and none of the GOP presidential candidates sound informed or intelligent on a range of subjects, but all of them seem determined to remain ignorant. Think of them and any administration of theirs as Rick Snyder and Michigan writ large.
What this latter response means is that the greatest threat to this country form the GOP is not its particular policies, but its resort to the denial of facts which define history and determine policy. Ignorance is bad enough--and none of the GOP presidential candidates sound informed or intelligent on a range of subjects, but all of them seem determined to remain ignorant. Think of them and any administration of theirs as Rick Snyder and Michigan writ large.
4
Please,
Let me translate into a simple English language the sentence that is widely
used by our politicians.
Israel is our inseparable ally.
Do you know what it actually means?
Be default Israel is always right and everybody else is always wrong.
No wonder that we have been waging the bloody wars in the Middle East for 25 years.
From this perspective any scientific breakthrough or advancement in Iraq and Iran is the direct threat to Israel and we have to stop it.
That’s why we dethroned the regime of Saddam Hussein. Iraq became a strong, educated and powerful country, thus a regional competitor to Israel.
We did the same to Libya and Syria.
There are no longer any regional threat to Israel, but just the lawless regions infested by the terrorists, the ISIS and the Al Qaeda...
The funny part is that Trump and Company are now blaming the Muslims for the current conditions.
However, the Islam didn’t bomb and destroy the regimes of Saddam Hussein, Moammar Gadhafi and Bashir Assad.
Our government did it.
That’s why we didn’t have the terrorism a quarter century ago and we didn’t have to build up any national registry of the Muslims living in the western hemisphere or a flood of the refugees from those countries....
They used to live well then...
Let me translate into a simple English language the sentence that is widely
used by our politicians.
Israel is our inseparable ally.
Do you know what it actually means?
Be default Israel is always right and everybody else is always wrong.
No wonder that we have been waging the bloody wars in the Middle East for 25 years.
From this perspective any scientific breakthrough or advancement in Iraq and Iran is the direct threat to Israel and we have to stop it.
That’s why we dethroned the regime of Saddam Hussein. Iraq became a strong, educated and powerful country, thus a regional competitor to Israel.
We did the same to Libya and Syria.
There are no longer any regional threat to Israel, but just the lawless regions infested by the terrorists, the ISIS and the Al Qaeda...
The funny part is that Trump and Company are now blaming the Muslims for the current conditions.
However, the Islam didn’t bomb and destroy the regimes of Saddam Hussein, Moammar Gadhafi and Bashir Assad.
Our government did it.
That’s why we didn’t have the terrorism a quarter century ago and we didn’t have to build up any national registry of the Muslims living in the western hemisphere or a flood of the refugees from those countries....
They used to live well then...
1
Temporary safety. In ten years there will be nothing stopping Iran from immediately withdrawing from the non proliferation treaty and building bombs. This, of course is assuming they live up to the treaty, unlike the other international deals they have made.
3
The Iran deal may prove to be Obama's most important success, certainly in the realm of foreign affairs. His avoidance of new, disastrous military entanglements in Libya, Syria and Ukraine is also significant but less appreciated. Overall, Obama has had a remarkably successful presidency given the magnitude of the various disasters he inherited from his predecessor and the GOP. I suppose that's partly why the republicans hate him as much as they do. To honestly assess his record requires a degree of maganamimity that they simply do not possess.
6
The Iran deal treated the symptoms but not the disease. Iran is the only theocracy in the world governed by the Ayatullahs who made the Iranian people believe the supreme leader (Khomeini before and khamieni now ) is an acting prophet for the missing Shia prophet (Imam, missing centuries ago ) and until he reappears, the supreme leader of Iran will assume the prophecy. This self-appointed prophecy, introduced by Khomeini in 1979, made not only Iranians but Shiite across the Globe follow Iran's supreme leader blindly. This gave Iran a foot wherever Shiite reside any where in the world. The question which should be asked is Why was Iran trying to build atomic weapons? Who is threatening Iran ? The only resemblance to the Iranian current political system is Europe in the Middle Ages when the church were enslaving the people.
3
Good editorial.
The "bomb-bomb-bomb Iran" Republicans keep doing their war dance and have fought long and hard against peace, for war, and against diplomacy every step of the way with Iran.
It was comical, as the diplomatic U.S.-Iranian talks and events unfolded, the Republicans kept making the wrong predictions, backed up by the GOP's ersatz Foreign Minister Netanyahu. Meanwhile, the Iranians worried that the hardliner Ayatollahs would also sabotage the multilateral nuclear deal made with the U.S., China, France, U.K. Russia, plus German and the E.U.
Luckily, the hardliner and right-wing noise machine was ignored, and the diplomats kept plodding down the road. Kerry deserves a lot of credit for his diplomacy and tenacity, as does the Iranian regime currently in charge.
Perhaps the worm has turned, and the adults are taking charge. Clearly, the military-industrial complex won't like this new direction. Dare we hope the temper-tantrum throwing, hardiner, reactionary war mongers are starting to look primitive, intellectually limited, and destructive in their demands for war, where nobody really wins.
Of course, we could always elect Donald Trump or any of the other Republican presidential candidates to reverse the agreement, go to war, squander blood and treasure, and take us back to the Dark Ages. Never mind it would be other people's children who would fight their wars.
Here's to one big step in the right direction--no thanks to the GOP and Iranian hardliners.
The "bomb-bomb-bomb Iran" Republicans keep doing their war dance and have fought long and hard against peace, for war, and against diplomacy every step of the way with Iran.
It was comical, as the diplomatic U.S.-Iranian talks and events unfolded, the Republicans kept making the wrong predictions, backed up by the GOP's ersatz Foreign Minister Netanyahu. Meanwhile, the Iranians worried that the hardliner Ayatollahs would also sabotage the multilateral nuclear deal made with the U.S., China, France, U.K. Russia, plus German and the E.U.
Luckily, the hardliner and right-wing noise machine was ignored, and the diplomats kept plodding down the road. Kerry deserves a lot of credit for his diplomacy and tenacity, as does the Iranian regime currently in charge.
Perhaps the worm has turned, and the adults are taking charge. Clearly, the military-industrial complex won't like this new direction. Dare we hope the temper-tantrum throwing, hardiner, reactionary war mongers are starting to look primitive, intellectually limited, and destructive in their demands for war, where nobody really wins.
Of course, we could always elect Donald Trump or any of the other Republican presidential candidates to reverse the agreement, go to war, squander blood and treasure, and take us back to the Dark Ages. Never mind it would be other people's children who would fight their wars.
Here's to one big step in the right direction--no thanks to the GOP and Iranian hardliners.
8
Yes there is a risk in making deals with those we have considered enemies in the past. And yes things do not always work out the way we envision them.. And yes we could live in fear and mistrust as many politicians and commentators would have us do. Reasons for this fear and mistrust can be found endlessly.
But war and sanctions have led only to more war and deeper sanctions giving rise to more fear and mistrust. It is time to give this agreement a chance to change this self fulfilling prophecy and see the possibilities for positive movement and peace. Some will claim that this view is naïve, but in the end even President Reagan needed to accept the hand that President Gorbachev extended and we need to do that now or just continue the endless log jam that now exists.
But war and sanctions have led only to more war and deeper sanctions giving rise to more fear and mistrust. It is time to give this agreement a chance to change this self fulfilling prophecy and see the possibilities for positive movement and peace. Some will claim that this view is naïve, but in the end even President Reagan needed to accept the hand that President Gorbachev extended and we need to do that now or just continue the endless log jam that now exists.
8
Why are the Republican presidential candidates so vehemently opposed to the Iranian nuclear deal?
All of them claim that Israel is our inseparable ally.
If so, we have to protect them at all cost. Thus, according to this kind of logic any regional technological or scientific advancement could be construed as the direct threat to Israel and the GOP leaders want to stop it even it means another bloody protracted war for America.
Thus they were supportive of the Iraq War a dozen years ago that directly helped the Iranian Ayatollahs to spread their Shiite influence across the region and cost us several trillion dollars and untold human sufferings.
Who cares if it helped Iran if we always could later attack Tehran and bring them back into the Stone Age.
Who cares if America pays the terrible bloody price for waging the protracted conflicts and piling up the enormous national debt.
Of course, after such a carnage the Republican presidential candidate will have another reason to blame the Islam and the Muslims...
Our strategic national priority is to determine whether any scientific, educational and economic progress in the Middle East represent the threat to Israel and America or not...
That’s the question of all questions.
The current wars in Iraq, Syria and Libya are just the direct consequences of the wrong answer to the aforementioned dilemma...
All of them claim that Israel is our inseparable ally.
If so, we have to protect them at all cost. Thus, according to this kind of logic any regional technological or scientific advancement could be construed as the direct threat to Israel and the GOP leaders want to stop it even it means another bloody protracted war for America.
Thus they were supportive of the Iraq War a dozen years ago that directly helped the Iranian Ayatollahs to spread their Shiite influence across the region and cost us several trillion dollars and untold human sufferings.
Who cares if it helped Iran if we always could later attack Tehran and bring them back into the Stone Age.
Who cares if America pays the terrible bloody price for waging the protracted conflicts and piling up the enormous national debt.
Of course, after such a carnage the Republican presidential candidate will have another reason to blame the Islam and the Muslims...
Our strategic national priority is to determine whether any scientific, educational and economic progress in the Middle East represent the threat to Israel and America or not...
That’s the question of all questions.
The current wars in Iraq, Syria and Libya are just the direct consequences of the wrong answer to the aforementioned dilemma...
4
Obama's surrender to Iran guarantees a nuclear war in the Middle East
4
When you use words like surrender you invoke distortion of what really happens in diplomacy. Very unkind, Larry.
2
One of the most succinct, and ridiculous comments about this issue. Larry of course must think that unless we (USA) nuke Iran first, Iran will inevitably get the bomb. Or, if/when they get the bomb, the only choice we have will be a nuclear war with them. Or, is Larry thinking that other ME countries will now somehow go for the bomb, and they will become future participants in a nuclear war in the ME? The idiocy of this kind of thinking is transparent.
1
Whatever you need to tell yourself. meanwhile, the Iranians continue to militarize and expand ballistic missile capabilities. They hid, for decades, their nuclear facilities while cooperating on the surface but dragging their feet. We should trust them and their intentions now? History and current events shows that fundamental extremists in Iran continue to hold us in contempt. If one feels bound to defend Obama's legacy, by all means, spin away.
9
Is the world safer because of Bill Clinton allowing North Korea to have nukes?
1
that would be george w. bush. and no.
1
Warren Buffett ( an Obama supporter) said "You cannot make a good deal with a bad person"
Wish Obama had called Warren Buffett for advice on this deal as Obama will be gone when the problems arise. The Israelis got this one right!!
Wish Obama had called Warren Buffett for advice on this deal as Obama will be gone when the problems arise. The Israelis got this one right!!
6
TALKING WORKS Words are our currency in trade when negotiating with anyone. What sets humans apart from animals is our ability to communicate complex, abstract information via language. The dialog we had with Iran in this case was highly productive; we negotiated the return of our military who had accidentally strayed into Iranian territorial waters . Of course they couldn't give up the chance for some humiliating photo ops. So what! We got our people back alive. The GOP wants to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by using the incident as an example of Obama's fecklessness, while, in fact, they are putting their own fecklessness on display. In the Middle Ages, war games were invented instead of constant wars with loss of lives and property. So this was a bit of war gaming with Iran. The lifting of sanctions was a powerful motivator for the Iranians to engage in damage control, after a sort. And Obama slapped on, fecklessly, his own sanctions for the shennanigans fo the Iranians, who will be rewarded for cooperation and sanctioned for violating the agreement. But no matter the noise on the right, for 'tis a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Uhhhh, Brush up your Shakespeare, start using it now, and the ladies you wil wow!
1
Too many editorials lack investigated journalism when they continuously and blindly parrots policies as a good or bad thing.
America did not sanction Iran because of its potential threat of building a nuclear weapon. Originally the sanctioned were placed against Iran, because Iran was not selling its energy for US dollars. The US wanted Iranian oil and gas sold and piped to India using US dollars.
With the lifting of sanctions, Iran will have extra billions left over to buy both nuclear weapons and missiles from North Korea whenever they want or need them. If WMD were of concern, we would have sanctioned Pakistan, a rogue nation, for its WMD. There is now a pipeline deal that excludes Iran. Caspian Sea gas is the new source and it will come through Afghanistan and Pakistan to India, but the Taliban stands it the way.
Everyone knows the ME has something to do with oil and gas, but editorials often circumvent the facts to support polices that favors one party or the other. Lies are lies no matter who said them or for what reason. America invaded Iraq because Iraq stopped using US Petro Dollars. Obama originally started a war in Syria using terrorists to support the Saudis and Qatar to get a pipeline through Syria to the EU.
America did not sanction Iran because of its potential threat of building a nuclear weapon. Originally the sanctioned were placed against Iran, because Iran was not selling its energy for US dollars. The US wanted Iranian oil and gas sold and piped to India using US dollars.
With the lifting of sanctions, Iran will have extra billions left over to buy both nuclear weapons and missiles from North Korea whenever they want or need them. If WMD were of concern, we would have sanctioned Pakistan, a rogue nation, for its WMD. There is now a pipeline deal that excludes Iran. Caspian Sea gas is the new source and it will come through Afghanistan and Pakistan to India, but the Taliban stands it the way.
Everyone knows the ME has something to do with oil and gas, but editorials often circumvent the facts to support polices that favors one party or the other. Lies are lies no matter who said them or for what reason. America invaded Iraq because Iraq stopped using US Petro Dollars. Obama originally started a war in Syria using terrorists to support the Saudis and Qatar to get a pipeline through Syria to the EU.
2
Mr. Magoo, actually it was because of their nuclear program. How do we know this? Because our rep at the UN made it crystal clear when we asked for and got UN sanctions. Its amazing how many lies your comment contains. Sad.
Let's see how this all plays out. The NYTs carries Obama's bag, so their declaring a great success even before we can truly judge success or failure is no big surprise. No one can foresee the dynamics that lay before us. If history is any guide regarding Iran, then I would think we are in for a world of hurt and disappointment, but we'll see.
7
Excellent post. We will know in just a few years, after catching iran cheating and clandestinely working on nuclear weapons, how truly disastrous this ludicrous deal was.
The only real question will be can we hold the despicable NYT and its hideous editorial board responsible for operating as obama's pr flack?
The only real question will be can we hold the despicable NYT and its hideous editorial board responsible for operating as obama's pr flack?
2
We'll know more in years to come, but capitulation is never equated with success. Obama/Kerry wanted a piece of paper to flash about, not a real deal. The previous administration was making headway against Iran's nuclear program and Iran's involvement in terrorism, but Obama basically told the Mullahs that he'd be easier to deal with. He was.
Obama and Kerry are the guys at the poker table who don't know who the patsy is (which means they are).
Obama and Kerry are the guys at the poker table who don't know who the patsy is (which means they are).
4
You claim that the previous administration was making headway with Iran. Where did you come up with that malarkey. Per the recent IAEA report, Iran was advancing its program up till 2009 when Obama came in power. Now after the first six months of implementation of this agreement, Iran has no workable centrifuges, its stockpile of enriched uranium has been slashed signifcantly and its breakout time has gone from a couple of months to a year. You are just naking things up. Amazing how hatred of Obama makes some people fabricate anything.
A Safer World,
Why does this editorial remind me of Chamberlain's peace in our time.When Chamberlain signed that deal wit Hitler, Hitler did not give up his quest for a greater Germany, quite the contrary it only encouraged him to become more aggressive.But as this editorial states Iran has given their nuclear fuel to Russia, which is like the Gun Moll ,holding the Gun for the Assassin.Russia has not decided to remove Assad from Power, they are in Syria to keep this Murderer in Power, with the Help of Iran.The saying that if you lie down with dogs you get up with fleas has never been truer than our involvement with these tyrants. Obama's vision only goes as far as his quest for a legacy which is on very shaky ground.Don't open the Champaign the party is premature.
Why does this editorial remind me of Chamberlain's peace in our time.When Chamberlain signed that deal wit Hitler, Hitler did not give up his quest for a greater Germany, quite the contrary it only encouraged him to become more aggressive.But as this editorial states Iran has given their nuclear fuel to Russia, which is like the Gun Moll ,holding the Gun for the Assassin.Russia has not decided to remove Assad from Power, they are in Syria to keep this Murderer in Power, with the Help of Iran.The saying that if you lie down with dogs you get up with fleas has never been truer than our involvement with these tyrants. Obama's vision only goes as far as his quest for a legacy which is on very shaky ground.Don't open the Champaign the party is premature.
8
ISIS, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, the taliban, the terrorist, the militant muslims, Sunni militants, Sadam Hussein, Osama Bin Ladin, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, Fidel Castro, and others.....are merely small time homicidal street thugs. These street thugs are small time potatoes who will make noise and name call. The big nuke boys to worry about are the U.S., Russia and China. On Oct. 16, 1964, China detonated its first atomic bomb. Hopefully everyone is also convinced that after the October 1962 missile crisis between U.S. Pres Kennedy and Premier Nikita Khrushchev of the Soviet Union over Cuba's small time street thug fidel castro, that the real power was not fidel, but rather the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Kennedy and Khrushchev came within a hair from pushing the button on a world nuclear war. North Vietnam was nothing without the military backing of Russia.
The real threat is a nuclear holocaust. The main players are the U.S., Russia, and China. Please don't believe the nonsensical Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1968. If you do then you probably believe in the tooth fairy as well. As long as all countries of the world continue with their quest for power and control.....the threat of a nuclear holocaust is real...the only question is when.
In a war there has to be an undisputed winner and a loser....otherwise the war continues. Any time an outside arbitrator or mediator steps in and declares peace...it merely fuels the flames of war.
The real threat is a nuclear holocaust. The main players are the U.S., Russia, and China. Please don't believe the nonsensical Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1968. If you do then you probably believe in the tooth fairy as well. As long as all countries of the world continue with their quest for power and control.....the threat of a nuclear holocaust is real...the only question is when.
In a war there has to be an undisputed winner and a loser....otherwise the war continues. Any time an outside arbitrator or mediator steps in and declares peace...it merely fuels the flames of war.
A safer world for who? Tell that to the starving, sick and dying Syrians in Madaya, Zibdani, Maadamiyah....and in so many other places in Syria. Tell that to the four million of shivering, hungry and sick Syrian refugees in Lebanon, Iraq, and Jordan. Tell that to the 9-10 million Syrians who lost their homes and livelihood and became refugees in their own country. Without the total and sustained Iranian Financial and Military support for 5 years to the criminal Assad regime and Hizb'ullah, none of these atrocities would have been possible. And the Mullah's of Iran have been willing to spend about 16 Billion dollars/year to sustain these criminals and to keep them in power with total disregards to their peoples' needs. What makes you think with the new found wealth these same Mullahs will change their minds? Iran's nuclear program was not and never was meant to be a threat to any one. But it was designed as a bargaining chip for the regime's legitimacy and recognition and the only way to recover their frozen assets. The nuclear accord is good for our president's Resume. The release of our American hostages was negotiated and the price was $100 Billion.
6
This poster is smarter than all of the other NYT posters plus the editorial board combined.
The liberals keep cheering what a great victory for their Hero obama, and hiding under the cloak of biased and poor journalism of the NYT obscuring the heinousness and crimes without end of the cancerous iranian regime.
Perhaps the families of the thousands of maimed/murdered US soldiers in iraq by iran's hands should send thank you letters to iran for their actions as well.
The liberals keep cheering what a great victory for their Hero obama, and hiding under the cloak of biased and poor journalism of the NYT obscuring the heinousness and crimes without end of the cancerous iranian regime.
Perhaps the families of the thousands of maimed/murdered US soldiers in iraq by iran's hands should send thank you letters to iran for their actions as well.
1
The nuclear agreement might have been a worthwhile attempt at slowing down Iran's nuclear ambitions but let's not oversell it. Relations between the US and Iran are still cold and only time will tell whether the world is any safer as a result of the agreement.
3
No agreement or treaty will ever solve all the problems it addresses, but I thoroughly believe that the prisoner exchange is a very positive result that gives hope for better things to come. It almost certainly would not have happened without the efforts of President Obama, Secretary Kerry and their staffs. What's that old saw about a journey of a thousand miles?
While you're on old saws try "one Robin doth not a Spring make" The real geopolitical issue with Iran is the Sunni/Shiite civil war and Iran's fight for hegemony in the Middle East. A few Iranian Americans held on trumped up charges are nothing compared to this.
1
Of course it was a good deal. And just as surely there were and will be risks. As Roger Cohen points out today, it's a delicate balance in Iran between the reformers and hard-liners and new elections will make clear who is ascendant.
My bet, and I think everyone's should be, with the young, highly educated, secular middle class. For them, the religious conservatives are nothing more than an obstacle to freedom and true democracy.
So, what are the elements of the bet, internal and external factors? Let's start with the hopeful since this is where we should be right now. The deal should strengthen the Iranian secular middle class, since it is they who are most mobile and relative to the wider world of commerce and culture. They are open. The hard-liners are closed. Openness will win in the end and Iran's conservatives will steadily lose power in Iran as they become less and less relevant to the aspirations and actions of young Iran.
Okay, now for the dangers, because they do exist. Firstly, it could all go south. The moment the conservatives perceive loss of power, they could do something. Down the road they could try to build a nuclear bomb. Israel could do something. Saudi Arabia could do something.
One thing is certain, among the unexpected futures, the negatives will happen, and president Ted Cruz could... You see where this is heading.
My bet, and I think everyone's should be, with the young, highly educated, secular middle class. For them, the religious conservatives are nothing more than an obstacle to freedom and true democracy.
So, what are the elements of the bet, internal and external factors? Let's start with the hopeful since this is where we should be right now. The deal should strengthen the Iranian secular middle class, since it is they who are most mobile and relative to the wider world of commerce and culture. They are open. The hard-liners are closed. Openness will win in the end and Iran's conservatives will steadily lose power in Iran as they become less and less relevant to the aspirations and actions of young Iran.
Okay, now for the dangers, because they do exist. Firstly, it could all go south. The moment the conservatives perceive loss of power, they could do something. Down the road they could try to build a nuclear bomb. Israel could do something. Saudi Arabia could do something.
One thing is certain, among the unexpected futures, the negatives will happen, and president Ted Cruz could... You see where this is heading.
5
How did this administration respond that last time that the secular, young, educated Iranians rebelled against their corrupt, rigged government while begging for our help?
2
A nuclear Iran was a future bogey man that could have been nuked by us if needed. Today, yesterday, and tomorrow Iran remains a deadly state sponsor of terrorism. If they are as smart as their forebears, the old Persian satraps, the mullahs will force their minions to stop terrorizing the West and stick to the Shia-Sunni sectarian carnage.
More interesting: U.S. banks are forbidden to do business with any named State Sponsor of Terrorism. Will Obama let U.SA. banks ignore this law? Is that part of the deal? Obama did not prosecute any of the Great Recession's great Wall Street bandits.
More interesting: U.S. banks are forbidden to do business with any named State Sponsor of Terrorism. Will Obama let U.SA. banks ignore this law? Is that part of the deal? Obama did not prosecute any of the Great Recession's great Wall Street bandits.
2
hey BJ, have you ever seen what happens when a nuclear bomb is used?
use this map- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_Middle_East.png
see who else would be affected. If you want to get technical, Saudi is a bigger sponsor of terrorism. Heres the thing better to have a speaking un-antagonistic relationship with a competing power then not. Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.
use this map- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_Middle_East.png
see who else would be affected. If you want to get technical, Saudi is a bigger sponsor of terrorism. Heres the thing better to have a speaking un-antagonistic relationship with a competing power then not. Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.
1
Hurrah for John Kerry.....and Barack Obama....and
this is a milestone in diplomacy...and ...not perfect......YET...!!!
but
There is a young generation of Iranians who want to be assimilated into
the world picture...so
This is hope to build on....
Pessimism....will not ever win.....and in this case the ray of hope is bright...!!!
this is a milestone in diplomacy...and ...not perfect......YET...!!!
but
There is a young generation of Iranians who want to be assimilated into
the world picture...so
This is hope to build on....
Pessimism....will not ever win.....and in this case the ray of hope is bright...!!!
12
"There is a young generation of Iranians who want to be assimilated into
the world picture"
If they are truly serious about this, they will eliminate every Ayatollah, Mullah and Iman, the religious police and revolution guards. Then turn Iran into a secular republic rather than a theocratic one.
the world picture"
If they are truly serious about this, they will eliminate every Ayatollah, Mullah and Iman, the religious police and revolution guards. Then turn Iran into a secular republic rather than a theocratic one.
1
Our government is constantly on the wrong course because we choose the wrong allies.
Allegedly, the allies are always right.
Our enemies cannot harm us. The allies hurt us by keeping us on the wrong course.
The biased people cannot make the rational decisions. The very moment we embrace any prejudice we fail to analyze the facts correctly and make the wrong conclusions.
Almost 8 decades ago our government would not accept the Jewish refugees running away from the Nazi and fascist persecution because we believed the Jews were bad.
Then we fought the imperialistic colonial wars in Indochina because we believed Great Britain and France, our allies from the WWI, were good and the people fighting for their independences were bad, so we branded them as the communists, not only in the Far East but in the Middle East, the Latin and Central America.
Thus we supported the worst dictators in Tehran, Riyadh, Baghdad, Cairo, Johannesburg or Santiago de Chile.
We failed to support the locals.
