Roger Cohen, "Iran: The Obamacare of Foreign Policy": More Lunacy From the Man Who Claimed Iran Is Not Totalitarian

Tweet

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Iran: The Obamacare of Foreign Policy," Roger Cohen would have us know that Obama's unsigned nuclear deal with Iran has prevented a disaster:

"Why has a disaster been averted? Because if the deal had unraveled in Congress, so would America’s standing as a global power. Russia, China and the European Union would have concluded that the United States is unserious. To negotiate over years a tough compromise obliging Iran, among other measures, to slash its stockpile of enriched uranium by 98 percent and its operating centrifuges by two-thirds, and then walk away in a righteous and deluded funk — well, that’s not how America won the respect of the world."

However, as we were told earlier this week by Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan, "the time had come for the Americans to realize that they were not the world's super power and no one recognizes them as such any longer."

And as reportedly stated by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Rybakov, who headed Russia's negotiating team:

"I was telling my associates last night that these Iranians are truly geniuses. They came to get a green light for their enrichment program from the Security Council in exchange for what? In exchange for their sanctions to be lifted. Not only do they not give anything in exchange, but they receive something in exchange for what they receive! Their sanctions will be lifted and their enrichment