In the meantime we changed our mantra. Now in the Middle East only Israel is good and everybody else is bad.
We are bouncing between the bad and worse wars.
What have we failed to learn?
If there is a conflict in this world, we don’t have to jump in.
We should do it only if there was a good side in it. The good side is perfect and makes no single mistake. If there is no perfect side in a conflict, we should stay out of it...
Allegedly, the allies are always right.
Our enemies cannot harm us. The allies hurt us by keeping us on the wrong course.
The biased people cannot make the rational decisions. The very moment we embrace any prejudice we fail to analyze the facts correctly and make the wrong conclusions.
Almost 8 decades ago our government would not accept the Jewish refugees running away from the Nazi and fascist persecution because we believed the Jews were bad.
Then we fought the imperialistic colonial wars in Indochina because we believed Great Britain and France, our allies from the WWI, were good and the people fighting for their independences were bad, so we branded them as the communists, not only in the Far East but in the Middle East, the Latin and Central America.
Thus we supported the worst dictators in Tehran, Riyadh, Baghdad, Cairo, Johannesburg or Santiago de Chile.
We failed to support the locals.
In the meantime we changed our mantra. Now in the Middle East only Israel is good and everybody else is bad.
We are bouncing between the bad and worse wars.
What have we failed to learn?
If there is a conflict in this world, we don’t have to jump in.
We should do it only if there was a good side in it. The good side is perfect and makes no single mistake. If there is no perfect side in a conflict, we should stay out of it...
3
Iran has more $ than ever to do what it declares over and over again to destroy us and Israel thanks to the Neville Chamberlin of our time.
8
Right, Iran's plan is to get the sanctions lifted so they can attack Israel and have more sanctions leveled against them. Not to mention the military retaliation from Israel and the US. Yes I'm sure they were just waiting for the money to bring off this brilliant strategy.
Write this editorial in five years, not while the ink is still wet.
9
I have no problem with the article but the headline is another thing.
The world isn't necessarily safer as stated in the headline but it is true as stated in the article that Iran is not capable of building a bomb in the near future so the world is safer from a nuclear attack which means nothing as Iran can make the world unsafe by other means.
Developing a missile that can reach cities in Israel with a conventional warhead may make the world even more unsafe as the likelihood that weapon will used is much higher and that weapon if accurate can easily kill a thousand if aimed at a place like a theatre or a mall where there are many people. There would be pressure on Israel to answer that attack with the use of the nuclear weapons she might have
This is the real reason Iran wants the bomb.
They want to be able to attack Israel with conventional weapons and not be afraid Israel can retaliate with her nuclear weapon as Iran would then use the nuclear weapons they have.
So I will acknowledge things have changed but I believe it is presumptuous to say the world is safer.
The world isn't necessarily safer as stated in the headline but it is true as stated in the article that Iran is not capable of building a bomb in the near future so the world is safer from a nuclear attack which means nothing as Iran can make the world unsafe by other means.
Developing a missile that can reach cities in Israel with a conventional warhead may make the world even more unsafe as the likelihood that weapon will used is much higher and that weapon if accurate can easily kill a thousand if aimed at a place like a theatre or a mall where there are many people. There would be pressure on Israel to answer that attack with the use of the nuclear weapons she might have
This is the real reason Iran wants the bomb.
They want to be able to attack Israel with conventional weapons and not be afraid Israel can retaliate with her nuclear weapon as Iran would then use the nuclear weapons they have.
So I will acknowledge things have changed but I believe it is presumptuous to say the world is safer.
6
They don't want to attack Israel, it is what Netanyahu and AIPAC want you to believe.
1
They say they want to attack Israel.
Netanyahu is just telling us what they say.
Netanyahu is just telling us what they say.
So Ayatollah Khameini and other high ranking Iranians' constant threat to wipe the Zionist regime from the pages of History (or, alternatively, off the map) means what exactly? That Iran supports the democratic process within Israel with an aim to elect members of the Knesset who will then form a governing coalition that passes a law depriving the Jewish people of their right to self-determination and ends Israel's policy of being a safe haven for persecuted Jews worldwide? Or do you think it means the continuation of Muslim refusal to view Jews as anything other than a powerless and despised minority that only has such rights as Muslims gratiously suffer to grant them so long as they "know their place" at the bottom of the social ladder? Perhaps the Iranian leadership's thinking may be divined from the juxtaposition of "Death to Israel" chants when their ballistic missiles are on display. I see no reason why Israel should not take Iran's genocidal threats against it seriously.
1
The Iran deal negotiated by the P5+1 including Russia, America, China, France, the United Kingdom and Germany has made the world safer and offers a model for dealing with the nuclear weapons rogue nations- Israel, India, North Korea and Pakistan- that unlike Iran are not parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and already have nuclear weapons. Adding Japan to the parties for future negotiations aimed at reducing and eliminating the threat of nuclear war annihilation would close the moral political circle. As the only nation to ever suffer a nuclear attack Japan has more weapons grade enriched nuclear material than any nation that is a party to the NPT and that has no nuclear weapons.
9
North Korea has their nuclear weapons thanks to Bill Clinton, or did you choose to overlook that point?
1
Now that the U.S. is out of the way, the Revolutionary Islamic Republic of Iran can focus its efforts on Israel.
8
In the words of Winston Churchill, one of the greatest wartime leaders in all of recorded history, it is always "better to jaw-jaw than to war-war." All the GOP offers as an alternative to this successful negotiated settlement to yet another disasterous and possibly nuclear Middle East War. How very foolish and short sighted.
Wrong. Iran is pro progress, pro peace. It's not so much Israel but Pakistan that we have to keep an eye on.
1
Although IAEA has confirmed Iran's compliance with the nuclear deal, it is still too early to be optimistic about its outcome. In a year we shall know who will be America's next president. If a GOP candidate moves into the White House, there's a risk that he would try to make life difficult for Tehran.
Also we have to follow the development in Iran carefully. How will the hardliners deal with a free-market economy, now that sanctions have been lifted and they no long enjoy monopolies. They might feel disenchanted and try to provoke the US, by stepping up their clandestine activities, like supporting Shia militias in Iraq and Lebanon, just for the sake of escalating sectarian tensions. Besides Israel and Saudi Arabia wouldn't stand idly by and watch. They might also add fuel to the fire, when the occasion arises.
Also we have to follow the development in Iran carefully. How will the hardliners deal with a free-market economy, now that sanctions have been lifted and they no long enjoy monopolies. They might feel disenchanted and try to provoke the US, by stepping up their clandestine activities, like supporting Shia militias in Iraq and Lebanon, just for the sake of escalating sectarian tensions. Besides Israel and Saudi Arabia wouldn't stand idly by and watch. They might also add fuel to the fire, when the occasion arises.
1
The key here is that there is a 90% chance that Robert Levinson is dead and was killed because he is Jewish. His family is wrong for going at the administration. Everyone wants them back and no one can guarantee what happens to a hostage held in Iran. The Iranians really really hate Israel and Jewish people in general and this is something we overlook at our own peril. When a Muslim commits a crime, the media rushes to inject religion into the story. Here we have a Jewish man held by Iran and they neatly say they lost him...and everyone pretends them losing this man has nothing to do with his religion? We are almost two billion. Of course there are a few crazies among us. It's not about religion when a Muslim breaks the law. Iran refusing to turn over Levinson is about religion and we are wrong to ignore this obvious fact.
8
How much of our "crumbling infrastructure" would that $100billion+ have paid for?
If you believe the world is safer with this deal, then there is no dialogue to be had. Iran will continue to create its nuclear weapon.
We had a deal under Clinton and Carter - Carter even won the Nobel Prize for that. One year later we learned Iran didn't abide by the deal one bit.
Must be proud of that Nobel Prize.
If you believe the world is safer with this deal, then there is no dialogue to be had. Iran will continue to create its nuclear weapon.
We had a deal under Clinton and Carter - Carter even won the Nobel Prize for that. One year later we learned Iran didn't abide by the deal one bit.
Must be proud of that Nobel Prize.
4
Congratulations are due to both American and Iranian leaders who in the face of stiff opposition from domestic and foreign critics remained steadfast and achieved what only a couple of years ago seemed impossible. No wonder that the rightwing Israeli and the Medieval Saudi regimes are so angry. The deal proved a number of important points:
1- It is easier and much less costly both in treasure and human life to resolve conflicts through negotiations than through war
2- Even the most intractable enemies can resolve their conflict. Iran has been demonized in the United States for the past four decades, and Iranian hardliners referred to America as the Great Satan. Yet, despite all that, when diplomats sat round a table they discovered that they could talk together and achieve results.
3- The deal has shown that despite the fulmination of Republican extremists, America is a peace-loving and law-abiding country. This will strengthen America.
4- The moderates in Iran have achieved something that the former hardline government failed to achieve, namely lifting the sanctions and having Iran reintegrated in the international community. Moderation has won.
5- Despite their desperate efforts, Netanyahu and his neocon gang in America failed to derail the agreement. This shows that the power of the Zionist lobby is exaggerated.
6- It is time to be vigilant and deprive the hardliners from reversing the agreement because they will never stop their mischief.
1- It is easier and much less costly both in treasure and human life to resolve conflicts through negotiations than through war
2- Even the most intractable enemies can resolve their conflict. Iran has been demonized in the United States for the past four decades, and Iranian hardliners referred to America as the Great Satan. Yet, despite all that, when diplomats sat round a table they discovered that they could talk together and achieve results.
3- The deal has shown that despite the fulmination of Republican extremists, America is a peace-loving and law-abiding country. This will strengthen America.
4- The moderates in Iran have achieved something that the former hardline government failed to achieve, namely lifting the sanctions and having Iran reintegrated in the international community. Moderation has won.
5- Despite their desperate efforts, Netanyahu and his neocon gang in America failed to derail the agreement. This shows that the power of the Zionist lobby is exaggerated.
6- It is time to be vigilant and deprive the hardliners from reversing the agreement because they will never stop their mischief.
10
The "power of the Zionist lobby" was not only exaggerated as you say but was never more than the sick fantasy creation of the anti-Israel crowd whose members bordered on, if not shared common ground with, anti-Semites.
Of course, no matter how many times the powerful Zionist lobby is "defeated," its illusory existence will be resurrected as needed by those who simply refuse to believe that the U.S. national interest can ever be aligned with anything that might smack of being "good for the Jews."
Of course, no matter how many times the powerful Zionist lobby is "defeated," its illusory existence will be resurrected as needed by those who simply refuse to believe that the U.S. national interest can ever be aligned with anything that might smack of being "good for the Jews."
2
Who was against this deal? The Israel Lobby and the Saudi Dictatorship.
They rather start a WW3.
They rather start a WW3.
6
Prediction: In the years to come Saudi Arabia and its proxies in the UAE cause both the US, the Middle East region and the world more grief and instability than Iran.
The despotic and vicious Islamic tribedom dominated by the House of Saud begins to see the writing on the wall of their demise and decide not to leave without a blood bath.
The despotic and vicious Islamic tribedom dominated by the House of Saud begins to see the writing on the wall of their demise and decide not to leave without a blood bath.
1
Republican position: FIRE, Aim, ready???
Obama position: "Jaw, jaw is better than war, war" -Winston Churchill
Now, what makes more sense?
Obama position: "Jaw, jaw is better than war, war" -Winston Churchill
Now, what makes more sense?
8
The costs of this irresponsible approach to dealing with this shiite Islamic State are just building. The price will be paid one day and it will be steep in lives and treasure.
Obama and his Islamist apologist, progressive liberal Marxist agenda has literally threatened to destroy the world. Thank goodness his reign of stupidity is almost over. The question is whether the idiots who voted for him will make the same mistake again by supporting candidates who espouse progressive liberal Marxism coupled with suicidal multi-culturalism. Islam is an Obamanation to humanity.
Obama and his Islamist apologist, progressive liberal Marxist agenda has literally threatened to destroy the world. Thank goodness his reign of stupidity is almost over. The question is whether the idiots who voted for him will make the same mistake again by supporting candidates who espouse progressive liberal Marxism coupled with suicidal multi-culturalism. Islam is an Obamanation to humanity.
5
Actually the war mongering far right republican idiots we have had as presidents before Obama practically destroyed our world. Obama is doing what he can to try to put it back together again.
1
Many of the comments in response to this editorial expose the misguided and dangerous views the extreme right...and left. This non-proliferation agreement is a compromise (as are all settlements) and not a "giveaway." And the US is not a conniving, punishing state, run by the military.
Reality lies, as usual, in the middle.
Reality lies, as usual, in the middle.
2
...has so far paid off?
For Iran, perhaps. And by the way, lets not get delusional. This is NOT peace in the Middle East. Only time will tell...but based on Irans proclivity to support terror in the Middle East and in other places, the odds are not good. Will we circle back then and call it Obamas biggest, most dangerous blunder? Or will we continue to give him a complete pass in the media?
For Iran, perhaps. And by the way, lets not get delusional. This is NOT peace in the Middle East. Only time will tell...but based on Irans proclivity to support terror in the Middle East and in other places, the odds are not good. Will we circle back then and call it Obamas biggest, most dangerous blunder? Or will we continue to give him a complete pass in the media?
6
For a few days, the popular media and "serious" people in Washington won't be able to sustain the unsupported narrative that they've treated for months with undo credulity: All the President's dealings with Iran were a sign of "weakness."
When a tough nuclear deal was reached with Iran, the prevalent message wasn't that a combination of toughening sanctions and multilaterally diplomacy had made the world safer, but the deal wasn't "tough" enough, and that Obama had "abandoned" four US citizens held as hostages in Iran.
When 10 US sailors were apprehended by Iran, the lasting message conveyed to the American public wasn't that they were caught because they'd drifted into Iranian waters or that most significantly they were quickly released, but that Iran had somehow "humiliated" us.
Now that Iran has given up its nuclear fuel and the four prisoners (plus one) have been released, it's difficult to ignore the fact that Secretary Kerry's diplomacy on one topic bore less belligerence in other areas.
The GOP candidates won't let these unmistakably real victories get in the way of their amoral quests for power. And I have no doubt that eventually — in their pursuit of "balance" — the popular media quickly will forget these successes and again help the Republicans peddle the same old fraudulent blather that had saddled Obama with two unfinished wars and greatly diminished American influence.
When a tough nuclear deal was reached with Iran, the prevalent message wasn't that a combination of toughening sanctions and multilaterally diplomacy had made the world safer, but the deal wasn't "tough" enough, and that Obama had "abandoned" four US citizens held as hostages in Iran.
When 10 US sailors were apprehended by Iran, the lasting message conveyed to the American public wasn't that they were caught because they'd drifted into Iranian waters or that most significantly they were quickly released, but that Iran had somehow "humiliated" us.
Now that Iran has given up its nuclear fuel and the four prisoners (plus one) have been released, it's difficult to ignore the fact that Secretary Kerry's diplomacy on one topic bore less belligerence in other areas.
The GOP candidates won't let these unmistakably real victories get in the way of their amoral quests for power. And I have no doubt that eventually — in their pursuit of "balance" — the popular media quickly will forget these successes and again help the Republicans peddle the same old fraudulent blather that had saddled Obama with two unfinished wars and greatly diminished American influence.
6
The economic sanctions hurt Iran; which was what the Iranians deserved. Our military planners should start now, if they haven't already on a plan to prevent Iran from attacking Israel or other allies in the Middle East, once Iran redevelops the country's military capacity to launch an attack.
To think that the United States can trust Iran's leadership is ridiculous. Their main policy maker, the supreme ayatollah, is a religious fanatic only restrained by the military might of Israel, and the United States, if the United States chooses to support Israel in the future. It will be interesting to see what the Editorial Board will have to say about the circumstances vis a vis Iran in 3 to 5 years, when Iran becomes a credible military threat and attacks an ally of the United States.
To think that the United States can trust Iran's leadership is ridiculous. Their main policy maker, the supreme ayatollah, is a religious fanatic only restrained by the military might of Israel, and the United States, if the United States chooses to support Israel in the future. It will be interesting to see what the Editorial Board will have to say about the circumstances vis a vis Iran in 3 to 5 years, when Iran becomes a credible military threat and attacks an ally of the United States.
3
You are aware, right, that Iran was months away from nuclear weapons capacity before this deal, and now are years away, correct? Explain how that makes the world more dangerous.
I like the deal. Any deals that fashioned to reduce nuclear weapons should be applauded.
I'm very concerned that the cash will be used to buy weapons from Security Council countries including the US. It's clear the weapons sales to the ME by the US, Russia, China and our allies in Europe have made the world much less safe.
The overall reduction of Nuclear weapons world wide needs to be the goal of every UN member along with the security council. What's clearly making the world less safe is the conventional weapons and training that developed nations are selling in exchange for commodities.
I'm very concerned that the cash will be used to buy weapons from Security Council countries including the US. It's clear the weapons sales to the ME by the US, Russia, China and our allies in Europe have made the world much less safe.
The overall reduction of Nuclear weapons world wide needs to be the goal of every UN member along with the security council. What's clearly making the world less safe is the conventional weapons and training that developed nations are selling in exchange for commodities.
5
I'm not sure how the world is safer today than it was before the nuke deal. Is it really? Don't think so. All we really have with Iran is hope that they'll decide to be a good global citizen, but historically they haven't been and nothing in the nuke deal suggests that they will change fundamentally. Nor do we have any assurances that Iran won't acquire nukes in the long run. And whether it is a longer run than it would have been otherwise we have no way of knowing. Unfortunately, life doesn't allow for control groups.
And Obama and the EB should remember that without the threat that the US could and would use military power to force Iran to conform, it is unlikely they would have negotiated.
The real question is whether or not in the short term Iran really needed nukes to achieve hegemony in the Middle East. What they need to up their game in the region was more money. They got it.
For the EB to declare victory at this point is kind of like awarding Obama the Nobel Peace Prize. Completely unwarranted. Perhaps in the long run we will find out that Iran has joined the international community in a peaceful way. Maybe not, but it may take years to assess.
And Obama and the EB should remember that without the threat that the US could and would use military power to force Iran to conform, it is unlikely they would have negotiated.
The real question is whether or not in the short term Iran really needed nukes to achieve hegemony in the Middle East. What they need to up their game in the region was more money. They got it.
For the EB to declare victory at this point is kind of like awarding Obama the Nobel Peace Prize. Completely unwarranted. Perhaps in the long run we will find out that Iran has joined the international community in a peaceful way. Maybe not, but it may take years to assess.
1
A "deal" followed by new sanctions?
Boy do we know how to negotiate and maneuver!
No wonder no one trusts America. Our focus should be capitalizing on what the nuclear deal makes possible, rather than further alienating every Iranian, Muslim and you name it (holding a legitimate grievance against our policies and damage we have done to them) by imposing new sanctions for Iran doing what every other nation on the planet earth is entitled to do (and what we do more of than any other nation on the planet earth!).
Boy do we know how to negotiate and maneuver!
No wonder no one trusts America. Our focus should be capitalizing on what the nuclear deal makes possible, rather than further alienating every Iranian, Muslim and you name it (holding a legitimate grievance against our policies and damage we have done to them) by imposing new sanctions for Iran doing what every other nation on the planet earth is entitled to do (and what we do more of than any other nation on the planet earth!).
2
"A Safer World, Thanks to the Iran Deal"
And all this happened in the first day of the rest of my life (early today) - great feeling.
Then it was followed by "Iran’s Foreign Ministry Denounces U.S. Over New Sanctions" (later this morning).
Moving right along.
And all this happened in the first day of the rest of my life (early today) - great feeling.
Then it was followed by "Iran’s Foreign Ministry Denounces U.S. Over New Sanctions" (later this morning).
Moving right along.
3
For those opposed to the Iranian deal (including all of the GOP Presidential wannabes), offer an alternative. Double down in the economic sanctions, which would strengthen the hand of the Iranian hard-liners? Send in troops? Make the sands of Iran glow? Fund an Israeli invasion? Demand the release of the American captives -- or else, what?
Criticism without an alternative solution is empty and childish. The Obama diplomacy has changed the narrative of the Middle East by reaching an accord with that region's most economically powerful, and most western-leaning nation. The accord is based on an old Reagan mantra: trust but verify.
Got a better solution?
Criticism without an alternative solution is empty and childish. The Obama diplomacy has changed the narrative of the Middle East by reaching an accord with that region's most economically powerful, and most western-leaning nation. The accord is based on an old Reagan mantra: trust but verify.
Got a better solution?
22
by western leaning you are of course referring to the monthly rally Iran has where "death to America" is chanted, right?
2
Yeah - sanctions. Ronald Reagan was able to cause the collapse of the Soviet Union by strangling their economy without firing a single shot. That means he got rid of the Soviet regime in its entirety and democracy ensued. Obama has done the complete opposite - strengthened the economy of a dangerous regime and pushed us closer to war as frightened allies (Saudia Arabia, etc.) strengthen their military presence against Iran (including possible nuclear options).
2
"Western-leaning"? More so than Israel or Jordan?
Again, the NY Times has to be kidding.
This deal insures that the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism has over time $150 billion more to spend on it. Guarantees a path to the bomb and does nothing to protect t the US or its allies. Why are the Arab States so concerned if this is such a great deal?
This deal insures that the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism has over time $150 billion more to spend on it. Guarantees a path to the bomb and does nothing to protect t the US or its allies. Why are the Arab States so concerned if this is such a great deal?
10
President Obama's patient and relentless diplomacy has produced the Iran deal. It is the zenith of his foreign policy success. There are legitimate concerns about Iran how Iran will use the $100 billion in frozen funds the US has released. Those concerns are tempered by economic reality.
Iran is dependent on oil revenue. The price of oil has been falling for over a year. Sure, oil prices will recover. Until they recover, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei needs a substantial portion of the released funds to make up for lost oil revenue.
The Ayatollah is no fool. He knows that developing Iran's economy is more important than waging war against Sunnis.
Iran is dependent on oil revenue. The price of oil has been falling for over a year. Sure, oil prices will recover. Until they recover, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei needs a substantial portion of the released funds to make up for lost oil revenue.
The Ayatollah is no fool. He knows that developing Iran's economy is more important than waging war against Sunnis.
5
Lately I've been thinking why Hillary? Why not John Kerry. He should have been elected in 2004 and he has done an incredible job since becoming Secretary of State. Cuba, climate change, the Iran nuclear deal and now the return of the prisoner/hostages. He has he vision and the experience. Second time around he is probably swift boat proof while we're still talking about Bill.
If the Republicans so oppose hostage deals with Iran they should introduce legislation today to rename Reagan National airport. You can't beat that deal for caving in!
I'm for it. Kerry if he decides to run which he won't but thought it should be mentioned.
If the Republicans so oppose hostage deals with Iran they should introduce legislation today to rename Reagan National airport. You can't beat that deal for caving in!
I'm for it. Kerry if he decides to run which he won't but thought it should be mentioned.
8
Am I the only one who thinks it's odd that the hostages were released at the same time the sanctions were lifted? Despite the administration's claim that the nuclear and hostage negotiations were totally separate, I can't help but believe that the hostage release was tied to sanctions relief.
3
This deal is analogous to Russian roulette. 90% that we’ll be fine.
Yet there is 10% chance where we’ll wake up one morning and Iran will say ha-ha we got the Bomb.
Considering the animosity between different Muslim sects, the hate between Iran and Israel, the Iranian unsettled account with the west, power games in the Golf, these 10 percent represent the end of the world.
Responsible American administration would not play Russian roulette.
Yet there is 10% chance where we’ll wake up one morning and Iran will say ha-ha we got the Bomb.
Considering the animosity between different Muslim sects, the hate between Iran and Israel, the Iranian unsettled account with the west, power games in the Golf, these 10 percent represent the end of the world.
Responsible American administration would not play Russian roulette.
5
I am curious. Your "90%-10%" risk analysis is undoubtedly based on original research. I, for one, would be interested in reviewing the data that you used for these calculations. Kindly provide some links.
1
your curiosity is misplaced. it's not about the percentage. Would it matters had it been 5 or 15? The issue is the consequence of these 10 percent. It is literally death.
If Israel and Iran launch 100 missiles at each other, we die here too. And this is why it's a Russian Roulette.
If Israel and Iran launch 100 missiles at each other, we die here too. And this is why it's a Russian Roulette.
One has to seriously consider possibility that the GOP party is either schizophrenic or bipolar or that their left arm has no idea what the right one is doing...
More than 6 decades ago they orchestrated a military coup in Iran, overthrew the democratically elected secular government in Tehran and replaced it with the tyrannical dictator general Pahlavi whose oppression created the enormous revolt and brought the Ayatollahs in power.
Then they incited Saddam Hussein to invade Iran and use the chemical weapons to kill the Iranians.
Then they attacked Iraq and imposed the debilitating sanctions against Baghdad for a couple of decades.
Then they invaded Iraq, dethroned the Saddam regime, put the Shiites in power and wasted a few trillion dollars to rebuild Iraq from the economic sanctions imposed upon them by the macho conservatives.
Then they decided to undermine the Assad regime in Syria to stem the rising Shiite regional influence.
Then they demanded the White House to start fighting the ISIS as well as the Assad regime, thus both the Sunnis and the Shiites.
Now they claim that we should launch the Iran War. If you don’t negotiate and compromise, a war is the only other kind of outcome.
We all remember tragically well what their macho attitude created in 2003 and how their “bring it on” credo forced everybody to become instantly meek and obedient.
At least that’s the kind of alternative reality that still exists in their schizophrenic minds...
More than 6 decades ago they orchestrated a military coup in Iran, overthrew the democratically elected secular government in Tehran and replaced it with the tyrannical dictator general Pahlavi whose oppression created the enormous revolt and brought the Ayatollahs in power.
Then they incited Saddam Hussein to invade Iran and use the chemical weapons to kill the Iranians.
Then they attacked Iraq and imposed the debilitating sanctions against Baghdad for a couple of decades.
Then they invaded Iraq, dethroned the Saddam regime, put the Shiites in power and wasted a few trillion dollars to rebuild Iraq from the economic sanctions imposed upon them by the macho conservatives.
Then they decided to undermine the Assad regime in Syria to stem the rising Shiite regional influence.
Then they demanded the White House to start fighting the ISIS as well as the Assad regime, thus both the Sunnis and the Shiites.
Now they claim that we should launch the Iran War. If you don’t negotiate and compromise, a war is the only other kind of outcome.
We all remember tragically well what their macho attitude created in 2003 and how their “bring it on” credo forced everybody to become instantly meek and obedient.
At least that’s the kind of alternative reality that still exists in their schizophrenic minds...
17
Republicans really do not want a "safer world." If people are not anxious and afraid, if there is no "bogeyman" out there who is coming to get them then Republicans do not have to save them. If there is less threat of war - well the Republicans lose every time. Their party and its message is based on fear, insecurity, and hatred - along with catering to defense-related industries (the Pentagon is their only favorite government agency) and anything that diminishes those things undercuts the fundamental Republican message of divisiveness and fear.
32
Chamberlain was also popular for "bringing "peace in our time" while others were calling Churchill "a war monger". The law student in the White House has learnt nothing from History and yet why should he as it happened "before he was born"??!!
4
The democrats' insistence on a utopian version of our world just makes realists that much more nervous. They become republicans.
2
What? You remember something about Neville Chamberlain from your high school or college history class and now that becomes the SINGLE metaphor that you and other Republicans just love to throw around in response to every single act of American diplomacy under Obama? That analysis is so simplistic from both the standpoint of the 1930s as well as 2016 that it is like comparing apples and tennis shoes. I am sure that under President Cruz that you, your entire family, your friends and associates, would all immediately enlist in the military to support President Cruz "standing up to" (or carpet bombing) anyone who disagrees with his policies.
1
"Once the detained Americans left Iran, Mr. Obama moved quickly to impose new, limited sanctions on 11 Iranian companies and individuals for their involvement in two recent ballistic missile tests." This tell ya all you need to know about Iran complying with sanctions going forward? They couldn't behave themselves when they were waiting for $100 billion in future fomenting of terrorism money to be released. It will be interesting to see how liberals on these threads try to defend Iran 6 months from now when it becomes clear they are cheating of the deal and/or have used the money they are now getting for terrorism--my bet-- results don't matter--this is part of Obama's legacy, leave the poor man alone you racist.
4
Jordan, I'll be checking back in six months to see if you're right i doubt it.
This is Obama's main legacy as far as I'm concerned. Some point point to the partially effective health care legislation, others point to the trade agreement that he negotiated, but both of those pale compared the importance of attempting to create a peace in the middle east.
Great job. Congratulations Obama!
Great job. Congratulations Obama!
20
Only a someone unwilling to face the facts would think this deal has made the world safer. Iran will have nuclear capability within 5 years.
We have put our closest ally in the middle east, Israel, at great risk to satisfy Obama's political legacy. Iran has gotten everything with America making all the concessions.
Iran is thumbing their nose at this weak, inept president. Kerry has got to be the worst negotiator in U.S. history.
We have put our closest ally in the middle east, Israel, at great risk to satisfy Obama's political legacy. Iran has gotten everything with America making all the concessions.
Iran is thumbing their nose at this weak, inept president. Kerry has got to be the worst negotiator in U.S. history.
10
What concessions did we make? We gave them some frozen assets back in return for them shipping out the majority of their enriched uranium, shutting down 12,000 centrifuges and completely disabling a plutonium reactor, among other stipulations that they had to meet. The 5 year nuclear capability argument makes no sense when before the deal they were months away, and now they are 5 years away. Seems like a better option to me. It also leaves us time to continue assessing whether they are following through on the deal or if they are reneging on it, in which case a military option is still very much on the table for those of you who wish to see us invest another few 100k troops in the middle east...
4
Many people, Netanyahu in particular, have been yammering about the "Iranian bomb" for decades and - guess what - there ain't no such animal, at least not yet. This agree helps to insure (no, nothing is EVER 100% certain) that it will never occur. As for Israel,, they make their own problems and then expect American money and power will always support them and bail them out. W got goaded by Bibi and the beocons to invade Iraq and we know how that worked out. That attitude will last as long as the oil lasts in the ME. After that our policy will be "See ya, wouldn't want to be ya."
1
"We have put our closest ally in the middle east, Israel...."
When you have a minute, Pat, or however long it takes, could you please tell us ONE THING America gets from our closet ally in the Middle East? Something that makes us stronger, I mean, not weaker, the usual definition for an ally -- except -- except -- except (notice the word?), here.
When you have a minute, Pat, or however long it takes, could you please tell us ONE THING America gets from our closet ally in the Middle East? Something that makes us stronger, I mean, not weaker, the usual definition for an ally -- except -- except -- except (notice the word?), here.
1
To the Editors,
Indeed, any step toward normalization in an area that hasn't been normal in centuries is to be welcome. But let us not kid ourselves; nuclear weapons have been let out of the bag and are not going back in. Countries that don't have them want them because the "superpowers" are defined by the ability to "end life on the planet as we know it" with all this prestige and power flowing from the nuclear tipped weapons in the stockpile.
If, indeed, the "superpowers" are concerned about nuclear proliferation among the less stable country then why am I hearing belligerence from the dictator in North Korea with NOBODY doing anything about him?
In the current world of "realpolitik", it's nukes that set the ground rules. Ignoring the fact that Iran just might be going full steam ahead on chemical/biological weapons and ignoring the fact that since the "fundamentalists" took over Iran in the '70's and the Shia inspired message of a world Muslim State became and still is their goal (Suggest reading Mr. Razoux and Mr. Elliott's fine book "The Iran-Iraq War" covering the period from that time to the present), at least this treaty allows some degree of inspection.
But, as far as I know, I'm still one of the "minions" of the "Great Satan" and nobody in Iran is talking about "normalizing" relations with Israel.
"A safer world" is a stretch. Let's just say "We took what the defense would give us".
Indeed, any step toward normalization in an area that hasn't been normal in centuries is to be welcome. But let us not kid ourselves; nuclear weapons have been let out of the bag and are not going back in. Countries that don't have them want them because the "superpowers" are defined by the ability to "end life on the planet as we know it" with all this prestige and power flowing from the nuclear tipped weapons in the stockpile.
If, indeed, the "superpowers" are concerned about nuclear proliferation among the less stable country then why am I hearing belligerence from the dictator in North Korea with NOBODY doing anything about him?
In the current world of "realpolitik", it's nukes that set the ground rules. Ignoring the fact that Iran just might be going full steam ahead on chemical/biological weapons and ignoring the fact that since the "fundamentalists" took over Iran in the '70's and the Shia inspired message of a world Muslim State became and still is their goal (Suggest reading Mr. Razoux and Mr. Elliott's fine book "The Iran-Iraq War" covering the period from that time to the present), at least this treaty allows some degree of inspection.
But, as far as I know, I'm still one of the "minions" of the "Great Satan" and nobody in Iran is talking about "normalizing" relations with Israel.
"A safer world" is a stretch. Let's just say "We took what the defense would give us".
2
The number one state sponsor of terrorism has $100 billion more with which to spread its evil and a pathway to the bomb. To think that this deal makes the world safer is the most delusional piece of magical thinking to grace these pages since Walter Duranty's whitewash of Stalin and his democide.
10
It's people like you who would have urged (or forced if you could have) Kennedy to nuke Cuba in 1961, or Hanoi in 1965, or North Korea, or any other spot in the world which opposes American policies. The fact that you would precipitate WWIII is of no consequence to people like you.
10
Excuse me, but I think you are very ingenue to say that we will be in a safer world with this historical mistake from the western countries. Also it is too hasty to say that the sanctions are already showing results. Iran has a very clear strategy in terms of power projection in the middle east. Moreover, it supports terrorism and are taking steps to acquire more and more ways to achieve its objectives, which are clearly against the USA and Israel.
5
Was this piece written by the White House media director? There is nothing in it but Obama agit-prop painting a deceptive picture of a malicious, autocratic regime that lies to the world about its intentions as frequently as North Korea. We applaud Iran releasing INNOCENT Americans they held hostage to secure the finalities of the lopsided nuclear deal? Even Jimmy Carter would have put his foot down, and that's a low bar.
10
Safer Place???? Not with the US military everywhere bombing and droning six(6) Muslim nations 24/7: overthrowing sovereign nations through CIA/Special OPS coups in Ukraine and Honduras!!! Antagonizing China in their backyard!!! The US MILITARY/CIA are effectively running the US government and policy decisions not civilians as the american people believe!!! We live in a military/fascist/1% state!!! We live on REGIME CHANGE on a constant basis!!!
4
Seven years ago the gauntlet was thrown down by the senator from Kentucky. A promise was made, the GOP would make sure that Obama would be a one term president. In spite of this threat, coupled with seven years of continuos obstruction, Obama continued with determination and INTELLIGENCE to weave his way through this morass of criticism and obstructionism to make significant achievements. Never perfect in his governing, but making small incremental steps, his rational approach in solving and implementing many necessary initiatives this country desperately needed.
In spite of the clamouring for more military force, to teach our enemies a lesson, Obama choose a difficult path of patient diplomacy. Time will tell whether his diplomatic initiatives will bear fruit, but for now it saved many of our young men and women having to fight another war that would give the same pitiful results of previous adventures.
Future academics and historians may conclude that an African American under very difficult circumstances provided leadership this country needed.
In spite of the clamouring for more military force, to teach our enemies a lesson, Obama choose a difficult path of patient diplomacy. Time will tell whether his diplomatic initiatives will bear fruit, but for now it saved many of our young men and women having to fight another war that would give the same pitiful results of previous adventures.
Future academics and historians may conclude that an African American under very difficult circumstances provided leadership this country needed.
34
"Once the detained Americans left Iran, Mr. Obama moved quickly to impose new, limited sanctions on 11 Iranian companies and individuals for their involvement in two recent ballistic missile tests."
This seemed to get little notice. I have no idea if Iran will violate this deal in a larger way, or if diplomacy will be prove successful long term. But I do know that after years of wars and pariah states and a form of virtual cold war with so many nations, it's rather refreshing to see diplomacy in action in one of the most volatile regions in the world.
In the words of the immortal Lennon, give peace a chance.
This seemed to get little notice. I have no idea if Iran will violate this deal in a larger way, or if diplomacy will be prove successful long term. But I do know that after years of wars and pariah states and a form of virtual cold war with so many nations, it's rather refreshing to see diplomacy in action in one of the most volatile regions in the world.
In the words of the immortal Lennon, give peace a chance.
19
The Obama doctrine of empowering a new Persian Empire is underway. Betting on regime change within 15 years,because if you read the agreement, Iran will have its bomb then.We even train their scientists!! A phenomenal robbery of America and its allies against a nation sworn to our destruction..Idiocy!
10
Meanwhile Israel is allowed to have nukes without ANY supervision or argument!!! Hypocrisy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
14
Where did you get new Persian empire from? Ask the million of zoroastrians scattered all over the world, some of the most talented and productive, sophisticated culture.
1
@ted dolan
Like Israel----- the United States, France, and the United Kingdom are "allowed to have nukes without ANY supervision" too.
But this has nothing to do with hypocrisy. Israel, the U.S., France, and the U.K. are not threatening to annihilate their neighbors, spewing repetitive statements of hate at them, or belligerently and constantly trying to create regional instability through terrorist and military means. The leadership of Iran IS doing all these things!
Like Israel----- the United States, France, and the United Kingdom are "allowed to have nukes without ANY supervision" too.
But this has nothing to do with hypocrisy. Israel, the U.S., France, and the U.K. are not threatening to annihilate their neighbors, spewing repetitive statements of hate at them, or belligerently and constantly trying to create regional instability through terrorist and military means. The leadership of Iran IS doing all these things!
1
Funny how an axis of evil and the great Satan can sit on the same negotiation table. This new fond is about months away from coming out in the light and articles of such are paving the way!
4
We will not know for decades as to whether trading $100B plus legitimacy for the Iranian regime plus open trade around the world for them that will underwrite this regime results in the elimination of a nuclear Iran in the future. We do know that we have split the Muslim world cutting the Iranian backed Shia massive slack while demonstrating a substantial reduction in support for the Saudis, Egyptians, and Israelis.
Like the climate deal where we allowed the Indians and Chinese to get the better of us, this deal was not necessary. The collapse in oil prices was damaging the regime with a need for a single shot to be fired and there was absolutely no reason to refill their coffers and legitimize their regime.
Like the climate deal where we allowed the Indians and Chinese to get the better of us, this deal was not necessary. The collapse in oil prices was damaging the regime with a need for a single shot to be fired and there was absolutely no reason to refill their coffers and legitimize their regime.
5
The deal was necessary; the fall of oil prices as well as the sanctions were putting pressure on Iran but there is no reason it would've brought the complete elimination in Iran of all nuclear facilities that you seem to think would've transpired.
4
To be clear, the deal does not eliminate their capacity to produce a bomb it delays it 10-15 years. They have not agreed to a non-nuclear Iran.
The sanctions worked. Perfectly. I don't understand why half of all Americans aren't proud of that.
27
Too bad the sanctions were and are illegal and set up by the US!!!! What other nations use unilateral sanctions on a daily basis!!! NO one!! The US is the worlds babysitter and loves to SPANK Nations it does not like!!! DO AS WE SAY NOT AS WE DO!!!! Nation of hypocrites!!!
2
There is a non-proliferation agreement. The U.S. has entered into multiple nuclear agreements with Russia. Clinton signed an agreement with North Korea. Bush signed one with India. Obama is negotiating one with Pakistan and has secured this one with Iran. Let's not get all messianic about these agreements. With or without them, our nuclear security depends on deterrence and good will. Any nuclear power can drop a bomb in its arsenal whenever it chooses. Dozens of agreements can't change that. In nuclear negotiations, agreements are, at best, the beginning of a process, not the end.
23
The difference is that Iran is not a nuclear power and, thanks to this agreement, is much less likely to become one. Another difference is that the political opposition in both countries worked very hard to sabotage the negotiations but failed. Wiser heads prevailed.
1
Come onm NYT do your investigtion.
Who said the boat drifted into Iranian waters? The same people who said Benghazi was due to a film and Bergdahll was a prisoner, not a deserter.
Who said the boat drifted into Iranian waters? The same people who said Benghazi was due to a film and Bergdahll was a prisoner, not a deserter.
6
Actually, our sailors who were on the 2 boats did.
20
You should read first then speak. The Pentagon and the captains of both boats said they had strayed into Iranian waters
22
Strayed while on SPECIAL OPS MISSION!!!! Please!!!! Imagine this off US coast!!!!!! We would nuke them!!!!
1
A great accomplishment, indeed. Of course, Mr. Obama's opponents, especially those whose main goal is to make him look bad and/or prevent him from accomplishing anything, decry the agreement. Apparently, they'd rather live in a world where danger continually escalates, where Iran is 2-3 months from having a nuclear bomb, and where are military are sent again and again and again and again to deployments in that dangerous and messy neighborhood. That's some price to pay for American pride and their need for domination (i.e., we demand and than the other side, whoever that may be, bows down and acquiesces).
38
Everything in the editorial is true, but incomplete: Iran can legally do what it pleases in 15 years when the deal has expired. The gamble, and indeed it is, is whether Iran in 15 years will have shaken off its revolutionary hard liners and religious fanaticism, truly joining the community of nations, or will it remain bent on Shia supremacy and regional hegemony. If the former, the Obama bet will have paid handsome dividends. If the latter, Iran will develop a bomb for which it already has the missiles to deliver it. Add to that miniaturization and smuggling, and we may find an Iranian nuclear device exploding in a container ship in New York harbor. That is the other possible Obama legacy. That is why I side with those who would have started harder and sooner in securing a stronger agreement against a backdrop of continuing and increased sanctions. I sadly conclude we have been out-negotiated, and all the president has accomplished is a kicking of an apocalyptic can down the road.
4
It is unlikely that Iran will be able to shake off their hard liners just as it is unlikely that we will be able to shake off ours. However, perhaps the hard liner's influence on both sides will be diminished to the extent that both the West and the Middle East can find peaceful solutions to their differences and not resort to wars.
8
We don't know where any of this will stand in 15 years, but if Iran's leadership at that time turns out still to be assertive, why assume that those who are leading the West then will be any readier to let up the pressure on the nuclear front than our present leadership today? If Mr. Kerry had negotiated a deal for 100 years, would you feel safer? At some point, every generation has to deal with its own challenges. At the moment, the Iranians' actions suggest that they are serious about abiding by the terms of the nuclear agreement.
A safer world?
We had that when two giants held each other in check.
With only one of them no operating in full liberty (his own only!), it has gone bad:
Willful invasions, setting up conflicts, starting civil wars, encourageing mass murder (to achieve "regime change") - Lenin called a man whom he saw likely to such policies "capricious" (the man came from Georgia - and our "friend" Sakashvili is a great admirer of him).
But there was, at some time, hope for better international relations. Mr. Gorachov believed in it - and in an honest "not expanding power borders", but promises are nothing - when from certain sides, as their excuses for aggressive acts are worthless.
The world could be safe - if that power started to de-militarize:
in armory as in mind!
We had that when two giants held each other in check.
With only one of them no operating in full liberty (his own only!), it has gone bad:
Willful invasions, setting up conflicts, starting civil wars, encourageing mass murder (to achieve "regime change") - Lenin called a man whom he saw likely to such policies "capricious" (the man came from Georgia - and our "friend" Sakashvili is a great admirer of him).
But there was, at some time, hope for better international relations. Mr. Gorachov believed in it - and in an honest "not expanding power borders", but promises are nothing - when from certain sides, as their excuses for aggressive acts are worthless.
The world could be safe - if that power started to de-militarize:
in armory as in mind!
1
You exemplify a historic precedent that these kinds of agreements can work, even with the potential for failure. The "Bush doctrine" where we need to act macho and threatening to demonstrate our strength - has no historic precedents of success.
7
Breakout Time for Saudi Arabia is approx. 12 hours.
That is 4 hours of flight time for the delivery of already existing nuclear war heads from Pakistan plus about 8 hours for mounting them as a warhead on the existing and ready to use Ghauri missiles stationed near Riyadh.
All ready to be used, paid for and well maintained.
And of course well documented in public.
Plus Saudi Arabia is a very active supporter of terrorism and is in a war against Yemen.
What will the US do to prevent this problem?
Will we finally see sanctions against Saudi Arabia?
When will the kingdom be banned from selling oil, making investments and it's politicians banned from travelling?
When will we see a total arms and technology embargo on Saudi Arabia?
Or will the US continue to support Saudi Arabia's support for terrorism and nuclear arms program by looking away?
That is 4 hours of flight time for the delivery of already existing nuclear war heads from Pakistan plus about 8 hours for mounting them as a warhead on the existing and ready to use Ghauri missiles stationed near Riyadh.
All ready to be used, paid for and well maintained.
And of course well documented in public.
Plus Saudi Arabia is a very active supporter of terrorism and is in a war against Yemen.
What will the US do to prevent this problem?
Will we finally see sanctions against Saudi Arabia?
When will the kingdom be banned from selling oil, making investments and it's politicians banned from travelling?
When will we see a total arms and technology embargo on Saudi Arabia?
Or will the US continue to support Saudi Arabia's support for terrorism and nuclear arms program by looking away?
6
Your great comment is appropriately bi-partisan so sorry for this; why do conservatives focus their suspicions only on Iran when there are so many more. Is the answer that it's politically easier to focus on one boogey man?
2
Jtati,
I am not so certain.
Personally I believe that the traditional involvement of politicians, mostly but not exclusively, with Saudi Arabian oil companies, member of the Bush and Cheney families (as well as Rockefeller) have and are serving the board ARAMCO for decades, might be a reason for their behaviour.
Just like business co operations like those of KBR have created a bond with US business.
You do not bite the hand that feeds you.
Iran is not the good guy on the block, but, I have worked in the region for decades and speak Farsi, Iran is one of those in the region that are able to understand reason while Saudi Arabia is entirely chaotic in it's way to handle day to day affairs.
Might be the difference between Persian culture that goes back a few thousand years and Arabic culture that mostly does not exist, that draws politicians to Saudi Arabia.
It looks easier to control than Persian culture.
Simple politicians probably prefer simple answers so Persian culture is way too complicated while easy to understand Saudi culture is.
Plus, Iran has kicked out US and British interest in 1979.
Which makes it an enemy just like Cuba.
I am not so certain.
Personally I believe that the traditional involvement of politicians, mostly but not exclusively, with Saudi Arabian oil companies, member of the Bush and Cheney families (as well as Rockefeller) have and are serving the board ARAMCO for decades, might be a reason for their behaviour.
Just like business co operations like those of KBR have created a bond with US business.
You do not bite the hand that feeds you.
Iran is not the good guy on the block, but, I have worked in the region for decades and speak Farsi, Iran is one of those in the region that are able to understand reason while Saudi Arabia is entirely chaotic in it's way to handle day to day affairs.
Might be the difference between Persian culture that goes back a few thousand years and Arabic culture that mostly does not exist, that draws politicians to Saudi Arabia.
It looks easier to control than Persian culture.
Simple politicians probably prefer simple answers so Persian culture is way too complicated while easy to understand Saudi culture is.
Plus, Iran has kicked out US and British interest in 1979.
Which makes it an enemy just like Cuba.
1
Where, exactly, is your proof that the Saudis have taken any steps towards such a purchase or that Pakistan would be inclined to make such a sale?
Dear New York Times:
Perhaps you feel safer 7000 miles or so away from Iran where as of yet, Iranian missiles can not reach you.
But given that so much more money is now available for Iran to further fund Hizbollah and other terrorist organizations with conventional weapons to murder more of the 200,000 that they have already helped murder, I and I suspect that many other people in the Middle East don't feel much safer today.
Perhaps you feel safer 7000 miles or so away from Iran where as of yet, Iranian missiles can not reach you.
But given that so much more money is now available for Iran to further fund Hizbollah and other terrorist organizations with conventional weapons to murder more of the 200,000 that they have already helped murder, I and I suspect that many other people in the Middle East don't feel much safer today.
11
Maybe you and your neighbors need to begin to work on ways to live with the neighbors in your region who don't like you. It is not the US's responsibility to make sure you are liked and respected. It is the US's responsibility to make sure the US is secure. If in the process that helps you and your neighbors, good. If not, so be it. What have you done to lower the animosity in your region?
16
Dear Michael:
Your answer reminds me of what a friend who was in the camps at Auschwitz told me. When he asked many years later a US General why the US did not do anything to help bomb and liberate the Death Camps in Europe during the war, the answer was that that had nothing to do with making the US secure.
So I hope that you feel secure in Pittsburgh, just as secure as people in San Bernadino and Paris felt not long ago. There are some people of ALL religions and ethnicities for whom the only thing you can do to, as you say, be liked and respected by them, is for you not to exist. That is not an alternative for me, thank you.
As for what I personally do to lower animosities when possible in this region, this is not the place to discuss such things, but I can promise you that I do my best and it is important to me and to many people in this region to try to overcome such animosities.
Your answer reminds me of what a friend who was in the camps at Auschwitz told me. When he asked many years later a US General why the US did not do anything to help bomb and liberate the Death Camps in Europe during the war, the answer was that that had nothing to do with making the US secure.
So I hope that you feel secure in Pittsburgh, just as secure as people in San Bernadino and Paris felt not long ago. There are some people of ALL religions and ethnicities for whom the only thing you can do to, as you say, be liked and respected by them, is for you not to exist. That is not an alternative for me, thank you.
As for what I personally do to lower animosities when possible in this region, this is not the place to discuss such things, but I can promise you that I do my best and it is important to me and to many people in this region to try to overcome such animosities.
6
@Michael, this is a new one for blame the victim: Now if you don't want to get nuked you have to make sure to be 'liked.' If a woman doesn't want to be beaten dead by her husband, she has to make sure she has his supper in on time and is 'liked and respected' by him. Clearly, Iran wouldn't nuke civilians if they liked the Jews, so Jews need to be more friendly to Holocaust deniers & anti-semites.
3
No mention made in this piece that one important component of this agreement between USA and Iran is the fact that ISIS is targeting Shi'ite Muslims, and Iran is predominately Shia, indeed the spiritual center of Shi'ite Islam. The moment that fact should change, and it may very well, since Iran supports terror through Hezbollah, this agreement will be rendered null and void. I am not throwing bouquets at the signatories, therefore, the US component of which I consider to be living in a fool's paradise. Of course, whatever damages will ensue are the price this nation needs to pay for having permitted two Bush presidents to lead us into two unholy and wholly unnecessary wars in Iraq.
5
Of course people can change courses. Russia can fire a nuke at us any time they want. But saying Iran can claim the agreement null and void at some point doesn't negate the solid movement to a non-nuclear Iran. Their centrifuges have been reduced by 2/3, their enriched uranium has been shipped out of the country, and the reactor that was to produce more fuel has been filled with concrete. To restart their program, all these would have to be rebuilt. We would know about it and we would have time to do something about it. That is a big achievement.
3
According to the article, the agreement increases Iran's breakout time from 3 months to a year. We have secured an extra 9 months before Iran can drop a bomb. 9 months? This is not a peace treaty. It is an agreement for a pregnant pause.
9
Another NYT editorial supporting appeasement of terrorism.
Ignoring that Iran has violated terms is the sponsor of islamic terrorism in Israel and Yemen.
Ignoring that Iran has violated terms is the sponsor of islamic terrorism in Israel and Yemen.
11
And Saudi Arabia is not a sponsor of terrorism? I wonder how many of those Saudi princes give their money to terror organizations. And since they are all members of the monarchy does that not make it state sponsored terrorism? The Saudi government is just as evil if not more so than the Iranian government. They Saudi's are just better at hiding it than the Iranians.
Is Netanyahu listening? For the sake of our children and grandchildren, lets hope he does.
16
Yeah your right we should stop supporting a country that lives by the same values and morals as us. Let's keep giving more and more support to Middle Eastern countries who want Western civilization destroyed. That'll show Bibi.
The issue should not be safety for us but fairness to them. We overthrew the democratic government of Mossadegh, we shot down Iran Air flight 655 and we have imposed sanctions for silly reasons.
Of the 19 who staged 9-11, 15 were Saudi. Not a single one was Iranian.But we still label Iran a terrorist nation.
We should be ashamed of ourselves.
Of the 19 who staged 9-11, 15 were Saudi. Not a single one was Iranian.But we still label Iran a terrorist nation.
We should be ashamed of ourselves.
16
The government of Iran attacked our embassy and took US diplomats hostage. A clear act of war against the US. Iran is clearly a State sponsor of terrorism. We didn't end diplomatic ties to Iran, Iran ended them with the US.
That's the facts today. Going back to our Cold War mistakes doesn't change the facts today.
I happen to like the deal. It's a start at re-engagement something both Iran and the US need to do. That doesn't change the fact that we support a terrible regime in Saudi Arabia and Iran's government is a terrible regime.
That's the facts today. Going back to our Cold War mistakes doesn't change the facts today.
I happen to like the deal. It's a start at re-engagement something both Iran and the US need to do. That doesn't change the fact that we support a terrible regime in Saudi Arabia and Iran's government is a terrible regime.
3
We also helped Saddam in his war against Iran that killed hundreds of Iranians
YES . . .
...Americans don't know history and therefore believe that the antipathy between the U.S. and Iran goes back to the Hostage Crisis of the 1970s ... but don't know or remember how the CIA removed the democratically elected president of the Persian state in the early 1950s ... so Great Britain could continue to get cheap oil.
Then, the Shah was installed. I bet that many politicians here don't know this. Imagine if Iran did this to an American president.
Those who don't know history ... often complex are bound to repeat this ... with dire implications.
Given the history both countries share, this deal was the best that could be implemented.
...Americans don't know history and therefore believe that the antipathy between the U.S. and Iran goes back to the Hostage Crisis of the 1970s ... but don't know or remember how the CIA removed the democratically elected president of the Persian state in the early 1950s ... so Great Britain could continue to get cheap oil.
Then, the Shah was installed. I bet that many politicians here don't know this. Imagine if Iran did this to an American president.
Those who don't know history ... often complex are bound to repeat this ... with dire implications.
Given the history both countries share, this deal was the best that could be implemented.
30
I'll bet most people do know this. They also know that the US and the Soviet Union were in a cold war. ME oil was a strategic part of the Cold war for both the Soviet Union and the US. We did lots of dumb things when we were afraid of a world dominated by a nuclear competitor who we were clearly at war with. The world is a very different place today.
This Iranian government is no friend of the US and is a sponsor of terrorism around the globe. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have this treaty and engage with them.
This Iranian government is no friend of the US and is a sponsor of terrorism around the globe. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have this treaty and engage with them.
3
The U.S. has traded concessions for Iran's promise not to develop the bomb. For that many folks want to award Obama the Nobel. In 1939, Neville Chamberlain traded concessions to Hitler for his promise not to go to war. That agreement has gone down in history as the worst diplomacy ever. Sure, there are differences with appeasement. But there are also obvious similarities.
9
It isn't just Iran's promise, it is IAEA verification that Iran has taken the initial steps (such as filling in the core at Arak, shutting down many of its centrifuges, turned over most of its stock of enriched uranium) plus a long-term and rigorous IAEA inspection regime.
4
Just as Nixon’s 1972 visit to China ended 25 years of separation and distrust between the US and the PRC, the Iran nuclear deal has a chance to open a door in Iran that has been closed since the embassy hostage crisis of 1979. Surely, we need to proceed cautiously, verifying carefully, keeping all options open.
But, the diplomatic opportunity, if we have the vision to seize it, seems far more like Beijing example than Munich.
But, the diplomatic opportunity, if we have the vision to seize it, seems far more like Beijing example than Munich.
18
It's hard to see how the world is "safer" when this deal has destabilized the Middle East. Countries now fear an Iran infused with tens of billions of dollars and who see the US' loyalties shifting.
If anything, this has been a disaster for the residents of the Middle East who will die during the new battles that will erupt as a result of this deal.
If anything, this has been a disaster for the residents of the Middle East who will die during the new battles that will erupt as a result of this deal.
6
Those who don't want to see never do see. Those who make inflammatory statements invariably use adjectives in place of evidence. Thinking requires honesty, most of all with oneself.
12
I can see why it's hard for you to see. The talking points you receive lack context. Has anyone tried to take your guns? Did you die of Ebola snuck over the Mexican border by ISIS agents? No?
6
John Griffiths:
You require "evidence" that other Middle East countries are terribly concerned about Iran's increased power? You are hardly being honest with yourself.
Google "nuclear arms race" for starters.
You require "evidence" that other Middle East countries are terribly concerned about Iran's increased power? You are hardly being honest with yourself.
Google "nuclear arms race" for starters.
2
Prisoners back. Sailors back and a Safer Iran and no American kids had to die for it. Wow. Talking beats killing any day in my book. Weakness is when we use the bullets or the bombs before we use our brains. Sure Iran has a long way to go but they can't come from out of the cold if we keep the door locked. Both sides have blow hearts who only see the sword as the only the way to peace. Do we really think when we have people talking of carpet bombing a sovereign nation that it falls on deaf ears? Saudi Arabia executed 47 people in one day recently most of them by decapitation and we could care less. So when we point our finger of indignation at certain nations we must remember we have three pointing back at us. When we have rich and some not so rich politicians rattling sabers we fail to realize few if any of their clans we be in these wars they are so anxious to start. Real tough guys are willing to put some of their own skin in the game. Fake tough guys love to put other people’s skin in the gain. Real tough guys don’t tell female teachers to shut up and sit down. Real tough guys lead not by the current polls they but by wisdom. Talking first sure beats shooting first. The world is not Dodge City and we are not Wyatt Earp.
36
President Obama moves forward and we're measuring Mt. Rushmore for his likeness. It would have been easy for the President to forego this deal and skate through his lame duck phase but not him. He's full throttle and let the GOP suck wind. Before he leaves he'll make sure that HRC is settled into the WH.
13
By time you complete the environmental impact statements and inevitable environmental lawsuits needed to carve a mountain Iran will have the bomb.
1
I have to say thanks to President Obama and to Secretary Kerry for their dogged diplomatic efforts to get these folks home. I am thankful we have a president who believes in diplomacy instead of the idiocy of saying we should just bomb and invade them. Instead of celebrating the return of our people, Republcians condemn the president for it. The Republican party is the most anti American party I have seen in my lifetime, and they absolutely hate this president, and part of that hatred is the color of his skin.
59
Truly historic! Momentous! One of the very finest events in US diplomacy.
It's a peculiar historical reality or is it a failure of the discipline of history: we have some way of measuring warfare, how many millions wounded, killed, how many orphans, how many kilotons of TNT, how much land gained or lost, how many prisoners of war, the cost...
But momentous accomplishments for peace, no ready measurement! Historians might want to construct some system for such a measurement as the focus of historians for two millennia has been war not the narration of historical events that have maintained peace, prosperity, advanced the quality of life.
Certainly, this agreement despite the attempted sabotage by Netanyahu and the US Congress is no more US orphans from a war with Iran, no body bags at Dulles, and hopefully maybe an end to the Syrian catastrophe.
Now, we will endure weeks of shocking, shameful conduct by Rubio, Cruz, Trump, and yes Jeb! (he's the brother of the crusader,GB43!) deploring this immense accomplishment.
Bravo, Hillary, Kerry, Biden, Obama - that's American leadership at its best.
It's a peculiar historical reality or is it a failure of the discipline of history: we have some way of measuring warfare, how many millions wounded, killed, how many orphans, how many kilotons of TNT, how much land gained or lost, how many prisoners of war, the cost...
But momentous accomplishments for peace, no ready measurement! Historians might want to construct some system for such a measurement as the focus of historians for two millennia has been war not the narration of historical events that have maintained peace, prosperity, advanced the quality of life.
Certainly, this agreement despite the attempted sabotage by Netanyahu and the US Congress is no more US orphans from a war with Iran, no body bags at Dulles, and hopefully maybe an end to the Syrian catastrophe.
Now, we will endure weeks of shocking, shameful conduct by Rubio, Cruz, Trump, and yes Jeb! (he's the brother of the crusader,GB43!) deploring this immense accomplishment.
Bravo, Hillary, Kerry, Biden, Obama - that's American leadership at its best.
37
The very fact of 2015 agreement to curb or eliminate the most dangerous elements of Iran's nuclear program, gives us all hope that there are very few problems which cannot be solved through mutual discussions.
More importantly the realization all-around that the peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding.
Now we can dare to hope for the dawn peace with North Korea joining the global mainstream and India-Pakistan restoring normal brotherly relationship finding solution to the issue of Kashmir.
It was, of course, due to sagacious statesmanship of Obama who has managed to miraculously salvage the deal with Iran in teeth of irrational opposition from sections of Congress prompted by Benjamin Netanyahu.
This is an opportune time for the Americans to do away with Iranophobia and make an attempt to learn the rich culture, history and tradition of Iranians and understand its pivotal role to maintain the regional balance of power in the region.
After all it is harmony that makes small things grow, lack of it makes great things decay.
More importantly the realization all-around that the peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding.
Now we can dare to hope for the dawn peace with North Korea joining the global mainstream and India-Pakistan restoring normal brotherly relationship finding solution to the issue of Kashmir.
It was, of course, due to sagacious statesmanship of Obama who has managed to miraculously salvage the deal with Iran in teeth of irrational opposition from sections of Congress prompted by Benjamin Netanyahu.
This is an opportune time for the Americans to do away with Iranophobia and make an attempt to learn the rich culture, history and tradition of Iranians and understand its pivotal role to maintain the regional balance of power in the region.
After all it is harmony that makes small things grow, lack of it makes great things decay.
10
Not really no as USA has reimposed sanctions on Iran aready as soon as the old ones were lifted this time over Iran's missle progam..Whivh this rag doesn't mention..
3
So, if you see the NYT as such a rag, what keeps you from canceling your subscription?
Yes, yes. Jumping to conclusions full of wishful thinking in direct opposition to the facts of life is so...uh, pretty.
At least until Iran buys a few nukes from North Korea with some of the hundred billion they are about to get, and any amount of the billions they will get any time after they return to free world trade. And there is nothing in the Iran nuclear deal, or the sanctions in place previous to the deal, that has done much to slow Iran's development of intercontinental ballistic missile technology.
Because, in the real world, a piece of paper is worth exactly what a nation's willingness, and desire to exercise power say's it's worth. Because, in the real world failing to learn from history is the way to repeat it.
See also, nuclear Pakistan, the Taliban, and Al Quada before, during, and after September 11th, 2001.
http://www.state.gov/j/ct/list/c14151.htm
At least until Iran buys a few nukes from North Korea with some of the hundred billion they are about to get, and any amount of the billions they will get any time after they return to free world trade. And there is nothing in the Iran nuclear deal, or the sanctions in place previous to the deal, that has done much to slow Iran's development of intercontinental ballistic missile technology.
Because, in the real world, a piece of paper is worth exactly what a nation's willingness, and desire to exercise power say's it's worth. Because, in the real world failing to learn from history is the way to repeat it.
See also, nuclear Pakistan, the Taliban, and Al Quada before, during, and after September 11th, 2001.
http://www.state.gov/j/ct/list/c14151.htm
5
In the real world, you'd actually have to offer some proofs that Iran had actually made any moves in that direction or that North Korea would be inclined to sell a portion of its limited nuclear arsenal. In the real world, you'd acknowledge that the inspections regime is already in place and ongoing and, as the Obama administration's sanctions in response to the ballistic missile test indicate, will be enforced.
5
Personally I am glad that a deal has been made. In the explosive Middle East the atomic bomb equals an end game. Also I'm glad that there seems to be a shift in the political, clerical Iranian establishment towards the outside world.
The words: "A golden page in our history," shows that the Iranian President has made a choice in looking beyond the borders of the standard internal propaganda.
The normal statement being that anything foreign is poisonous and that even he thinks that Iran needs the rest of the world !!
The words: "A golden page in our history," shows that the Iranian President has made a choice in looking beyond the borders of the standard internal propaganda.
The normal statement being that anything foreign is poisonous and that even he thinks that Iran needs the rest of the world !!
1
The behavior of today's Republicans in the face of the groundbreaking and historical diplomacy that the President and Secretary of State have effected regarding Iran and Cuba reminds me of the actions of another Republican, Richard Nixon, during the Paris Peace talks that could have ended the Vietnam War years earlier than it did end. Thousands of Americans and tens, if not hundreds of thousands of Southeast Asians might still be alive if Nixon did not sacrifice them on the altar of his Presidential ambitions.
He sent an emissary to Saigon to convince the South Vietnamese not to make any agreement in Paris, as he would obtain a better deal for them once in office. Johnson had telephone tapes to prove Nixon's treason but could not make them public without also making it known that Johnson had the FBI tape Nixon's phone.
Once again, Republicans show that they are more interested in exercising the power they feel entitled to, driving Democratic interlopers from the White House, than they are in peace. Their behavior on budget and economic matters show the same tendencies when they obstruct the implementation of policies designed to put more people back to work, make sure they have access to healthcare and earn a living wage.
He sent an emissary to Saigon to convince the South Vietnamese not to make any agreement in Paris, as he would obtain a better deal for them once in office. Johnson had telephone tapes to prove Nixon's treason but could not make them public without also making it known that Johnson had the FBI tape Nixon's phone.
Once again, Republicans show that they are more interested in exercising the power they feel entitled to, driving Democratic interlopers from the White House, than they are in peace. Their behavior on budget and economic matters show the same tendencies when they obstruct the implementation of policies designed to put more people back to work, make sure they have access to healthcare and earn a living wage.
8
Peace through diplomacy.
6
Talking face to face helps clear pre conceived ideas and biases. The Internet has made it worse because people simply click the Send Key on impulse without thinking what they would not be able to say face to face.
If Donald trump faced a room full of Muslims from all continents, he would not say all the things he says out loud, with bluster and air.
If Donald trump faced a room full of Muslims from all continents, he would not say all the things he says out loud, with bluster and air.
1
The underlaying premise of this editorial is that with nuclear weapons in the possession of present owners the world is a much safer place for all.
Re nuclear weapons , which are no longer a practical solution to any problem anywhere, that may be true as long as the seniors dare not brandish their nuclear capabilities which leaves out Israel, North Korea and ,reputedly, South Africa.
Neither the former nor the latter were hampered by not using their nuclear capabilities.
Equating a safer world with the absence of nuclear weapons is a new orthodox fallacy .Events have shown that even without deployment or use of nuclear weapons the world, with such states as the USA and Israel, ,can be far less safe not only from nuclear destruction, but for the possession and wanton use of the horrible Arsenal,of non nuclear weapons,whic are .
as destructive .
Isrsel, aided and abetted by the USA, has pursued a political course of territorial expansion, universal legitimacy denial and an over all. Human rights denial that never needed any of its nuclear arsenal.Nor did the USA to destroy Iraq.
Both the USA, in Iraq, and Israel, in Palestine, have shown that recourse to nuclear weapons to realize their ambitions, is certainly unnecessary
A safer world would need shackling and bringing to task both , a universal,rejection of what both stand for and what both can achieve, without recourse to nuclear weapons to obtain results no less destructive than the use of nuclear weapons.
Re nuclear weapons , which are no longer a practical solution to any problem anywhere, that may be true as long as the seniors dare not brandish their nuclear capabilities which leaves out Israel, North Korea and ,reputedly, South Africa.
Neither the former nor the latter were hampered by not using their nuclear capabilities.
Equating a safer world with the absence of nuclear weapons is a new orthodox fallacy .Events have shown that even without deployment or use of nuclear weapons the world, with such states as the USA and Israel, ,can be far less safe not only from nuclear destruction, but for the possession and wanton use of the horrible Arsenal,of non nuclear weapons,whic are .
as destructive .
Isrsel, aided and abetted by the USA, has pursued a political course of territorial expansion, universal legitimacy denial and an over all. Human rights denial that never needed any of its nuclear arsenal.Nor did the USA to destroy Iraq.
Both the USA, in Iraq, and Israel, in Palestine, have shown that recourse to nuclear weapons to realize their ambitions, is certainly unnecessary
A safer world would need shackling and bringing to task both , a universal,rejection of what both stand for and what both can achieve, without recourse to nuclear weapons to obtain results no less destructive than the use of nuclear weapons.
1
I get it: Israel never being accepted legally and then being attacked by its neighbors on 5 occasions in 60 years, defines it as pursuing "a political course of territorial expansion"?
Having nuclear weapons has been a necessary deterrent. Don't you suppose Iran and its proxies have considered their aggressive moves with that in the back of their minds?
The Arab world needs to stop blaming Israel and the West for its failures to deliver a modern world to its citizens. Were their youth to have education and hope they'd not be resorting to the violence of extremism. THAT would make a safer world.
Having nuclear weapons has been a necessary deterrent. Don't you suppose Iran and its proxies have considered their aggressive moves with that in the back of their minds?
The Arab world needs to stop blaming Israel and the West for its failures to deliver a modern world to its citizens. Were their youth to have education and hope they'd not be resorting to the violence of extremism. THAT would make a safer world.
9
This editorial should have been published in the Sunday N.Y.Times after
the treaty was signed. This treaty is weak, and the Muslim world will see
the United States will pay the price. The United States is releasing $150
billion after a prisoner exchange that should have been negotiated during
original negotiations and after the humiliating surrender of our ten sailors.
by the Revolutionary Guard. Iran can not be trusted. The N.Y. Times
printed columns by Nicholas Kristof, Thomas Friedman, Roger Cohen, and
Secretary of the Treasury Jacob Lew, last fall, supporting this treaty. There
simply is no guarantee that Iran will not pursue an nuclear device.
The negotiations of this treaty will be compared to Neville Chamberlain's
dealings with Hitler at Munich, in 1938.
the treaty was signed. This treaty is weak, and the Muslim world will see
the United States will pay the price. The United States is releasing $150
billion after a prisoner exchange that should have been negotiated during
original negotiations and after the humiliating surrender of our ten sailors.
by the Revolutionary Guard. Iran can not be trusted. The N.Y. Times
printed columns by Nicholas Kristof, Thomas Friedman, Roger Cohen, and
Secretary of the Treasury Jacob Lew, last fall, supporting this treaty. There
simply is no guarantee that Iran will not pursue an nuclear device.
The negotiations of this treaty will be compared to Neville Chamberlain's
dealings with Hitler at Munich, in 1938.
8
While I share a great deal of the concern you have expressed, nonetheless I see the deal as the lesser of 2 bad choices.
Ultimately, the military option for the U.S. remains on the table, does it not? In the ensuing 15 years, if they continue their expansion of terror, then I see no reason why the U.S. will not have the same option as today: to thwart them with the military neutralization of their nuclear ambitions.
Ultimately, the military option for the U.S. remains on the table, does it not? In the ensuing 15 years, if they continue their expansion of terror, then I see no reason why the U.S. will not have the same option as today: to thwart them with the military neutralization of their nuclear ambitions.
2
The Editorial correctly mentions "the daunting challenges ahead".
President Obama has ably met the first challenge: Bringing Iran back into the international fold despite cacophonous opposition by Neocon and Zionist ideologues.
The next challenge will be for the next President to broaden the challenge: Preventing Saudi Arabia from tacitly supporting the spread of Wahhabi terrorism across the globe; and forcing Israel to negotiate with the Palestinians in good faith.
And there's the rub: Saudi Arabia's and Israel's fury at Obama's success are born of the knowledge that there is n o longer a Middle Eastern bogeyman to distract the world's attention from their own atrocious human rights records.
I just hope and pray that the next President is also a Democrat, lest we go back to Square One with a vengeance.
President Obama has ably met the first challenge: Bringing Iran back into the international fold despite cacophonous opposition by Neocon and Zionist ideologues.
The next challenge will be for the next President to broaden the challenge: Preventing Saudi Arabia from tacitly supporting the spread of Wahhabi terrorism across the globe; and forcing Israel to negotiate with the Palestinians in good faith.
And there's the rub: Saudi Arabia's and Israel's fury at Obama's success are born of the knowledge that there is n o longer a Middle Eastern bogeyman to distract the world's attention from their own atrocious human rights records.
I just hope and pray that the next President is also a Democrat, lest we go back to Square One with a vengeance.
15
Early days. Iran is still ruled by Shia fundamentalists, who are fighting a proxy war in Syria and Iraq against the Saudi Sunni fundamentalists. Iran is still developing its capability to deliver nuclear warheads. Iran can still order nuclear warheads from Pakistan should it decide to. The current agreement was necessitated by Israel's threat to bomb Iran's nuclear sites. The money now released to Iran will undoubtably be used to further fund their religious/national proxy war. It's time to begin negotiations to resolve that war and begin to bring the possibility of a real and lasting peace to the Middle East.
10
Peace in the Middle East will come about only when the Arabs decide that war is not the answer, that they want to negotiate a peaceful resolution rather than resorting to murder, terror and violence. Regrettably there are very few signs that they have grown weary of the sword.
3
Brightened, I take it you reject the Bush-y Taled doctrine?
2
Interesting - What the US is doing for combating Saudi Sunni fundamentalists - ISIS etc? Not that much or the real issue is there. Maybe it is to hard to look at the reality of the situation.
Dear NY Times. Let's keep our eyes open, ok? What's with the headline about a "prisoner" swap, as if the Americans held in Iran had been convincted of a crime. They were hostages. Call it like it is!
7
Well Franny; They didn't say it was a 'criminal swap'.
2
I would have started the editorial with,” This is a moment many wished would never come…”. You are correct though it is here with a new beginning with Iran (GWB’s axis of evil). Now we also know how wrong and ill-advised GWB and his administration was for not taking similar step back in 2002-2003 when there was an opening with the Iranians when they had blocked Taliban from leaving through Iran and channels of communication were open between us and them. Had the Bush Administration taken Iran on its words and worked with them, sanctions would have not been necessary and Iraq and Syria would be a very different story.
The opposition to this agreement tried everything that they could think of from drawing cartoon characters at the UN speech to recently beheading Sheikh Nimr on drummed up charges looking for a different reaction from Iran. What they forgot was the fact that Persians are an old civilization and are not just some lines drawn by British or French conquerors on a piece of paper, they are a nation state. Their reaction even on the invasion of Yemen by Saudi Arabia is measured.
This is what happens when adults talk and at times may not agree on all issues, but they keep talking and that is what diplomacy requires.
My heartiest congratulations to President Obama, Secretary Kerry, Secretary Moniz, Wendy Sherman, and President Rouhani, Minister Javad Zarif, chairman Akbar Salehi and also to Sultan Qaboos of Oman who started this conversation.
Thank you all
PEACE
The opposition to this agreement tried everything that they could think of from drawing cartoon characters at the UN speech to recently beheading Sheikh Nimr on drummed up charges looking for a different reaction from Iran. What they forgot was the fact that Persians are an old civilization and are not just some lines drawn by British or French conquerors on a piece of paper, they are a nation state. Their reaction even on the invasion of Yemen by Saudi Arabia is measured.
This is what happens when adults talk and at times may not agree on all issues, but they keep talking and that is what diplomacy requires.
My heartiest congratulations to President Obama, Secretary Kerry, Secretary Moniz, Wendy Sherman, and President Rouhani, Minister Javad Zarif, chairman Akbar Salehi and also to Sultan Qaboos of Oman who started this conversation.
Thank you all
PEACE
12
I'm enjoying the debate between Luettgen and Underwood. And the remarkable comment by Rhett. Socrates is as lucid as ever. This is intelligent dialogue and commentary. Please keep it up. My own comment: If only some of our GOP leaders could demonstrate some similar intelligence (and fruitful debate) on the major issues of our times.
3
A safer and smarter world ...
3
This set of agreements is a miracle in today's world. None of the Republican presidential candidates with their yipping and sniping have made a single positive contribution to this process, and none of them could have come close to this achievement. Their complaints make them look petty and small, and most importantly unpatriotic.
All Americans should celebrate this accomplishment, which will change the history of our planet going forward. It is the most significant diplomatic achievement since the US opening to China.
If they had the slightest grace, Republicans would acknowledge this achievement, and celebrate our nation's ability to settle differences peacefully. By not doing so and making micro-objections, they Mark themselves as non-statesmen and unfit for the presidency.
All Americans should celebrate this accomplishment, which will change the history of our planet going forward. It is the most significant diplomatic achievement since the US opening to China.
If they had the slightest grace, Republicans would acknowledge this achievement, and celebrate our nation's ability to settle differences peacefully. By not doing so and making micro-objections, they Mark themselves as non-statesmen and unfit for the presidency.
9
Time will tell whether the deal was successful or not and whether the world is a safer place or not.
For the moment it should be remembered that the US Department of State still lists Iran as one of three "State Sponsors of Terror", together with Sudan and Syria.
http://www.state.gov/j/ct/list/c14151.htm
http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2014/239410.htm (as this is the 2014 report, the last paragraph on nuclear danger could perhaps now be expunged- the rest is far from complimentary).
Will the 100 billion $ be used for funding terror or bettering the life of Iran's citizen's? My guess is both.
Time will tell also on that.
For the moment it should be remembered that the US Department of State still lists Iran as one of three "State Sponsors of Terror", together with Sudan and Syria.
http://www.state.gov/j/ct/list/c14151.htm
http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2014/239410.htm (as this is the 2014 report, the last paragraph on nuclear danger could perhaps now be expunged- the rest is far from complimentary).
Will the 100 billion $ be used for funding terror or bettering the life of Iran's citizen's? My guess is both.
Time will tell also on that.
3
If ever there was a headline screaming out not for a publication date but an expiration date, it's this one.
2
Under President Obama we got a country with a nuclear arms program to set it aside and no one died. Under George Bush we attacked a country without a nuclear arms program and over 100,000 civilians were killed.
8
Let's hope the war crimes tribunal will summon Bush-Cheney during their lifetime.
3
It took a great deal of work with the US and Russia to bring Iran to the table. It's no accident that Iran sent most of its enriched uranium to Russia as part of its compliance to end sanctions. Now it's time to for the US and Russia to work on defusing the tensions between the Saudis and Iran, to end their proxy wars in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. It's time to talk of easing sanction on Russia and working in a united front with the US to roll back ISIS.
4
Before the agreement, we had 3 months to respond to an Iranian breakout. Now, we have a year. If they do break out, they're building a bomb, but not necessarily preparing to use it. I assume our possible responses would be negotiation, threats, and military action. A year is probably not enough time to re-impose effective sanctions. So we got 9 months more to wave our hands at the Iranians and tell them to cut it out. It seems to me that the concrete advantages of the agreement in the event of a breakout don't amount to much. This agreement rises and falls on whether diplomatic relations between the U.S.and Iran improve.
3
A year is more than enough time to impose sanctions and to engage in military strikes if necessary.
Good news in international affairs is so rare these days! Kerry and Zarif should jointly be given the Nobel. Saudi Arabia and Israel may not be very pleased with these developments but the U.S. will do well to take a wider perspective for regional peace.
4
I'm just sorry President Obama can't serve another term.
I'm just sorry Secretary Kerry isn't running for president.
Very impressive work by both.
I'm just sorry Secretary Kerry isn't running for president.
Very impressive work by both.
6
Now watch as Hillary Clinton piggy backs on these successes like she did last night with other Obama administration successes!
1
The NY Times Editorial trumpets "A Safer World, Thanks to the Iran Deal "
Safer for Who? And for how long?
I shall pop your editorial into a time capsule - to be opened in 2027, and shall bet the farm that your prediction is wrong.
The Iranian leopard does not change its spots. The Iranian theocracy will continue to covertly enrich its nuclear fuel in secret sites away from the inspectors' gaze, and continue to covertly sponsor and fund terrorism whilst thumbing its nose at the West.
Here's my prediction - In 2026 Iran will unveil its nuclear arsenal and in all probability begin siphon nuclear weapons to its proxies Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad. the Taliban et al. A safer world?
As John Heywood opined in 1546 - "There are none so blind as those who WILL not see"
Safer for Who? And for how long?
I shall pop your editorial into a time capsule - to be opened in 2027, and shall bet the farm that your prediction is wrong.
The Iranian leopard does not change its spots. The Iranian theocracy will continue to covertly enrich its nuclear fuel in secret sites away from the inspectors' gaze, and continue to covertly sponsor and fund terrorism whilst thumbing its nose at the West.
Here's my prediction - In 2026 Iran will unveil its nuclear arsenal and in all probability begin siphon nuclear weapons to its proxies Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad. the Taliban et al. A safer world?
As John Heywood opined in 1546 - "There are none so blind as those who WILL not see"
7
Well, I guess that's it for OPEC and Saudi hegemony. Thanks for the 40 years of internatlonal economic and political turmoil. What a world - when there is relief that a stronger Shiite theocracy will be able to contain a Wahabist one. Please, post-carbon economy, come soon!
The United States spent over a $2 trillion dollars - an expense expected to rise to over $10 trillion ($7 billion in interest payments due by 2053) - to pursue an ill-conceived war of choice in Iraq, which resulted in a historical and strategic failure for the US.
We lost 4,500 American soldiers. US soldiers suffered 32,000 injuries. Over 200,000 Iraqis were killed, including 120,000 civilians.
In the case of Iran, we are releasing - not "giving" (let's be very, very clear) - $100 billion of Iran's assets in exchange for Iran's demonstrated agreement to close down its nuclear weapons program.
The New York Times need to repeat and contrast those statistics in any article that is critical of the Iran agreement.
The foreign policy approaches of the current and previous presidents, and their consequences, could not be more stark.
We lost 4,500 American soldiers. US soldiers suffered 32,000 injuries. Over 200,000 Iraqis were killed, including 120,000 civilians.
In the case of Iran, we are releasing - not "giving" (let's be very, very clear) - $100 billion of Iran's assets in exchange for Iran's demonstrated agreement to close down its nuclear weapons program.
The New York Times need to repeat and contrast those statistics in any article that is critical of the Iran agreement.
The foreign policy approaches of the current and previous presidents, and their consequences, could not be more stark.
6
Congratulations to the Obama administration for their patience and fortitude in "giving peace a chance". I sincerely hope that the majority of the American public recognizes how important it is to have adults, not just chronologically but also emotionally and intellectually in charge of our government.
What we forget is that we willingly allowed Israel to amass hundreds, if not thousands, of nuclear weapons. Iran and other "enemies" of Israel can only be expected to "nuke-up' just to defend against a known nuclear super-power as a neighbor.
2
Unfortunately, Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel believes he is our president and ill continue to beat the drums of war. I fear for our the future nation if one of his worshipful Republican "hawks" wins the next election.
2
One issue I never hear discussed:
Iran is giving the lion's share of its nuclear fuel to Russia.
Russia is an ally of Iran and Russia has, in some views, been antagonistic to western interests (The Crimea and Ukraine).
What safeguards are there to prevent Russia's return of the nuclear fuel to Iran.
Iran is giving the lion's share of its nuclear fuel to Russia.
Russia is an ally of Iran and Russia has, in some views, been antagonistic to western interests (The Crimea and Ukraine).
What safeguards are there to prevent Russia's return of the nuclear fuel to Iran.
1
Humans are part animal, part spirit.
It sometimes takes a strong spirit to override the automatic animal response of killing, vengeance, and war.
The strong spirits are in charge at the present time.
It sometimes takes a strong spirit to override the automatic animal response of killing, vengeance, and war.
The strong spirits are in charge at the present time.
2
We can make all of us safer only by solving the chronic problems. This could be accomplished in many different ways, from a single individual to the team work of many countries by careful negotiating and compromising to achieve the better world.
In my view the solution to the Middle Eastern problem starts with the faith. The point is to destroy the widespread mutual bias an animosity.
There is no better platform to achieve this objective than a proverb “gens una sumus”. We are one people. Of course, you use the faith to unite the people in this heavily religious part of the world. If there is one God, there is one faith and one set of the principles all of us could share and that’s fully combatable with the democracy, freedom and free elections.
To unite and pacify that region we have to point out that the faith is supposed to unite the people and eradicate the wars. If the religions created different religious, ethnic and sectarian groups fighting each other, it’s obvious that the mainstream religions have distorted the true faith, all of them.
Simply said, there should be no Jews, Christians and Muslims and three different clergies but just the believers obeying the Commandments not to kill, not to steal, not to be the false witnesses, not to crave for the things belonging to their neighbors and not to wage the wars.
How can anybody wage the wars if we are forbidden to kill even a single person?
In my view the solution to the Middle Eastern problem starts with the faith. The point is to destroy the widespread mutual bias an animosity.
There is no better platform to achieve this objective than a proverb “gens una sumus”. We are one people. Of course, you use the faith to unite the people in this heavily religious part of the world. If there is one God, there is one faith and one set of the principles all of us could share and that’s fully combatable with the democracy, freedom and free elections.
To unite and pacify that region we have to point out that the faith is supposed to unite the people and eradicate the wars. If the religions created different religious, ethnic and sectarian groups fighting each other, it’s obvious that the mainstream religions have distorted the true faith, all of them.
Simply said, there should be no Jews, Christians and Muslims and three different clergies but just the believers obeying the Commandments not to kill, not to steal, not to be the false witnesses, not to crave for the things belonging to their neighbors and not to wage the wars.
How can anybody wage the wars if we are forbidden to kill even a single person?
Our world is not any safer due to the Iran nuclear deal. The deal just prevented this planet from starting another senseless bloody war. However, it didn’t make us safer. We will not be safer unless we decode the essential problems and understand what’s pushing all of us into the endless conflicts.
Only after we understand the theoretical basis behind the endless wars we can eradicate them.
If the humanity ever accomplished this objective, we would break the vicious cycle of the chronic wars.
Why have we been waging the wars for many millenniums?
There are no devils that make us fight each other. We just chronically make the same logical mistakes all over again.
We have to finally understand and recognize how we constantly wrongly train the young generations.
We installed the wrong system of values into them and the wrong values forced them into another round of the useless wars.
Every generation makes the identical mistakes - for decades, centuries and millenniums.
We should at least to try to come up with the theoretical explanation of our chronic mistakes.
If we don’t get it right immediately, let’s keep trying and fine-tuning our efforts.
It’s going to be the team work. Somebody will create the go foundations, the next generation might build the first floor but the humanity will eventually reach this objective…
Only after we understand the theoretical basis behind the endless wars we can eradicate them.
If the humanity ever accomplished this objective, we would break the vicious cycle of the chronic wars.
Why have we been waging the wars for many millenniums?
There are no devils that make us fight each other. We just chronically make the same logical mistakes all over again.
We have to finally understand and recognize how we constantly wrongly train the young generations.
We installed the wrong system of values into them and the wrong values forced them into another round of the useless wars.
Every generation makes the identical mistakes - for decades, centuries and millenniums.
We should at least to try to come up with the theoretical explanation of our chronic mistakes.
If we don’t get it right immediately, let’s keep trying and fine-tuning our efforts.
It’s going to be the team work. Somebody will create the go foundations, the next generation might build the first floor but the humanity will eventually reach this objective…
1
The Iran Nuclear Deal along with the release of the 5 prisoners is something that could NEVER have occurred were any of the 2016 GOP candiates the President...None of the GOPers have the temperment nor any desire to pursue diplomacy....
Well done President Obama..
Well done President Obama..
2
If you read the article, you know that before the agreement, Iran's breakout time was 3 months. Now it's a year. Is that the good news or the bad news?
4
Republicans always complain about US debts and deficits. Let's compare the cost of Diplomacy vs War.
The Iraq War has cost the US $1.7 Trillion with an additional $490 Billion owed to War veterans.
A War with Iran, a country more powerful than Iraq will cost the U.S. around 4 to 5 Trillion minimum
The Nuclear deal has cost the US $0.
No need to be an Economic Nobel prize winner like Dr Krugman, to conclude that this is a good deal for the US. It will not just make the World safer, it will make the US economy stronger.
The Iraq War has cost the US $1.7 Trillion with an additional $490 Billion owed to War veterans.
A War with Iran, a country more powerful than Iraq will cost the U.S. around 4 to 5 Trillion minimum
The Nuclear deal has cost the US $0.
No need to be an Economic Nobel prize winner like Dr Krugman, to conclude that this is a good deal for the US. It will not just make the World safer, it will make the US economy stronger.
3
I can't help but believe that this is a very naïve conclusion. But then, the NYT did at least acknowledge the North Korea issue. Maybe the world is safer for the moment, but I doubt it's because Iran means well. They are just more practical.
3
With all due respect, I don't feel any safer.
4
Go buy a gun, that's what Marco Rubio is telling his fans. Then Proceed to kill each other if you perceive threat to you, your family, your community, your country. Lunatics
3
I'm not sure the best vantage point from which to judge this deal is the day after it was implemented.
2
President Obama as well as Sec. Kerry deserve our thanks for defusing this potential conflict, a tremendous achievement given the well financed warmongering campaign. They have proven diplomacy works with reasonable people. One wishes our 'special allies' were as reasonable as Iran, but alas...
3
I applaud President Obama and John Kerry for their work with Iran. It takes more to forge effective diplomacy than knee-jerk, reactionary, even sometimes childish rhetoric which unfortunately the Republicans are currently specializing in for some reason.
3
If any one of the GOP candidates was president today, we'd be reading about a fully nuclear armed Iran; the lead up to military action against that country; and looking down the road at another Middle East quagmire.
This is reason number 3,754,193 as to why not one single Republican running for President, and many running for the House and Senate, are not fit to serve in any elected office in the land.
This is reason number 3,754,193 as to why not one single Republican running for President, and many running for the House and Senate, are not fit to serve in any elected office in the land.
1
The world may appear safer in the short term, particularly when you continually appease your opponents and concede to their demands because they scare you when they say that they will walk away from the game if you do this or don't do that. Ultimately this leads to deeper, more complicated and more complex problems. Iran has called the shots in this political back and forth. We have settled for a temporary, minor truce and have satiated our need for an instant gratification.
3
So - peace in our time?
An opinion with this optimistic title shouldn't be published earlier than 10 years from now. Let's hope we will see it again at that time. I wouldn't be surprised if we won't.
An opinion with this optimistic title shouldn't be published earlier than 10 years from now. Let's hope we will see it again at that time. I wouldn't be surprised if we won't.
1
Imagine if we'd made the nuclear deal with Iran *INSTEAD* of invading Iraq. What would the Middle East look like now?
The Iran deal itself more than justifies my votes for President Obama--perhaps the best president of my long lifetime. But I worry. The Republicans and Israelis will be doing everything they can to kill our budding relationship with Iran. I take great comfort that the US is the only one of the P5+1 who would willingly kill this bright prospect of peace, and that would only happen if a Republican were elected president.
3
Supporters of the Iran deal, and there are many despite what one may hear if their entire source of "news" consists of listening to Right Wing radio and watching FOX "News", should file this event in their long-term memory banks. They will need to retrieve it along with other foreign policy endeavors which have reduced the United States becoming involved in yet another war which is unwinnable.
When the General Election does roll around come November, these and other foreign policy accomplishments instituted by President Obama and Secretary Kerry need to be applauded and confirmed in the voting booth. If one has concluded that a diplomatic course versus a militaristic bellicosity tact was the more pragmatic and responsible direction in which the US should take, then this year's election should ratify it.
It goes without saying but, without fail, one will not find one Republican candidate for the Presidency who approves of this deal, not even Mister "The Art of the Deal" himself, Donald Trump. Hopefully, come Fall the electorate will take note and act accordingly.
DD
Manhattan
When the General Election does roll around come November, these and other foreign policy accomplishments instituted by President Obama and Secretary Kerry need to be applauded and confirmed in the voting booth. If one has concluded that a diplomatic course versus a militaristic bellicosity tact was the more pragmatic and responsible direction in which the US should take, then this year's election should ratify it.
It goes without saying but, without fail, one will not find one Republican candidate for the Presidency who approves of this deal, not even Mister "The Art of the Deal" himself, Donald Trump. Hopefully, come Fall the electorate will take note and act accordingly.
DD
Manhattan
3
“Iran has transferred 8.5 tons of Uranium to Russia”; this should be alarming news for Israel and the United States.
1
The false "choice" posited here by some posters, and the NYT, continues to be "war' or "peace."
The real choice was to ratchet up sanctions even further, and then actually aiding the next Green revolution, instead of abandoning the Iranians who hate the Mullahs. Instead, this President caved in a manner similar to how the US allowed Hungary's nascent rebellion to be crushed by the Soviets. It was long wait again for Hungary, or Czechoslovakia, to be free.
But what is US leadership in the face of Presidential pride and longing for "foreign policy successes"?
The Mullahs will never tire in their quest for an atomic bomb. Their revolution would collapse without constant threat of war. progressives here blame the West, because that is their default mindset.
But the real warmongers are the Muslim fascists, and in the Shi'ite world, that is Iran.
And no matter how many times posters here may proclaim, like Dorothy in Kansas, "Iran did not have a bomb program, Iran did not have a bomb program, the IAEA confirmed that they did, and right through 2009.
Now, however, with 150 billion dollars, they can buy lots more weapons, and continue to expand their hegemony. One day, they will build it again. Ten years is nothing for an Islamic fascist regime which measures time in millenia.
And then comes the hidden Mahdi.
The real choice was to ratchet up sanctions even further, and then actually aiding the next Green revolution, instead of abandoning the Iranians who hate the Mullahs. Instead, this President caved in a manner similar to how the US allowed Hungary's nascent rebellion to be crushed by the Soviets. It was long wait again for Hungary, or Czechoslovakia, to be free.
But what is US leadership in the face of Presidential pride and longing for "foreign policy successes"?
The Mullahs will never tire in their quest for an atomic bomb. Their revolution would collapse without constant threat of war. progressives here blame the West, because that is their default mindset.
But the real warmongers are the Muslim fascists, and in the Shi'ite world, that is Iran.
And no matter how many times posters here may proclaim, like Dorothy in Kansas, "Iran did not have a bomb program, Iran did not have a bomb program, the IAEA confirmed that they did, and right through 2009.
Now, however, with 150 billion dollars, they can buy lots more weapons, and continue to expand their hegemony. One day, they will build it again. Ten years is nothing for an Islamic fascist regime which measures time in millenia.
And then comes the hidden Mahdi.
3
Jubilee: Mullahs may still be around but this is not a country culturally driven by them, nor is a rural environment with tribal religious leaders telling people what to think and do. Most Iranians (70%+) live in urban areas, the majority are youth/young adults (two thirds < 35), over 10 million go to college with about half of them women, math and engineering are heavily pursued careers, and many travel out of the country, often to the West.
There is a lot more to gain by engaging Iran and its growing brighter side and leadership roles that the next generation will likely play in the future, than staying in the past in a 1979 mindset.
There is a lot more to gain by engaging Iran and its growing brighter side and leadership roles that the next generation will likely play in the future, than staying in the past in a 1979 mindset.
2
There was no choice to ratchet up the sanctions further. Russian and Chinese vetoes would've prevented the UN Security Council from doing so and the EU was very unlikely to choose tighter sanctions over this agreement.
As to supporting the Green Revolution, what are you suggesting--Special Forces, parachuted arms shipments? Your statement sounds more like a neocon fantasy than a thought out plan.
What the IAEA said was that up to 2003, Iran had activities relevant to a bomb development that "...did not advance beyond feasibility and scientific studies, and the acquisition of certain relevant technical competences and capabilities" and that some of these activities took place up to 2009. Hardly the Manhattan Project.
This regime has been in power for less than forty years, the idea that they're measuring time in millennia is laughable.
"Similar to how the US allowed Hungary's nascent rebellion to be crushed by the Soviets."
That example shows the untenability of your position. Are you suggesting that Eisenhower should've taken that risk of starting WWIII in 1956?
As to supporting the Green Revolution, what are you suggesting--Special Forces, parachuted arms shipments? Your statement sounds more like a neocon fantasy than a thought out plan.
What the IAEA said was that up to 2003, Iran had activities relevant to a bomb development that "...did not advance beyond feasibility and scientific studies, and the acquisition of certain relevant technical competences and capabilities" and that some of these activities took place up to 2009. Hardly the Manhattan Project.
This regime has been in power for less than forty years, the idea that they're measuring time in millennia is laughable.
"Similar to how the US allowed Hungary's nascent rebellion to be crushed by the Soviets."
That example shows the untenability of your position. Are you suggesting that Eisenhower should've taken that risk of starting WWIII in 1956?
1
Fibonacci, you've been too accepting of the Times' reasoning.
Young people, in whatever quantity, do not guarantee a rational government, especially against the background of Islamic fascism.
If it were otherwise, the Mideast would be a paradise. And there are plenty of engineers and math students in Arab countries and in Persia, along with plenty of the same in China and North Korea.
The Mullahs are going to be with us for a very long time. And they are patient.
And by the way, about 500,000 Iranians went to their deaths at the Mullah's behest in the long war with Iraq. It was an extremely "tribal" war, indeed the worst form of "tribalism," as in Sunni vs. Shi'a. And if over-population in urban centers equates with modernity and progressivism, than you will absolutely love Cairo, or Raqqa.
Young people, in whatever quantity, do not guarantee a rational government, especially against the background of Islamic fascism.
If it were otherwise, the Mideast would be a paradise. And there are plenty of engineers and math students in Arab countries and in Persia, along with plenty of the same in China and North Korea.
The Mullahs are going to be with us for a very long time. And they are patient.
And by the way, about 500,000 Iranians went to their deaths at the Mullah's behest in the long war with Iraq. It was an extremely "tribal" war, indeed the worst form of "tribalism," as in Sunni vs. Shi'a. And if over-population in urban centers equates with modernity and progressivism, than you will absolutely love Cairo, or Raqqa.
1
On February 17th, 1994, NYT editorial board published these words: "The Clinton Administration was wise to cut a diplomatic deal instead. Its strategy is working so far.". NYT cheered Clinton's wisdom all the way through the deal. We now know the outcome. It never retracted this position after North Korea became a full fledged nuclear power which is constantly threatening to use its weapons against south Korea and the US. I am fairly certain NYT won't retract this foolishness either.
http://www.nytimes.com/1994/02/17/opinion/back-from-the-brink-again.html
http://www.nytimes.com/1994/02/17/opinion/back-from-the-brink-again.html
4
Almost one year ago, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu practically sprinted onto the floor of the House of Representatives to make his country's case against the Obama administration's negotiations to bring Iran around to dismantling its nuclear ambitions. The Israeli head of state, a nemesis of the American president, found aid and comfort for his antagonistic point of view from the president's enemies on Capitol Hill. Then-Speaker John Boehner invited the aggressive Netanyahu to Washington in a bald attempt to torpedo the deal. Forty-seven Senators signed an extremely ill-advised letter-as-lecture to Iran warning them that the president's authority was not to be taken seriously. To Iran's great credit, the ruling powers dismissed the clumsy, sophomoric gambit. President Obama's "long view," has matured into a reality grounded not in sappy naïveté, but in single-minded realpolitik: no agreement is reached without compromise. No one gets everything they want. The Israeli prime minister and his puppets in Congress lacked that patience and wisdom. Mr. Obama, as we now see, was correct after all.
6
Thanks, Roger Cohen says it really well today (for a change he is not pushing war), in his comment free column.
1
As the Times says, we couldn't expect the leaders of Iran to give up their nukes for nothing. So now that we have released the $150 billion of their money that was frozen, and to end sanctions going forward, how do we persuade them not to resume their march towards getting nukes? Of course, they have promised not to resume that march, but why would they keep their promise? They ignore UN resolutions with regard to their missile development, why would they keep a promise that they have made to the infidel? And what can we offer them now to persuade them to keep it. Perhaps we should agree to give them $150 billion more of our money? Or maybe $150 billion a years in perpetuity?
I don't know but I rather suspect that they only thing that will persuade Iran to keep their promise and not go for a bomb sometime in the future is to tell them in no uncertain terms that if we perceive that they are going for a bomb or indeed maybe surprise us and explode one, our bombs will start dropping on their heads and their facilities immediately.. And to make the threat credible, Obama or Hillary or whoever needs to ask Congress for the authority to do just that if and when the IAEA or the CIA determines that that has happened.
I don't know but I rather suspect that they only thing that will persuade Iran to keep their promise and not go for a bomb sometime in the future is to tell them in no uncertain terms that if we perceive that they are going for a bomb or indeed maybe surprise us and explode one, our bombs will start dropping on their heads and their facilities immediately.. And to make the threat credible, Obama or Hillary or whoever needs to ask Congress for the authority to do just that if and when the IAEA or the CIA determines that that has happened.
The real deal is to strengthen the hands of moderates in Iran and elsewhere, which is in sharp contrast with the neocon approach. The same model of diplomacy will work in most other places except extreme cases like N Korea since these countries do not even have any moderates under an absolute totalitarian murderous regime.
3
This whole thing is a huge disappointment for Republicans and all those that support them.
No massive body count. Trillions saved (from the coffers of Halliburton and KBR). I'm guessing they can't imagine anything worse.
"Where is the massive bloodshed?!", they will ask.
"Where are the 500,000 dead civilians?!". they will beg.
"This is a travesty! An unmitigated travesty!"
Yes, a genuine "travesty" wrought by logic, reason, wisdom and diplomacy - the things most despised by the far right, along with the poor and non-whites.
Kudos to Obama!
Remember, for Republicans: Iraq War = Huge success! Normalizing relations with Iran = Tragedy beyond description.
No massive body count. Trillions saved (from the coffers of Halliburton and KBR). I'm guessing they can't imagine anything worse.
"Where is the massive bloodshed?!", they will ask.
"Where are the 500,000 dead civilians?!". they will beg.
"This is a travesty! An unmitigated travesty!"
Yes, a genuine "travesty" wrought by logic, reason, wisdom and diplomacy - the things most despised by the far right, along with the poor and non-whites.
Kudos to Obama!
Remember, for Republicans: Iraq War = Huge success! Normalizing relations with Iran = Tragedy beyond description.
1
George Santayana is laughing from his grave and sadly shaking his head at the great worthies of the Times. Take a look at the Times from September 30 - October 2, 1938. The Times then waxed euphoric over the diplomatic brilliance of Chamberlain and how reasonable Mr. Hitler could be. Though the Munich Agreement called for concessions by both sides, those churlish warmongering critics like Churchill were barking up the wrong tree. This deal was indeed one that guaranteed a Safer World, the pages of the Times assured us, then as now. And here we are again. This version of a Safer World Agreement has been verified by international inspectors relying on self-reporting by Iranians and Russians on the whereabout of 98% of Iran's enriched uranium stocks (supposedly stashed somewhere safe, very safe, in Russia, but we really don't know because we agreed the US will not be allowed to send its own inspectors to verify this and other aspects of the deal). Meanwhile, to show its warming relations with the US, Iran continues snatching random American travelers from the streets of Tehran (and US sailors from the sea) for use as hostage bait and developing ballistic missiles designed to carry nuclear warheads. And Kerry and Obama repeatedly insist this is all great news, really super stuff. Fingers crossed and knock on wood they are are proved right, and that Santayana is proved wrong.
3
If Barack Obama had found a way to turn water into wine, Republicans would complain it's too sweet or too dry or both. He does reasonable things like negotiate, when his GOP opponents mostly can't wait to start the bombing. They rail on about his weakness and how they would make the world respect us again. Translation- they would put our "boots on the ground," get a lot of people killed, and perhaps start more wars with no end.
I think Obama's approach might allow for Iran to rejoin the world. Something the Iranian population would like. Obviously no guarantees, there will be bumps in the road. Still much better than the alternative. This might well be history making stuff, but no one in the Republican Party will entertain such a thought. Makes me realize the importance of the 2016 election even more.
I think Obama's approach might allow for Iran to rejoin the world. Something the Iranian population would like. Obviously no guarantees, there will be bumps in the road. Still much better than the alternative. This might well be history making stuff, but no one in the Republican Party will entertain such a thought. Makes me realize the importance of the 2016 election even more.
5
Just give us a president who doesn't enjoy lying. Obama's staff warned him that the line about people keeping their insurance and their doctor was a total misrepresentation of the law and tha people would find it out.
Barack insisted on repeating these lies every time he spoke about it's passage - 29 times on video alone.
Anyone able to change water into wine never has to lie to people - and DEFINITELY doesn't enjoy it as much as BHO appears to.
Every American President dealt with opposition and compromised to get things done. What happened to exempt Mr. Obama from having to work with opposition?
Barack insisted on repeating these lies every time he spoke about it's passage - 29 times on video alone.
Anyone able to change water into wine never has to lie to people - and DEFINITELY doesn't enjoy it as much as BHO appears to.
Every American President dealt with opposition and compromised to get things done. What happened to exempt Mr. Obama from having to work with opposition?
3
You haven't noticed that they hate him? They oppose everything he does and criticize him for it. In case you haven't noticed, he has kind of a dark skin tone- they don't like that. He can do nothing right 'cause he's the "other."
You seem to be a member of that group. Complain, hate him for not being different than he is . Really nothing to say to you. If he accomplished a miracle, you'd complain. My original point.
You seem to be a member of that group. Complain, hate him for not being different than he is . Really nothing to say to you. If he accomplished a miracle, you'd complain. My original point.
1
While I generally support Obama and international diplomacy in general, (I have a degree in it!) I think this is a poor deal for the U.S.. In order for diplomacy to work, both parties have to be operating in good faith, and I don't believe the Iranians are. While they may be making all the right moves on the surface to appease the IAEA inspectors, who really knows what measures they're taking behind the scenes in order to create a bomb. Iran's desire to have one didn't disappear the day this deal was implemented, and I just don't trust them.
And as mentioned, the sudden cash windfall for Iran's economy will have broad implications regionally and internationally. Their oil now comes online to world markets, dragging the prices down, and many other countries' economies with it. And it is more than naive to think that a portion of this newfound money will not go towards funding terrorist groups that destabilize the region.
And as mentioned, the sudden cash windfall for Iran's economy will have broad implications regionally and internationally. Their oil now comes online to world markets, dragging the prices down, and many other countries' economies with it. And it is more than naive to think that a portion of this newfound money will not go towards funding terrorist groups that destabilize the region.
15
Slow down, speedyturtle, I am amazed that your conjecture was published:
"........ both parties have to be operating in good faith, and I don't believe the Iranians are."
What proof does Iran have that the U.S. is operating in good faith? It is equally conceivable that Iran has acted in good faith, only to see a Republican President reimpose sanctions on some spurious pretext.
With your degree in international diplomacy, would you kindly also describe the U.S.'s acts of good faith during the past 15 years, beginning with the invasion of Iraq?
"........ both parties have to be operating in good faith, and I don't believe the Iranians are."
What proof does Iran have that the U.S. is operating in good faith? It is equally conceivable that Iran has acted in good faith, only to see a Republican President reimpose sanctions on some spurious pretext.
With your degree in international diplomacy, would you kindly also describe the U.S.'s acts of good faith during the past 15 years, beginning with the invasion of Iraq?
5
The problem with your reasoning is that state we don't know if Iran is acting in good faith. I return the question to you: is US acting in good faith ? or is it preparing something behind the scene?
Who is destabilizing the region? ISIS and co created by Saudi Sunni fundamentalists. Do you have any suggestion for it ? So instead being negative about an agreement which seems working is better to give it a chance.
Who is destabilizing the region? ISIS and co created by Saudi Sunni fundamentalists. Do you have any suggestion for it ? So instead being negative about an agreement which seems working is better to give it a chance.
1
This is a tremendous achievement, and will go down as the best result of Pres Obamas' foreign policy efforts. It makes me think back to his West Point speech, in which the President laid out his rationale for diplomacy , and use of forces as a last resort.
Obama is smart, patient, this was well thought out; he saw the possibility for a deal and then with consistent hard work, they made it happen.
This is the kind of leadership I like. I will miss him when he is no longer in power.
I hope someone else will emerge with the long term vision, and dogged determination he has shown us for the next President.
Obama is smart, patient, this was well thought out; he saw the possibility for a deal and then with consistent hard work, they made it happen.
This is the kind of leadership I like. I will miss him when he is no longer in power.
I hope someone else will emerge with the long term vision, and dogged determination he has shown us for the next President.
3
This is why we voted for Obama. . Hope and change indeed, Well done.
4
Your analysts would be far more credible if you could point to any treaty that a dictatorship has ever honored 1 minute past its no longer advantaging the dictatorship. The only one that can reference was signed between an Egyptian Pharoh and the Hittite Empire signed around 1259 BC.
But since you can't, I view this column as nothing more than thinly disguised support for Obama and Democratic appeasers.
But since you can't, I view this column as nothing more than thinly disguised support for Obama and Democratic appeasers.
3
Earlier today, on CBS's Face the Nation, Marco Rubio exaggerated, fulminated and pontificated on the subject of Iran and the United States. To hear him tell it, one would believe the seven Iranian citizens (six of whom are have dual Iran/US citizenship) granted clemency by President Obama in return for the release of four Americans held in Iran, must surely have beheaded several dozen women, children and puppies in parks, churches and McDonald's Playlands around the country. They were the worst form of terrorists, while the four held in Iran were "hostages," not prisoners. Lawyerly semantics don't make a bad argument good.
Mr. Rubio condemned every particular of the Obama administration's efforts at diplomatic rapprochement with Iran, from easing sanctions in return for backing away from developing nuclear weaponry, to the rapid release without harm or even the threat thereof of the crews of two small Navy boats caught inside Iran's territorial waters.
Mr. Rubio (and, it must be noted, Ted Cruz) are among the loudest and most histrionic voices objecting to US/Iran diplomacy. These two should take the time to ask any West Point-educated general or recent 2nd Lieutenant what Sun Tzu might have said about the past week's activities involving the two nations. "Hold your friends close. Hold your enemies closer," seems to be the order of the day for both countries.
Diplomacy is war waged to save lives. From his remarks, Mr. Rubio, as President, will have none of it.
Mr. Rubio condemned every particular of the Obama administration's efforts at diplomatic rapprochement with Iran, from easing sanctions in return for backing away from developing nuclear weaponry, to the rapid release without harm or even the threat thereof of the crews of two small Navy boats caught inside Iran's territorial waters.
Mr. Rubio (and, it must be noted, Ted Cruz) are among the loudest and most histrionic voices objecting to US/Iran diplomacy. These two should take the time to ask any West Point-educated general or recent 2nd Lieutenant what Sun Tzu might have said about the past week's activities involving the two nations. "Hold your friends close. Hold your enemies closer," seems to be the order of the day for both countries.
Diplomacy is war waged to save lives. From his remarks, Mr. Rubio, as President, will have none of it.
7
I intended to enclose "war" in the quotes as I just did here.
Alfred Nobel is smiling, knowingly.
6
“We’ve achieved this historic progress through diplomacy, without resorting to another war in the Middle East.” Diplomacy violates the W Doctrine: shoot first, think later. What a disappointment this must be for Republicans and their foreign policy adviser, Netanyahu, to avoid an opportunity for more war in the Middle East.
5
This will lead to world war in the not too distant future. Obama sold us out and Iran continues to humiliate us. Iran forcing our soldiers onto their knees told everyone in the world that we are no longer a force to be reckoned with. Obama tells fairy tales to uninformed Americans during state of the union address and the media promotes his lies.
1
The value of diplomacy is on full view for all to see. Bravo to Pres. Obama and John Kerry. If only this approach was taken with Syria, instead of funding so-called 'Syrian' rebels with the goal of regime change, the lives of millions of innocent people would be very different today. Sadly, the US has chosen to impose brand new sanctions on Iran, using as justification a list of infractions that are much, much worse in Saudi Arabia...a country that gets hardly a slap on the wrist for its lack of democracy, poor treatment of women and minorities, and its deplorable human rights record.
Does ''safer'' mean a well-funded Hezbollah and Hamas?
Does ''safer'' mean the bomb factories in Iran working overtime producing explosive vests and intercontinental missiles?
Ironically, the first place Iran's new weapons will be tried out is almost certainly the island of Manhattan, AKA as poetic justice. #2 would probably be the western half of Los Angeles.
Iran has never been as furious at Western Europe as it has been at America.
Does ''safer'' mean the bomb factories in Iran working overtime producing explosive vests and intercontinental missiles?
Ironically, the first place Iran's new weapons will be tried out is almost certainly the island of Manhattan, AKA as poetic justice. #2 would probably be the western half of Los Angeles.
Iran has never been as furious at Western Europe as it has been at America.
2
That remains to be seen.
I hope wholeheartedly that the Editorial Board would be right and the Iran Deal would not turn out to be Chamberlain's words "peace for our time", after the 1938 Munich Agreement.
Iran had nothing to gain with a U.S. deal; they are getting billions. Only time will tell if it is a safer world. We will see.
1
Peace in our time.
Clapity...Clap.
Iran just won the Powerball. One hundred times over.
"That's a lot of money," as the bank robber salivates to the Joker at the beginning of The Dark Knight.
A dark shadow falls over the Middle East tonight. Do we fully understand these men? We ignore the publicly stated intent of the ayatollahs at our own peril. We project our western sensibilities and political calculations on an extremist cabal that clearly has a very different set of life priorities. We ignore their apocalyptic prophecies. M.A.D. won't work with fanatics.
"Some men just want to watch the world burn." - Alfred
Are they biding their time? The funding is now in.
Time will tell.
Clapity...Clap.
Iran just won the Powerball. One hundred times over.
"That's a lot of money," as the bank robber salivates to the Joker at the beginning of The Dark Knight.
A dark shadow falls over the Middle East tonight. Do we fully understand these men? We ignore the publicly stated intent of the ayatollahs at our own peril. We project our western sensibilities and political calculations on an extremist cabal that clearly has a very different set of life priorities. We ignore their apocalyptic prophecies. M.A.D. won't work with fanatics.
"Some men just want to watch the world burn." - Alfred
Are they biding their time? The funding is now in.
Time will tell.
Iran is a major power in the Middle East whether or not it has nuclear weapons. Why would they want to have them? I hope they see it this way. In the meantime, Mr. Netanyahu is still speaking out against the nuclear accord. He would be much better off finding a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem. Iran is not anti Jewish; it is anti Netanyahu.
3
American prisoners released. Sailors freed. Centrifuges shut down. Enriched uranium supplies shipped abroad. The mind boggles in imagining what the GOP will spin to vilify this signal achievement of President Obama and Secretary Kerry.
We won't have to imagine for long. The Republican bile bus will be rolling soon.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
We won't have to imagine for long. The Republican bile bus will be rolling soon.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
5
The Iran deal improves the chances for a safer world. However, in the near term, Iran's rivals like Saudi Arabia, will make the region less safe with their reactions to the deal. They will pass through the emotional stages before settling on acceptance. We and our allies should brace ourselves, and focus on our priorities, as the middle east transitions to a new equilibrium.
3
I am grateful for Obama's leadership. This historic; the USA chooses diplomacy over bombs and tantrums.
1
What I want to know is: where are the elder statesmen and women of America's foreign policy and military establishment? Can none of them pipe up to hail this great diplomatic achievement? Or have they all become partisan?
There should be a cadre of wise, respected statesmen above the political fray who should pronounce on developments like this to help the general population understand its import. Otherwise it will be left to the partisans. And we've seen that political rivalry in America is such that opponents will never be caught praising the other side, even if they look or sound ridiculous in denying what is evident to us all.
Where is Kissinger? Jim Baker? George Schultz? Madeleine Albright? All the retired generals? Where are the foreign policy experts?
Please, sirs and madams, act your your positions. This is an important achievement for America. And your silence suggests some sort of partisanship.
There should be a cadre of wise, respected statesmen above the political fray who should pronounce on developments like this to help the general population understand its import. Otherwise it will be left to the partisans. And we've seen that political rivalry in America is such that opponents will never be caught praising the other side, even if they look or sound ridiculous in denying what is evident to us all.
Where is Kissinger? Jim Baker? George Schultz? Madeleine Albright? All the retired generals? Where are the foreign policy experts?
Please, sirs and madams, act your your positions. This is an important achievement for America. And your silence suggests some sort of partisanship.
1
>
Once again, Obama has out foxed the GOP and the Israelis to boot, good for him and good for the U.S..
Once again, Obama has out foxed the GOP and the Israelis to boot, good for him and good for the U.S..
3
It is clear the biggest looser in this apparent shift of balance of powers and balance of personalities is Saudia Arabia! They are running scared due to a) our decreased reliance on their oil, b) our decreases reliance on any of the Middle East oil, c) that fact that there is another power center the US is turning to who are not arabs, d) we are 'embracing' the Persians as opposed to the arabs, e) their lacking ability to effect world oil prices through OPEC. We should attempt to capitalize on the Saudi's apprehension to secure substantial and meaningful more involvement from them for peaceful engagement with Israel, suppressing the wahabi extremists, and military participation in Syria, across northern Africa, and Yemen.
It is a new day the world never thought would come after 35 years!!!
It is a new day the world never thought would come after 35 years!!!
Does anyone really know what the Iranians want from us? Respect? If so, what specific actions would the Iranians consider to reflect the respect that they desire? All of this should be on the table.
As the only country to drop an atomic bomb in a war, we are in no position to lecture the world about the perils of nuclear weapons unless we ourselves commit to nuclear disarmament, as required by The Treaty on The Non-Proliferation Of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The hypocrisy is especially jarring as we we don't object strenously when our friends, be it India or Israel, possess nuclear weapons and even provide them with assistance.
Gandhi's quote, "A fat man cannot speak persuasively to a skinny man about the virtues of not overeating," is applicable here.
It is all good that progress has been achieved with Iran, but it is not inconceivable that other countries may want to become part of the nuclear club.
It is important for the signatories of the NPT to try to adhere to Article VI of the treaty as soon as possible:
"Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control." http://www.un.org/en/conf/npt/2005/npttreaty.html
Unless we do so, we won't be on moral high grounds when we try to persuade others, be it Iran or North Korea, to cease their efforts to produce nuclear weapons.
Gandhi's quote, "A fat man cannot speak persuasively to a skinny man about the virtues of not overeating," is applicable here.
It is all good that progress has been achieved with Iran, but it is not inconceivable that other countries may want to become part of the nuclear club.
It is important for the signatories of the NPT to try to adhere to Article VI of the treaty as soon as possible:
"Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control." http://www.un.org/en/conf/npt/2005/npttreaty.html
Unless we do so, we won't be on moral high grounds when we try to persuade others, be it Iran or North Korea, to cease their efforts to produce nuclear weapons.
1
Roger Cohen had it right in his op-ed way back in March of 2015. Four simple declarative sentences: "Do the Iran Deal. Iran is a youthful hopeful society. Embrace the hope. Don't imprison it."
The angry right loves to call out the moderate center for being weak or leading from behind. The loudest of the loud have no shortage of wars the want us to fight. They fail to see the irony in their own unwillingness to fight when it was
their turn. They made and continue to make leading from behind the governing principle of their own lives.
We are fortunate to have leaders like Barack Obama, John Kerry, Wendy Sherman and others willing to take the heat from the angry right and do the
right thing.
http://www.wednesdayswars.com
The angry right loves to call out the moderate center for being weak or leading from behind. The loudest of the loud have no shortage of wars the want us to fight. They fail to see the irony in their own unwillingness to fight when it was
their turn. They made and continue to make leading from behind the governing principle of their own lives.
We are fortunate to have leaders like Barack Obama, John Kerry, Wendy Sherman and others willing to take the heat from the angry right and do the
right thing.
http://www.wednesdayswars.com
3
If the NYT thinks that the World is now Safer - it is the height of Delusion ...
I can go on to list all the reasons for beleiving otherwise, but why should I ? ...
Time will tell ... However, by that time it will be too late...
I can go on to list all the reasons for beleiving otherwise, but why should I ? ...
Time will tell ... However, by that time it will be too late...
3
Obama has just given/allowed $150 billion to the dangerous Iranian regime in a deal that only strenghtens their ability to pursue regional hegemony and terrorism in the Middle East. Furthermore, the oversight of the Iranian nuclear program via the deal is so full of holes (self-inspections) they are fully expected to cheat.
The goal was to eliminate the repressive Iranian regime and move its long suffering people closer to democracy. Reagan caused the collapse of the Soviet Union and its communist regime by strangling their economy. And he accomplished this sithout firing a single shot. You don't allow repressive, terrorist regimes to have billions of dollars in the hopes they'll suddenly decide they prefer democracy. This is complete and utter folly and the Iranian regime - and its nuclear program- could have ultimately been toppled with stronger sanctions. Now we've got a terrorist regime with $150 billion in its pocket. But I guess we've got an Obama, not a Reagan.
The goal was to eliminate the repressive Iranian regime and move its long suffering people closer to democracy. Reagan caused the collapse of the Soviet Union and its communist regime by strangling their economy. And he accomplished this sithout firing a single shot. You don't allow repressive, terrorist regimes to have billions of dollars in the hopes they'll suddenly decide they prefer democracy. This is complete and utter folly and the Iranian regime - and its nuclear program- could have ultimately been toppled with stronger sanctions. Now we've got a terrorist regime with $150 billion in its pocket. But I guess we've got an Obama, not a Reagan.
11
"The goal was to eliminate the repressive Iranian regime and move its long suffering people closer to democracy."
This was one of the most fundamental and oft-repeated errors in this entire process. That was anything but the goal - the goal, as clearly stated by the administration on numerous occasions, was to forestall Iran's nuclear potential for at least 10 years. According to the heads of every major power on earth and the IAEA, this goal has been accomplished.
Stronger sanctions were and are a pipe dream of the right wing. Most of the other signatories to this deal had strong incentives to end the sanctions, and there is no way the US could have unilaterally brought Iran to its economic knees without the support of those other nations.
There is a water crisis in Iran, much like in California. The sanctions have brought economic harm to the Iranian people. The billions that will be freed can be used by Iran to solve these problems and make life better for the Iranian people. The region is safer with one less nuclear power - for 10 years at least. There is the beginning of a thaw in US/Iran relations. No bombs will be dropped, no US soldiers killed and maimed, no Iranian citizens blown to bits, no ISIS territories flourishing within Iran's borders.
So tell me again how this is a bad outcome.
This was one of the most fundamental and oft-repeated errors in this entire process. That was anything but the goal - the goal, as clearly stated by the administration on numerous occasions, was to forestall Iran's nuclear potential for at least 10 years. According to the heads of every major power on earth and the IAEA, this goal has been accomplished.
Stronger sanctions were and are a pipe dream of the right wing. Most of the other signatories to this deal had strong incentives to end the sanctions, and there is no way the US could have unilaterally brought Iran to its economic knees without the support of those other nations.
There is a water crisis in Iran, much like in California. The sanctions have brought economic harm to the Iranian people. The billions that will be freed can be used by Iran to solve these problems and make life better for the Iranian people. The region is safer with one less nuclear power - for 10 years at least. There is the beginning of a thaw in US/Iran relations. No bombs will be dropped, no US soldiers killed and maimed, no Iranian citizens blown to bits, no ISIS territories flourishing within Iran's borders.
So tell me again how this is a bad outcome.
2
The $150 billion belongs to Iran and was seized as part of the sanctions program.
There is NO evidence that the regime would have been toppled.
Reagan sold missile components to Iran. Reagan prolonged the hostage crisis to manipulate voters and defeat Carter. We do not have Reagan, a grade B actor whose virtues are far more synthetic than his incapacity. We have Obama and with him we have this nuclear treaty negotiated among all of the major powers, and the healthiest largest economy in the world.
There is NO evidence that the regime would have been toppled.
Reagan sold missile components to Iran. Reagan prolonged the hostage crisis to manipulate voters and defeat Carter. We do not have Reagan, a grade B actor whose virtues are far more synthetic than his incapacity. We have Obama and with him we have this nuclear treaty negotiated among all of the major powers, and the healthiest largest economy in the world.
7
And your solution? Just what do you think Reagan would have done? Please elaborate.
Now that economic sanctions against Iran have been lifted as a consequence of Iran’s fulfillment of its obligations under its nuclear agreement, further improvement of US-Iran relations would be greatly beneficial to both countries.
During the height of the Cold War, Iran was one of America’s most reliable and most faithful allies, albeit when Iran was ruled by one of the most authoritarian and repressive monarchs in modern Middle East history, the former Shah of Iran.
The impetus for that alliance was Iran’s strategic, economic, political and military significance.
That impetus continues to exist today under a government, with all its flaws, is by far more democratic, more accepted to its people and more influential.
The Iranian people are a resourceful, hardworking and responsible people, with a culture born out of a longstanding history and civilization.
The United States would be wise to better understand that history and culture, in an effort to improve relations with Iran, an improvement that would ultimately lead to reestablishing diplomatic relations with Iran.
This would inevitably lead to resolving the tragic civil war in Syria, would create an aura for possibly resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and, of necessity, would stabilize the entire region of the Middle East.
Those who opposed the nuclear agreement with Iran would no doubt oppose such a prospect.
Yet first and foremost the US must do what is best for its own national interest.
During the height of the Cold War, Iran was one of America’s most reliable and most faithful allies, albeit when Iran was ruled by one of the most authoritarian and repressive monarchs in modern Middle East history, the former Shah of Iran.
The impetus for that alliance was Iran’s strategic, economic, political and military significance.
That impetus continues to exist today under a government, with all its flaws, is by far more democratic, more accepted to its people and more influential.
The Iranian people are a resourceful, hardworking and responsible people, with a culture born out of a longstanding history and civilization.
The United States would be wise to better understand that history and culture, in an effort to improve relations with Iran, an improvement that would ultimately lead to reestablishing diplomatic relations with Iran.
This would inevitably lead to resolving the tragic civil war in Syria, would create an aura for possibly resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and, of necessity, would stabilize the entire region of the Middle East.
Those who opposed the nuclear agreement with Iran would no doubt oppose such a prospect.
Yet first and foremost the US must do what is best for its own national interest.
54
Talking is preferable to combat but it remains to be seen, years down the road, whether or not the Iranians are committed to peace or war. Past precedent indicates the mullahs have hegemonic ambitions as well as implacable hatred of Israel and an apocalyptic ideology
http://napoleonlive.info/did-you-know/iran-and-the-bomb/
http://napoleonlive.info/did-you-know/iran-and-the-bomb/
2
I don't fully understand why the United States can attack another nation's economy and illegally withhold their money and their financial assets. They're not getting free money. The money already belonged to the Iranian people to begin with. So... Why is economic blackmail erroneously described as "diplomacy" within the American media ?
Just look at the photo on the front page to the left of this editorial. Members of the Iran parliament kissing the foreign minister for getting the deal done and earning a payment of $150 billion for this terrorist nation. That picture tells you who got the better end of the deal.
If Israel will be Iran's nuclear 'watchdog' will IAEA watch Israel's known arsenal.
1
"Leaders don’t give up their nuclear weapons for nothing." But Iran has not given up nuclear weapons. Or its intentions to obliterate Israel. It has not compensated the US for the soldiers killed by Iranian supplies in Iraq, or Iranian embedded forces. It has not compensated the US for its assault on our embassy. For its support of terror organizations.
You want to celebrate? Go ahead. You'll look foolish soon enough when the Iranians prove to have taken us for fools.
You want to celebrate? Go ahead. You'll look foolish soon enough when the Iranians prove to have taken us for fools.
1
Jingoistic Republicans will choose war over peace. They are willing to fight to the death - so long as someone else's kid does the dying.
1
Iran has delivered on its commitment under a 2015 agreement with the United States ? Hmm... Sounds economic blackmail and American-made extortion to me.
Peace is always a better option and having our hostages back is great. Yesterday's exchange of hostages and prisoners highlight why the Obama / Kerry duo negotiated a bad deal. The American hostages in Iran were guilty of freedom of the press and freedom of religion, and were only held hostages to be pawns in dealing with the US. Our President should have shown the strength to have these hostages released BEFORE entering in nuclear negotiations and showed to be a weak negotiator with Iran.
He also released American spies for Iran after holding them less than a year, while he contributed in keeping an American who spied for Israel for 30 years.
Now that he showed "clemency" to these spies, he should do the same and pardon Jonathan Pollard and allow him to travel to Israel.
He also released American spies for Iran after holding them less than a year, while he contributed in keeping an American who spied for Israel for 30 years.
Now that he showed "clemency" to these spies, he should do the same and pardon Jonathan Pollard and allow him to travel to Israel.
2
Different issue. Pollard is a traitor and spy, and should be treated no better than Israel treats its victims.
1
Your prejudice clouds your judgment.
1
Shahmat to the Republicans. The motley of hardliners are playing checkers. Obama, Kerry, Rouhani, Zarif, these are the real chess players. It is not a game of sound and fury, but of patience and wisdom. Please continue.
2
This deal was and is a great achievement by the Obama administration. It demonstrates how a real leader deals with a major problem. The Mullahs are still very hardline, but the vast majority of the people of Iran want to live normal lives in a stable society, as reflected by the government they have elected. Reasonable compromises were made by both sides. There are still major differences between the US and Iran but this deal has made the world safer and shown that there are other ways to solve problems besides military force. Surely the contrast between Obama's actions and the foolish and bellicose statements made by leading Republicans on this issue demonstrates there unfitness to govern the country.
The editorial did not mention the effect on the regional politics in the Middle East. US had pursued policies for years benefiting Saudi Arabia intentionally or unintentionally. We chose to ignore its role in spreading Wahabbism in many countries which has lead to the rise of terrorism. Now the balance may be tilting which may be uncomfortable to the Saudis.
The House of Saud is facing turmoil with falling oil prices thanks to oil fracking in the US. Its troubles may worsen if Iran produces more oil and becomes more assertive in Shia dominant countries.
It is time for us to let the politics play out. We have interfered in this region too long. The Sunni- Shia conflict existed since the dawn of Islam and will persist for a long time.
The House of Saud is facing turmoil with falling oil prices thanks to oil fracking in the US. Its troubles may worsen if Iran produces more oil and becomes more assertive in Shia dominant countries.
It is time for us to let the politics play out. We have interfered in this region too long. The Sunni- Shia conflict existed since the dawn of Islam and will persist for a long time.
1
Whether or not its a safer world as a result of this won't be known for some time yet.
The fact of the deal is a triumph for President Obama and his strategy to change the calculus in the Middle East. The simple reality is that the US is not going to be the policeman for the Middle East. In addition to the more multi religious Kurds, Shiites have proven to be the most effective force combatting Sunni Wahhabist terrorists. In addition, Iran must demonstrate its willingness to abide by an international treaty, which it appears to be doing so far. But its only a short time.
Theocratic Iran is most assuredly not the friend of secular United States or western civilization. However, neither was the USSR in the war against the nazis. Time will tell whether pragmaticism will prevail over idelological fanaticism.
The fact of the deal is a triumph for President Obama and his strategy to change the calculus in the Middle East. The simple reality is that the US is not going to be the policeman for the Middle East. In addition to the more multi religious Kurds, Shiites have proven to be the most effective force combatting Sunni Wahhabist terrorists. In addition, Iran must demonstrate its willingness to abide by an international treaty, which it appears to be doing so far. But its only a short time.
Theocratic Iran is most assuredly not the friend of secular United States or western civilization. However, neither was the USSR in the war against the nazis. Time will tell whether pragmaticism will prevail over idelological fanaticism.
Bibi must be furious at this initial success. Remember the sky is falling speech to the U.N.
1
G-d’s promise of Israel to the Jewish people is just that, a promise that
supporters of Israel must work hard for every day to keep meaningful and make real.
The Iran nuclear deal is the single biggest threat to the survival of Israel since its
establishment in 1948, and still needs to be continuously fought and opposed at every
turn, beginning especially with the November election.
supporters of Israel must work hard for every day to keep meaningful and make real.
The Iran nuclear deal is the single biggest threat to the survival of Israel since its
establishment in 1948, and still needs to be continuously fought and opposed at every
turn, beginning especially with the November election.
2
In other words, "Mission Accomplished"? We all know how that moment of hubris worked out.
It will be ten years at least before anyone can really say whether this deal led to a safer world, or a more dangerous one.
It will be ten years at least before anyone can really say whether this deal led to a safer world, or a more dangerous one.
2
Well, seems like tons of plutonium shipped out is safer. Compared to leaving thousands of tons of c4 laying around for terrorists steal, like the crack Republican team did in Iraq, and claiming victory. Also, haven't heard POTUS make any such claims.
3
When the time arrives that the Ayatollah really needs atom bombs, Israel must give him atom bombs. That is the only sure way to prevent him from obtaining them.
3
President Obama and Secretary Kerry have won round one.
The true test will come in November.
The true test will come in November.
2
The Iranian removal of its enriched uranium, the quick resolution of the U.S. Navy's Farsi island intrusion, and the release of the American prisoners, is stunning proof of the wisdom and efficacy of Obama's patient policy of negotiation and engagement, as opposed to the confrontational rhetoric and bombastic bluster, that is the algorithm of the Republican Party candidates. When the Republican candidates, ludicrously, criticize the President for a "bad deal"which led to the return of 5 American prisoners, they unequivocally substantiate their hollow political natures and unfitness for the Presidency.
2
THE Message Is Clear: "Diplomacy 100 - Gunboat Diplomacy 0".
AS for the New Sanctions, they are Cosmetic at best and are intended to Silence & Appease AIPAC and their Cheerleaders at the Fox News and Congress.
THE Real Losers are the US Business and Labour as the Europeans, the Russians, the Chinese et al are racing to invest in Iran, and WE Are Left Out In The Cold....
IN ESSENCE, The US Sanctions Are On The US Economy As Iran Can Buy Anything They Need And Sell Anything They Want To Anyone Except The US!???
AS for the New Sanctions, they are Cosmetic at best and are intended to Silence & Appease AIPAC and their Cheerleaders at the Fox News and Congress.
THE Real Losers are the US Business and Labour as the Europeans, the Russians, the Chinese et al are racing to invest in Iran, and WE Are Left Out In The Cold....
IN ESSENCE, The US Sanctions Are On The US Economy As Iran Can Buy Anything They Need And Sell Anything They Want To Anyone Except The US!???
2
Don't forget, the Republican Congress is made up mostly of rocket scientists and brain surgeons... Oh, right, that would be a lot better.
Mr. Netanyahu has done well. I am glad he is still on the case defending Israel's interests.
5
Bibi is a failure and a pathological liar. Done well? The only thing he does well is cry wolf and destroy Israel's credibility. But thanks for playing along.
3
Spoke like a true Leftist. Your fellow Leftists in Israel have entirely disappeared from the political scene because of their delusional agenda. So I'm afraid 'playing' along is all that's left for you and them.
3
Delusional thinking at its worst. There is an expression, 'born to be conned'. That is fully operative here. Think about it, the Persians have been at the con for three thousand years, they have perfected it. Along comes O, always the smartest guy in the room, and he is sucked big time. Safer world, of course not, what you have is O, a total coward, putting US safety and security at risk. Hey, $150 billion will allow Iran to out source their nuclear program to North Korea, they need the money. Iran will of course work on their missile technology. In the meantime the Saudi's will put their money to work to acquire a bomb. How can we be so stupid? It sounds like 'peace in our time', and we know how that worked out.
3
It's truly a pathetic state of affairs when one of the two major parties must be opposed to literally everything this president does - even to the detriment of the nation - solely to appease their base.
Since President Obama's election in 2008, the GOP has not had specific issues to disagree with the president on - it has been a 100% blanket reactionary denouncement of his EVERY action - even his recent gun background check legislation that they fervently denounced BEFORE they knew one word of what it entailed.
As we head into the 2016 election, there is no aspirational message from the Republican Party. It is 100% scorched earth - cheer our side & hate everything the other side does - regardless of the merits. Attack EVERYTHING, no matter how it benefits the United States, solely because it was done by a Democratic politician.
It has been this way since Bill Clinton was president and there's no indication it will ever change. Just imagine what these fake scandal hustlers would have done had 9.11 occurred on Obama's watch instead of Bush's.
Since President Obama's election in 2008, the GOP has not had specific issues to disagree with the president on - it has been a 100% blanket reactionary denouncement of his EVERY action - even his recent gun background check legislation that they fervently denounced BEFORE they knew one word of what it entailed.
As we head into the 2016 election, there is no aspirational message from the Republican Party. It is 100% scorched earth - cheer our side & hate everything the other side does - regardless of the merits. Attack EVERYTHING, no matter how it benefits the United States, solely because it was done by a Democratic politician.
It has been this way since Bill Clinton was president and there's no indication it will ever change. Just imagine what these fake scandal hustlers would have done had 9.11 occurred on Obama's watch instead of Bush's.
1
"The value of increased American-Iranian engagement was obvious last week when Iran quickly released 10 American sailors after their two patrol boats mistakenly drifted into Iranian waters in the Persian Gulf."
But not before they required our female sailor to don a burqa.
But not before they required our female sailor to don a burqa.
3
With nuclear deal with Iran and normalization of relations with Cuba, Obama has finally earned the Nobel Peace Prize - which, even his supporters would agree, was premature. If he can achieve some sort of settlement in Syria, he would have more than fulfilled his vision of American leadership that he had outlined when first elected. Secretary Kerry deserves an immense amount of credit for his indefatigable pursuit of negotiations with Iran in face of strident opposition and scare tactics.
101
Neville Chamberlain, the former Prime Minister of Great Britain before WWII, would have deserved a Nobel Prize by your reasoning. He said, "There will be peace in our time."
Wake up!
Wake up!
Kudos to President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry for once again demonstrating that "patient diplomacy" of peace is always better than the fear-mongering jingoism of war. Of course, the same Republican critics are still crying about the $100 billion in frozen Iranian funds that have now been returned. Given the state of the world's, and especially Iran's, economy and plunging oil prices, it should be clear to those who will just take a deep breathe that most, if not all, of the money will find its way into Iran's stressed domestic economy as promised by its leaders. And, that in itself should be welcome as an economically stable society is much less likely to engage in aggressive military provocations that the critics continue to predict. Finally, we have already seen the beginning of a "peace dividend" in the return of imprisoned American sailors and civilians. Hopefully, this will continue and lead to the success of the peace talks aimed at ending the Syrian civil war and the refugee crisis that has strained western societies. This is a moment to savor rather than to sneer.
1
I'm glad too that now the guns are off the table and we can get back to our old-fashioned arm wrestling. Now here we may be doing ourselves an unforeseen favor, as imagine as how much really constructively stronger we can make ourselves with the added non-lethal physical exercise that arm-wrestling entails. You see, having those big a-bombs of our own in our pants, somehow makes us feel the thing between our ears is of no value, when maybe - just maybe - it was put there for a purpose. Arm wresting again will maybe force us to us what upstairs to gain an advantage rather than what we instinctively went to first before.
Irrespective of the cheap and loud bluster of the current crop of republican candidates arguing to the contrary, the diplomatic feat obtained by Obama is very praiseworthy. Otherwise, those couch fear-mongers may not think twice, if they can think at all, in declaring war on Iran...or just invade on false premises, a new mess most difficult to extricate from, and with a huge cost in blood and treasure. A propo, when we hear the uncalled-for racist comment of a vulgar bully (Christie) threatening to hit Obama on his behind, we ought to be appalled no fierce condemnation was at hand, and allowing the political discourse to live in the toilet. Unless there is some honesty in recognizing one's opponent's accomplishments, and that some compromise is not akin to appeasement but pragmatism, our fate is sealed, oblivion.
1
"A Safer World," I really want what the editorial board of the NYT is either smoking or drinking. I too want to feel delusional that the world is a safe wonderful place where there is no evil." It might even serve as an example for dealing with North Korea," you mean the possibility that the last bomb that exploded in North Korea might have been a test of an Iranian bomb?Since the entire world knows how North Korea and Iran have become best of friends lately. Than we have Saudi Arabia who over the last 50 years or more have spent hundreds of Billions of Dollars on the most lethal of modern weapons the world has to offer. Does the editorial board really think that they will not use them if another incident occurs like the burning of its embassy? Where does that leave the 5th Fleet in the Persian Gulf? Sitting ducks in between 2 countries who are willing to kill anyone who gets in the way or is thought to be on the wrong side?The entire world is on fire,and hoping it won't come to our shores is wishful thinking.
5
More from the Fox spin room.
4
The negotiated solution to the Iranian nuclear issue together with further diplomatic engagement of the US and major world powers with Iran does not only justify the Obama initiative for peace with Iran, but also reiterate the need for the similar international cooperation as seen on the Iran nuclear deal to be extended to solve other complex problems bedevilling the West Asia and North Africa.
Professor,
Iran might get The Bomb! Pakistan and North Korea do have The Bomb! What has Obama done about that?
Iran might get The Bomb! Pakistan and North Korea do have The Bomb! What has Obama done about that?
2
Oh, the warmongers from the GOP freak show -- and their backers in the military-industrial complex -- will continue to beat their drums and maintain their chickenhawkish swagger despite this proof that diplomacy works. And they'll continue to push for sending middle-class and poor Americans into battle while their own privileged children stay home. Trump's going to take the fight to Iran, China and elsewhere, but his kiddies will remain safely ensconced in their mansions and luxury apartments.
5
The Iran deal speaks to both the legacy of President Obama, having kept us out of more "stupid wars," and to the future we would find with electing a Democrat as opposed to a Republican. Both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have spoken strongly in favor of the accords as a way the US leveraged influence without combat. As Senators past and present, they, like Kerry, stood above their Congressional associates who went along with Bibi's Iran fear-mongering.
The GOP candidates, save Paul, declared that they would rip up the accord on day one, without a thought as to how things would then proceed, or how they would incorporate another active adversary in the Middle East. Donald Trump calls the accord "a bad deal" and, against all reason, said he believed that he had something to do with Saturday's prisoner exchange. This is part of what President Obama referred to as blustery talk irrelevant to the seriousness of governance.
The success of continued and future diplomacy lies with keeping the White House blue.
The GOP candidates, save Paul, declared that they would rip up the accord on day one, without a thought as to how things would then proceed, or how they would incorporate another active adversary in the Middle East. Donald Trump calls the accord "a bad deal" and, against all reason, said he believed that he had something to do with Saturday's prisoner exchange. This is part of what President Obama referred to as blustery talk irrelevant to the seriousness of governance.
The success of continued and future diplomacy lies with keeping the White House blue.
2
As with all of Obama's other "accomplishments", this one occurs in the future. As we've learned, what is championed as an "accomplishment often turns out to be something quite different.
Obama's "accomplishments" need their own set of inspectors.
Obama's "accomplishments" need their own set of inspectors.
3
The deal with Iran has shown encouraging signs of progress. Indeed it is too early to asses its long term success but it undoubtedly a step forward.
Which can make one think about what is possible to achieve in the international arena without bombing, killing, droning, kidnapping, torturing and invading, in contrary to what we were led to believe for the past decade and a half by successive administrations, Republican 'tough guys' ,pro war Democrats - Mrs. Clinton among others - and trigger happy European leaders.
(The best example was the French president who called for and ordered bombing even before knowing who was behind the massacre in Paris - French and Belgian citizens)
Apparently in order to discourage Iran from potentially developing nuclear capabilities, sanctions and skilled diplomacy can bring more peace, security, trust and hope for the future than all the trillion dollars wars we have been conducting in the Middle East, leaving hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of refugees and years of mayhem and chaos - alongside hate, resentment and even more terror.
For now it would seems like "weak" president Obama might be be more effective than 'drones Obama'.
Which can make one think about what is possible to achieve in the international arena without bombing, killing, droning, kidnapping, torturing and invading, in contrary to what we were led to believe for the past decade and a half by successive administrations, Republican 'tough guys' ,pro war Democrats - Mrs. Clinton among others - and trigger happy European leaders.
(The best example was the French president who called for and ordered bombing even before knowing who was behind the massacre in Paris - French and Belgian citizens)
Apparently in order to discourage Iran from potentially developing nuclear capabilities, sanctions and skilled diplomacy can bring more peace, security, trust and hope for the future than all the trillion dollars wars we have been conducting in the Middle East, leaving hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of refugees and years of mayhem and chaos - alongside hate, resentment and even more terror.
For now it would seems like "weak" president Obama might be be more effective than 'drones Obama'.
Perhaps - but is it safer for Dafna Meir, the 38 year-old nurse and mother of six, who was murdered in her own home today by a Palestinian terrorist? Restraining Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons is good, but it must be further restrained and sanctioned if needed from encouraging and funding, directly or indirectly, the sort of individual acts of terrorism against civilians like Dafna, whether in Israel or anywhere else in the world.
2
"Perhaps - but is it safer for Dafna Meir, the 38 year-old nurse and mother of six, who was murdered in her own home today by a Palestinian terrorist?"
Why are you pinning the act of a Palestinian on the government of Iran? They aren't the same thing, and never have been.
Why are you pinning the act of a Palestinian on the government of Iran? They aren't the same thing, and never have been.
3
Excellent job President Obama. It might not be a perfect deal but diplomacy and dialogue is much better than going to war.
3
Making the world safer, one series of talks at a time. Let's all be relieved and glad that, for once, force wasn't the answer.
2
'A Safer World, Thanks to the Iran Deal'
Keep telling yourself that...the rest of us can see you have your head in the sand.
Keep telling yourself that...the rest of us can see you have your head in the sand.
4
All this and not one shot fired or one bomb dropped or one innocent child or US soldier killed. Sounds like a great way to go moving forward. Thank you Mr. President.
7
The agreement provides for Iran to delay a request by inspectors for access to "military" sites or any new locations for 24 days, and requires that the inspectors first provide independent evidence of potential violation -- and thereby expose their intelligence sources. That makes it trivially easy for Iran to continue their nuclear arms development, designing mobile facilities expressly to facilitate concealment. (Incidentally, as was well reported, that development was ongoing during the negotiations. So much for actions versus words.)
Further: After 8 years, Iran will be free to acquire ballistic missiles. Exactly what do the those so vigorously applauding the agreement think they want those missiles for? Not just Israel, but also most of the remaining Arab states, are terrified of a nuclear-armed ballistic-missile-equipped Iran.
This agreement is, indeed, a total surrender, providing Iran with explicit, legal, methods to cheat its intent and continue its nuclear weapon development, and the funds to do so with.
Future generations will regret this move. I only hope they remember who is to blame.
Further: After 8 years, Iran will be free to acquire ballistic missiles. Exactly what do the those so vigorously applauding the agreement think they want those missiles for? Not just Israel, but also most of the remaining Arab states, are terrified of a nuclear-armed ballistic-missile-equipped Iran.
This agreement is, indeed, a total surrender, providing Iran with explicit, legal, methods to cheat its intent and continue its nuclear weapon development, and the funds to do so with.
Future generations will regret this move. I only hope they remember who is to blame.
2
New locations would involve radioactive materials, the evidence of which can't be eliminated in 24 days. You've also erroneous assumed that the evidence would have to consist of intelligence sources when it it more likely to consist of scientific measurements or satellite readings. As to mobile facilities, if it was so trivially easy to do that, how come there is no evidence that Iran has done so now. How do you have a mobile facility with thousands of centrifuges?
1
It is time for a bit of truth telling about the contest between Iran and Saudi Arabia. That is often portrayed as Sunni vs Shiite, and we are frequently told the Sunnis are a large majority in that.
That isn't true. To get a Sunni majority, the Saudis must enlist Muslims who are far outside the contest and/or scattered and useless to them.
Iran has about 82 million Shiites, Iraq another 27, Lebanon another 3 in Hezbollah control, and Syria's Assad has control of perhaps 10 million on the Shiite side. That is 122 million.
The Saudis are only 27 million including guest workers and some extra Shiites living on top their oil. Add in the other 9 million Iraqis who are Sunni (saying 25%), the other 8 million Syrians outside the government areas, Lebanon's 3 million Sunnis, Jordan's 8, say 2/3 of Yemen and Oman's 3 million, both pretty useless, Kuwait's 3, UAE's 5.8, and you've got ~77 million, barely half the Shiites, and that is counting a lot who are useless in that contest. These are not impressive allies or numbers.
To get bigger numbers, one must count Egypt or Turkey or the North African Arabs, none of whom are much interested in being part of the Saudis against Iran.
The Saudi Wahhabi crazy Sunnis have the short end of the numbers, any way you add them up.
The story of a Sunni majority against Iran is a myth. The Shiite numbers are not just larger, they are concentrated and useful. I did not even count some Shiites like Bahrain or the Saudi's own restive oil provinces.
That isn't true. To get a Sunni majority, the Saudis must enlist Muslims who are far outside the contest and/or scattered and useless to them.
Iran has about 82 million Shiites, Iraq another 27, Lebanon another 3 in Hezbollah control, and Syria's Assad has control of perhaps 10 million on the Shiite side. That is 122 million.
The Saudis are only 27 million including guest workers and some extra Shiites living on top their oil. Add in the other 9 million Iraqis who are Sunni (saying 25%), the other 8 million Syrians outside the government areas, Lebanon's 3 million Sunnis, Jordan's 8, say 2/3 of Yemen and Oman's 3 million, both pretty useless, Kuwait's 3, UAE's 5.8, and you've got ~77 million, barely half the Shiites, and that is counting a lot who are useless in that contest. These are not impressive allies or numbers.
To get bigger numbers, one must count Egypt or Turkey or the North African Arabs, none of whom are much interested in being part of the Saudis against Iran.
The Saudi Wahhabi crazy Sunnis have the short end of the numbers, any way you add them up.
The story of a Sunni majority against Iran is a myth. The Shiite numbers are not just larger, they are concentrated and useful. I did not even count some Shiites like Bahrain or the Saudi's own restive oil provinces.
9
Mark Thomason: Then it's only a matter of time before Saudi Arabia beefs up it's missile defenses, and hides a few illicitly acquired, F-35 deliverable, nukes in the Arabian desert? Or do you think the Sunni sect of Islam is going to change their ways after 1400 years of more or less constant warfare with the Shia sect of Islam? And as for the Shia, how many Sunni have they killed in Syria over the past few years?
3
I meant that as a comment on the true balance of power, and what it means for the motives of Saudi Arabia.
They are not the powerful majority we are so often told. They are hiding behind US power, and without that would be in a very dangerous spot.
News reporting about the dominant numbers of Sunnis misses the key facts of where they are, and what sort they are, i.e. not Saudi Wahhabi sect.
They are not the powerful majority we are so often told. They are hiding behind US power, and without that would be in a very dangerous spot.
News reporting about the dominant numbers of Sunnis misses the key facts of where they are, and what sort they are, i.e. not Saudi Wahhabi sect.
Despite the obstructionist policies of the congressional troglodytes Mr. Obama has accomplished two diplomatic policies, that show the paucity of the GOP ideology of the past few decades.
He has established relations with Cuba, and helped bring Iran back to the worlds economy. It may not be perfect, but I will bet, one the Iranians get a bit more economically stable, they will bring about change in their government. If it had not been for our interference in their government by the Eisenhower administration, the Ayatollahs would not be ruling Iran today.
Suppose the GOP should win the next election, will they then reverse these understandings, just to show how despicable they can really be? Will their documented unsavory conduct toward Mr. Obama drive then to even more destructive action?
They have been fighting any constructive relationship with Iran since 1979, and have accomplished nothing by it. Now Mr.Obama has shown how ineffective their policies are. And, they are livid about it, so be prepared disreputable and spurious attack on him. I will bet tomorrows WSJ will find a way to accuse him of making the world less safe, and how he "Caved in" to some undefined pressure. Even while U.S. businesses like Boeing stands to profit from this.
He leaves a legacy they can not match, he did not have to put on a costume and declare "Mission Accomplished, " he just did it to their chagrin.
He has established relations with Cuba, and helped bring Iran back to the worlds economy. It may not be perfect, but I will bet, one the Iranians get a bit more economically stable, they will bring about change in their government. If it had not been for our interference in their government by the Eisenhower administration, the Ayatollahs would not be ruling Iran today.
Suppose the GOP should win the next election, will they then reverse these understandings, just to show how despicable they can really be? Will their documented unsavory conduct toward Mr. Obama drive then to even more destructive action?
They have been fighting any constructive relationship with Iran since 1979, and have accomplished nothing by it. Now Mr.Obama has shown how ineffective their policies are. And, they are livid about it, so be prepared disreputable and spurious attack on him. I will bet tomorrows WSJ will find a way to accuse him of making the world less safe, and how he "Caved in" to some undefined pressure. Even while U.S. businesses like Boeing stands to profit from this.
He leaves a legacy they can not match, he did not have to put on a costume and declare "Mission Accomplished, " he just did it to their chagrin.
60
David Underwood: Don't count your chickens before they hatch. Back in the 90's the Clinton Administration said pretty much what you just did, that the nuclear deal they signed with North Korea might not be perfect, but they would bet that once the North Koreans got bit more economically stable, they will bring about change in their government.
4
Unfortunately due to the NK totalitarian regime, the country has not stabilized economically. China has aided and abetted it and kept if from being totally isolated.
I suspect China is afraid if thing should get worse there, NK just might try to invade the south, and cause even more instability in the area.
The U.S. would have to really bomb them, and China does not want that on their border. If NK were to put an armed missile on the pad, the U.S. would have to send an ICBM with a nuke. No one wants that, but it would be a last resort.
We need for China to take the lead with them, or wait until the current leader dies. They are mad, quite mad, and have to be confined to the mad house. Iran is not NK, it is far better educated, and its citizens know about the rest of he world.
I suspect China is afraid if thing should get worse there, NK just might try to invade the south, and cause even more instability in the area.
The U.S. would have to really bomb them, and China does not want that on their border. If NK were to put an armed missile on the pad, the U.S. would have to send an ICBM with a nuke. No one wants that, but it would be a last resort.
We need for China to take the lead with them, or wait until the current leader dies. They are mad, quite mad, and have to be confined to the mad house. Iran is not NK, it is far better educated, and its citizens know about the rest of he world.
It is important to note that Iran's President Rouhani had many of the same problems that President Obama had in securing this deal and moving his country forward. He has to deal with a group of hard-liners, as we call them, headed by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei who have considerable political power and want no part of the West. This is the "death to America" crowd.
President Obama has his group of hard-liners that want nothing to do with Iran except use their nation as target practice for our military. They are still screaming that this deal will lead to the end of civilization. The GOP presidential candidates are their varsity cheerleading squad.
The only way to integrate Iran into the modern world is through global economic cooperation. They will soon find out that they can all make a lot more money by being a part of the world instead of a pariah of the world. This will take time, but you can't get going unless you get started and this was a start.
Now imagine what we could accomplish if we could get our hard-liners started on a path to progress. As it stands now, the only place they want to go to is nowhere. Let's see in a year form now if the Ayatollah is more receptive to change than the GOP.
President Obama has his group of hard-liners that want nothing to do with Iran except use their nation as target practice for our military. They are still screaming that this deal will lead to the end of civilization. The GOP presidential candidates are their varsity cheerleading squad.
The only way to integrate Iran into the modern world is through global economic cooperation. They will soon find out that they can all make a lot more money by being a part of the world instead of a pariah of the world. This will take time, but you can't get going unless you get started and this was a start.
Now imagine what we could accomplish if we could get our hard-liners started on a path to progress. As it stands now, the only place they want to go to is nowhere. Let's see in a year form now if the Ayatollah is more receptive to change than the GOP.
100
The only word for your comparison of our country's republicans to Iranian clerics is "disgusting".
2
"Change" and the GOP is an oxymoron.
" Let's see in a year form now if the Ayatollah is more receptive to change than the GOP." Best statement in commenting I have read for a month. Thanks
8
I am thankful to President Obama and to the government of Iran for the nuclear agreement but I am sorely disappointed by the renewal of sanctions by Obama. Sanctions are now completely unjustified and harm an entire people. Diplomacy will do now.
20
The sanctions announced today are extremely limited- affecting about 11 companies and few individuals selling certain materials to Iran. It shouldn't have any real impact in the average Iranian, unlike the ones that were lifted today.
5
Sanctions are completely justified by the Iranian breach of the UNSC resolution regarding ballistic missiles and serve to buttress the nuclear agreement by indicating that a violation of that will lead to sanctions snapping-back. It's interesting to note that you don't seem the least bit disappointed with Iran's violation.
4
The missile sanctions are not being placed on the country of Iran but on a small group of individuals that participated in the import of missiles. It's less than a slap on the wrist.
3
Many thanks to President Obama, Secretary Kerry and the entire diplomatic team for showing that diplomacy works.
It was not long ago that Republican war hawks were clamoring for a military attack on Iran to further destabilize the Middle East.
It was not long ago that Senator John McCain was singing 'bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran' to great right-wing applause.
To this day, Republicans regret this diplomatic resolution because to them, Iran was a wonderful opportunity for a new war, and now they have to go invent a new war to wage.
It takes real thought leadership to achieve diplomatic success.
And it takes really bad leadership to invade a country based on the fomenting of fear when the horror and catastrophe of war can simply be avoided through diplomacy and thinking real long and hard before you shoot your guns.
D for peace; R for war.
It was not long ago that Republican war hawks were clamoring for a military attack on Iran to further destabilize the Middle East.
It was not long ago that Senator John McCain was singing 'bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran' to great right-wing applause.
To this day, Republicans regret this diplomatic resolution because to them, Iran was a wonderful opportunity for a new war, and now they have to go invent a new war to wage.
It takes real thought leadership to achieve diplomatic success.
And it takes really bad leadership to invade a country based on the fomenting of fear when the horror and catastrophe of war can simply be avoided through diplomacy and thinking real long and hard before you shoot your guns.
D for peace; R for war.
257
The mathematically-challenged Republicans are still unable to count.
www.costofwar.com
Scroll down to see all the numbers.
www.costofwar.com
Scroll down to see all the numbers.
5
"D for peace; R for war."
You must have forgotten about the Tonkin Bay "incident", the bombing of Haiphong, the defoliation of Vietnam's forests and the us of Napalm on its people.
Or for another example,G.W.Bush's first Gulf was cost 3 billion dollars net with most of the cost being borne by Arab allies.Obama sent 30,000 troops to Afghanistan as soon as he took office.
The original Socrates was interested in Truth.
I do support Obama's actions on Iran and Cuba.
You must have forgotten about the Tonkin Bay "incident", the bombing of Haiphong, the defoliation of Vietnam's forests and the us of Napalm on its people.
Or for another example,G.W.Bush's first Gulf was cost 3 billion dollars net with most of the cost being borne by Arab allies.Obama sent 30,000 troops to Afghanistan as soon as he took office.
The original Socrates was interested in Truth.
I do support Obama's actions on Iran and Cuba.
3
"The original Socrates was interested in Truth."
This 'Socrates' is a parrot for the Leftist agenda and an obedient servant of Obama. The delusion apparent in his choice of screenname is only equalled by the content found under it.
This 'Socrates' is a parrot for the Leftist agenda and an obedient servant of Obama. The delusion apparent in his choice of screenname is only equalled by the content found under it.
3
The isolation of Iran was the goal of its enemies. Allegations of a nuclear program were their means, another round of WMD. Iran has used that confrontation to get our of its isolation. If it never had any nuclear program, it would still be isolated. Its enemies now want to use other excuses to achieve that isolation.
Iran did not have a bomb program. It did not give up a bomb program it did not have. It is entitled to a nuclear program, not for a bomb, and under this deal will in a few years have exactly that.
The risk was never Iran. It was those who wanted to destroy the regional power of Iran, to elevate their own regional power. They failed. They'll try again. That is the real risk of war.
We face a danger. It is not watching for an Iranian bomb. It is watching for the next iteration of attempts to push the US into war with Iran. They won't give up. They'll try something a bit different. And all those here and elsewhere who wanted war with Iran will want it again, for whatever "reason" they've found to justify what they want.
Iran did not have a bomb program. It did not give up a bomb program it did not have. It is entitled to a nuclear program, not for a bomb, and under this deal will in a few years have exactly that.
The risk was never Iran. It was those who wanted to destroy the regional power of Iran, to elevate their own regional power. They failed. They'll try again. That is the real risk of war.
We face a danger. It is not watching for an Iranian bomb. It is watching for the next iteration of attempts to push the US into war with Iran. They won't give up. They'll try something a bit different. And all those here and elsewhere who wanted war with Iran will want it again, for whatever "reason" they've found to justify what they want.
124
Nonsense. The IAEA itself testified to the continuing Iranian atomic bomb program, said to be dismantled in 2003, continuing well into 2009.
Western nations, including he US and Israel, used cyberwarfare to slow Iranian centrifuges which were "ganged' and spinning to enrich uranium sufficient for a weapon and not to peacefully distribute power to rural Iran. North Korea shared weapons know-how, including ballistic missile technology which was not for carrying doves and olive branches.
The Iranian nuclear "deal" has given people in Michigan a temporary reprieve. But there is no peace. The Iranians will use their new 150 billion dollars not to build a new HQ for Amnesty International, but for modernized weaponry for Hamas, Hezbollah and the evolving Shi'ite hegemony in the Mideast.
The progressives who decry "war" with the mullocracy, led by the iranian Fuhrer (I mean Supreme Leader) will only find that the IRG's recent humiliation of US marines, and the blackmail release of US hostages, along with the firing of missiles bear US carriers, are only the tip of the Persian hate for the West.
But, hey, Obama would not aid the Green revolution. Maybe the next president will before it is too late and the hidden Mahdi arrives in the form of a Persian bomb, purchased from whomever is willing to sell it for lots of sanction-free dollars.
Western nations, including he US and Israel, used cyberwarfare to slow Iranian centrifuges which were "ganged' and spinning to enrich uranium sufficient for a weapon and not to peacefully distribute power to rural Iran. North Korea shared weapons know-how, including ballistic missile technology which was not for carrying doves and olive branches.
The Iranian nuclear "deal" has given people in Michigan a temporary reprieve. But there is no peace. The Iranians will use their new 150 billion dollars not to build a new HQ for Amnesty International, but for modernized weaponry for Hamas, Hezbollah and the evolving Shi'ite hegemony in the Mideast.
The progressives who decry "war" with the mullocracy, led by the iranian Fuhrer (I mean Supreme Leader) will only find that the IRG's recent humiliation of US marines, and the blackmail release of US hostages, along with the firing of missiles bear US carriers, are only the tip of the Persian hate for the West.
But, hey, Obama would not aid the Green revolution. Maybe the next president will before it is too late and the hidden Mahdi arrives in the form of a Persian bomb, purchased from whomever is willing to sell it for lots of sanction-free dollars.
2
"We face a danger. It is not watching for an Iranian bomb. It is watching for the next iteration of attempts to push the US into war with Iran. They won't give up. They'll try something a bit different. And all those here and elsewhere who wanted war with Iran will want it again, for whatever "reason" they've found to justify what they want."
Welcome everyone to another episode of
"Paranoia Central." As we left our last broadcast, Benjamin Netanyahu and AIPAC were meeting in the Money Counting Room of Sheldon Adelson's
Las Vegas casino and ...
Welcome everyone to another episode of
"Paranoia Central." As we left our last broadcast, Benjamin Netanyahu and AIPAC were meeting in the Money Counting Room of Sheldon Adelson's
Las Vegas casino and ...
4
Obama has to be commended for pulling this off with long term US interests in mind. It was, is, never ever easy.
1
There are three things worth mentioning that are vitally important to factor in:
1. Wars are extremely expensive. And not just in terms of money, as anybody who has spent any time in a VA hospital or attended a military funeral can tell you. If we had to pay them $200 billion and they then did what we wanted, it would have been a bargain.
2. Both sides have internal politics to consider as well. In the case of President Rouhani and Mr Zarif, we have Iranian leaders who wants to make deals rather than fight wars. When we make deals and stick to them, we strengthen their party in Iran, making it more likely that the next leader of Iran will be willing to continue to work with us.
3. Iran's #1 enemy right now is ISIS. Our #1 enemy right now is ISIS. There's an opportunity there we'd be fools to ignore.
1. Wars are extremely expensive. And not just in terms of money, as anybody who has spent any time in a VA hospital or attended a military funeral can tell you. If we had to pay them $200 billion and they then did what we wanted, it would have been a bargain.
2. Both sides have internal politics to consider as well. In the case of President Rouhani and Mr Zarif, we have Iranian leaders who wants to make deals rather than fight wars. When we make deals and stick to them, we strengthen their party in Iran, making it more likely that the next leader of Iran will be willing to continue to work with us.
3. Iran's #1 enemy right now is ISIS. Our #1 enemy right now is ISIS. There's an opportunity there we'd be fools to ignore.
167
@ Dave K --- The next Ayatollah of Iran will be someone just like him, possibly one of his sons. Anything is possible, but it does not seem likely that the current Ayatollah will be succeeded by Barack Obama,
4
Of course the current Supreme Leader will not be replaced by Obama: The Supreme Leader is required in the Iranian constitution to be a Muslim cleric who has the equivalent of a doctorate-level education, whereas Obama is not a Muslim.
The thing is, there are significant moderate forces in Iran who want peace with the West. President Rouhani is president of Iran because he has enough support within the theocratic side of Iran to be accepted as a presidential candidate, and had enough support among the general population to win a democratic election. He's not a fluke, just like Gorbachev wasn't a fluke.
The thing is, there are significant moderate forces in Iran who want peace with the West. President Rouhani is president of Iran because he has enough support within the theocratic side of Iran to be accepted as a presidential candidate, and had enough support among the general population to win a democratic election. He's not a fluke, just like Gorbachev wasn't a fluke.
Bravo, President Obama, and Thank you for your courageous, smart use of diplomacy to make the world safer. Thanks, also, to Secretary Kerry, UN Representative Samantha Powers, Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton and all those who have worked so hard to bring this historic agreement about. History being made before our eyes - again!
183
Waiting for the press conference when Mr. Kerry announces Peace In Our Time.
1
I have a hard time understanding why any American would think that war, risking the lives of young men and women, is a wiser approach to solving problems than sitting down at a table and coming to an agreement. I can only assume it's fear of the unknown.
Then, I think of the families who are getting their loved ones back and the unknown they bravely endured. Unimaginable how Bolton-esque calls to war must have been for them.
Then, I think of the families who are getting their loved ones back and the unknown they bravely endured. Unimaginable how Bolton-esque calls to war must have been for them.
244
I have a hard time with that also, swm. I remember that Bob Herbert once wrote that it's easy to be brave with someone else's kids (I would add someone else's parents and other loved ones, too). But then when I hear someone like John McCain, who should know better than to be hawkish, I wonder why he is fast to send another into the dangers he knows firsthand. For the sake of military families, and innocent civilians everywhere, I hope this country's leaders hasten to talk to, not to bomb, others. Take care.
7
Who considered war as an alternative? Only Obama as a political distraction. His opponemts called for stonger sanctions.
2
"I have a hard time understanding why any American would think that war, risking the lives of young men and women, is a wiser approach to solving problems than sitting down at a table and coming to an agreement."
A war with Iran could be fought and won without any American lives being lost. All it would take would be 14 x W88 nuclear warheads, the payload of only two Trident D5 missiles, to completely wipe Iran off the face of the earth.
A war with Iran could be fought and won without any American lives being lost. All it would take would be 14 x W88 nuclear warheads, the payload of only two Trident D5 missiles, to completely wipe Iran off the face of the earth.
1
The Times editorial says it succinctly: "The deal is a testament to patient diplomacy and President Obama’s visionary determination to pursue a negotiated solution to the nuclear threat, despite relentless attempts by his political opponents to sabotage the initiative."
As a writer, this sentence is a powerful narrative of the whole sundry tale! It tells the hero's finest qualities (patient, visionary), the efforts of the hero's enemies (relentless, to sabotage); the efforts of the hero's team (negotiate!) and the hero's thrust into the future (the initiative).
There is not one among the Republican candidates who declared, withdrew, or remain who could have accomplished this remarkable, impressive achievement, which has already paid benefits. It is a high mark for peace time agreements between countries with long histories of rancor. Pulled from within by conservative elements, vehemently opposed by its main third party beneficiary, it is concrete evidence and testament of not only Barack Obama's vision (outlined in his Cairo speech) but also his inner strength and galvanizing will.
As a writer, this sentence is a powerful narrative of the whole sundry tale! It tells the hero's finest qualities (patient, visionary), the efforts of the hero's enemies (relentless, to sabotage); the efforts of the hero's team (negotiate!) and the hero's thrust into the future (the initiative).
There is not one among the Republican candidates who declared, withdrew, or remain who could have accomplished this remarkable, impressive achievement, which has already paid benefits. It is a high mark for peace time agreements between countries with long histories of rancor. Pulled from within by conservative elements, vehemently opposed by its main third party beneficiary, it is concrete evidence and testament of not only Barack Obama's vision (outlined in his Cairo speech) but also his inner strength and galvanizing will.
319
Being neither an armistice or peace treaty, or an economic initiative like the Marshall Plan, this multi-national agreement ranks with only two other accords I have witnessed in my lifetime: the end of apartheid in South Africa and the establishment of free elections and majority rule, culminating in Nelson Mandela's election as President of South Africa in 1994, and the agreement granting Ghana independence from Britain and full nationhood in 1957.
72
Thank you for another beautifully written comment, Walter Rhett. I agree that the story of the Iran deal reads like a parable of President Obama and his opponents.
Diplomacy leads to thorough, longterm victories and lasting peace, unlike war, which means wanton death and destruction and creates even more problems. Diplomacy means compromise, working behind the scenes, longterm commitment, dropping the propaganda, treating the "other" as an equal. These concepts are anathema now to a political party that would rather use tough-talk, all-stick-and-no-carrot strategies, memorable visuals (like Bibi's cartoonish bomb drawing at the UN), and sound bites, like "Axis of Evil" (with non sequiturs Iran, Iraq and North Korea).
President Obama, as a thoughtful leader and reflecting his diverse, international upbringing, knows how to reach others - as demonstrated, like you say, in that early Cairo speech. Yet the GOP would rather see President Obama fail than all of us win alongside him.
Take care.
Diplomacy leads to thorough, longterm victories and lasting peace, unlike war, which means wanton death and destruction and creates even more problems. Diplomacy means compromise, working behind the scenes, longterm commitment, dropping the propaganda, treating the "other" as an equal. These concepts are anathema now to a political party that would rather use tough-talk, all-stick-and-no-carrot strategies, memorable visuals (like Bibi's cartoonish bomb drawing at the UN), and sound bites, like "Axis of Evil" (with non sequiturs Iran, Iraq and North Korea).
President Obama, as a thoughtful leader and reflecting his diverse, international upbringing, knows how to reach others - as demonstrated, like you say, in that early Cairo speech. Yet the GOP would rather see President Obama fail than all of us win alongside him.
Take care.
15
Inner strength + galvanizing will = the Assad red line that wasn't a red line, the Iran deal that has left Israel dangerously exposed and won't prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, the cave-ins to Putin, the dilly-dallying over ISIS, the collapsing stock markets. Some strength, some galvanizing.
2
It’s notoriously dangerous to pronounce a “safer world” or a “better healthcare system” until AFTER we learn that the president was manipulated into lying to the American people by HHS that “you can keep your old policy and doctor”. The deal has just delivered benefits to Iran by lifting major sanctions, even if a few new ones have been imposed related to missile tests. There is NO real evidence that Iran has any intention of respecting their word, and lots of evidence that they place no value on promises they give to infidels to gain some advantage. We also have no evidence, once lifted, that we can impose equally meaningful sanctions against them by the global community.
We only have evidence that Iran has mothballed thousands of centrifuges (instead of destroying them), that it has shipped out MOST of its nuclear fuel (they say), and that they disassembled a plutonium plant and don’t have five others under the sands that nobody else knows about. About as much evidence that we had that their client, Syria, destroyed all its chemical weapons in return for the U.S. not protecting the red-line that Mr. Obama declared on this issue. How well did THAT work out for Syrians opposed to Assad who since have been gassed?
Well, it’s said by some that the Iranians put the kibosh on Jimmy Carter’s reelection chances by holding on to the 1980 U.S. captives until Reagan took his inaugural. We’ll see what scampish mischief they may be planning to derail Hillary’s chances in 2016.
We only have evidence that Iran has mothballed thousands of centrifuges (instead of destroying them), that it has shipped out MOST of its nuclear fuel (they say), and that they disassembled a plutonium plant and don’t have five others under the sands that nobody else knows about. About as much evidence that we had that their client, Syria, destroyed all its chemical weapons in return for the U.S. not protecting the red-line that Mr. Obama declared on this issue. How well did THAT work out for Syrians opposed to Assad who since have been gassed?
Well, it’s said by some that the Iranians put the kibosh on Jimmy Carter’s reelection chances by holding on to the 1980 U.S. captives until Reagan took his inaugural. We’ll see what scampish mischief they may be planning to derail Hillary’s chances in 2016.
33
@Richard Luettgen
Mr. Luettgen, from reading a bit about your profile, you are not ignorant, and you seem to have an education, so why considering that, do you persist in helping to continue the false accusations against Mr. Obama.
You well know that the administration realized it could not eliminate Assad, without the radical opposition taking over. That we could not tell which opposition to support, and as we have seen, there are so many factions, we could have easily found ourselves arming a future enemy, just as happened with the Taliban.
Your constant attacks on the veracity of Mr. Obama speak more of a personal vendetta, than a reasoned opposition. Is it ideology, or more personal.
This detent with Iran, and the renewed relations with Cuba, are evidence that We do not have to send our people to die in some foreign land to assert our superiority. We are no longer a nation of imperial conquests, just as the British learned in Africa and India, peace does not come at the point of a gun. Even WWII while destroying a totalitarian led military, took diplomatic measures to stabilize the Axis. Gen MacArthur understood this with Japan, and Gen Marshal with Europe.
To me, it appears as if you do not the have patience to let these problems be solved, it is as you want to continue to keep beating the others over the head with a bat, to see just how mad you can make them.
Why???
Mr. Luettgen, from reading a bit about your profile, you are not ignorant, and you seem to have an education, so why considering that, do you persist in helping to continue the false accusations against Mr. Obama.
You well know that the administration realized it could not eliminate Assad, without the radical opposition taking over. That we could not tell which opposition to support, and as we have seen, there are so many factions, we could have easily found ourselves arming a future enemy, just as happened with the Taliban.
Your constant attacks on the veracity of Mr. Obama speak more of a personal vendetta, than a reasoned opposition. Is it ideology, or more personal.
This detent with Iran, and the renewed relations with Cuba, are evidence that We do not have to send our people to die in some foreign land to assert our superiority. We are no longer a nation of imperial conquests, just as the British learned in Africa and India, peace does not come at the point of a gun. Even WWII while destroying a totalitarian led military, took diplomatic measures to stabilize the Axis. Gen MacArthur understood this with Japan, and Gen Marshal with Europe.
To me, it appears as if you do not the have patience to let these problems be solved, it is as you want to continue to keep beating the others over the head with a bat, to see just how mad you can make them.
Why???
122
Why, David, it could be because the accusations I level AREN'T false. What actually happened is that the president had his bluff called by Assad, didn't want to show his cards to be shown as a busted bluffer and instead leapt at the suggestion by the Russians (of all people on Earth) that he cut a deal on chemical weapons. Just about the entire planet laughed uproariously as we took Assad's word that he would destroy them in return for not being spanked, and much show was provided of incinerating those weapons or sinking them in the ocean.
Then, of course, Assad just began gassing his fellow countrymen AGAIN with the chemicals he DIDN'T turn over, and that even got the RUSSIANS laughing so hard they near busted a gut.
It's not a personal vendetta I have with our president, it's criticism of bad decisions, bad motivations and a worldview with which I disagree strongly -- and whose failures are historically manifest beyond the capacity of apologists to mask. Last time I looked, that was not only the right of every American but his obligation.
Then, of course, Assad just began gassing his fellow countrymen AGAIN with the chemicals he DIDN'T turn over, and that even got the RUSSIANS laughing so hard they near busted a gut.
It's not a personal vendetta I have with our president, it's criticism of bad decisions, bad motivations and a worldview with which I disagree strongly -- and whose failures are historically manifest beyond the capacity of apologists to mask. Last time I looked, that was not only the right of every American but his obligation.
4
Okay, sanctions weren't provoking Iran to cry uncle and the other members of the negotiating team in Geneva would have lifted them regardless of what our government decided to do. Ergo, I guess you're recommending we go to plan B and BomB every facility that was used to store nuclear materiel. And since we can't be sure that they didn't move that stuff to some kindergarten in Tehran let's bomb all of those, too. And if they won't produce the WMDs that we're convinced they're still building, let's send in our dupes- I mean our troops- and take care of this little problem the same way that we took care of the one next door. It stands to reason we'll be greeted with garlands from the newly-liberated civilians. Maybe this time we'll even get them to hang up those Mission Accomplished banners.
Sorry that you're disappointed with the current state of affairs with Iran but I suppose you can look forward to the implementation of Plan B if The Donald or Cruz Missile is elected in November (some of the other Republicans might actually think twice about launching another preemptive strike in the Middle East but proof of sanity won't lead to any of them getting the nomination). Personally, I prefer to think that Iran is serious about rejoining the community of nations, but if it develops that they're pulling a fast one I'm reasonably certain that our own nuclear arsenal would prove powerful enough to withstand whatever it is that they could come up with in the next hundred years or so.
Sorry that you're disappointed with the current state of affairs with Iran but I suppose you can look forward to the implementation of Plan B if The Donald or Cruz Missile is elected in November (some of the other Republicans might actually think twice about launching another preemptive strike in the Middle East but proof of sanity won't lead to any of them getting the nomination). Personally, I prefer to think that Iran is serious about rejoining the community of nations, but if it develops that they're pulling a fast one I'm reasonably certain that our own nuclear arsenal would prove powerful enough to withstand whatever it is that they could come up with in the next hundred years or so.
71
"Peace in our time!" - N. Chamberlain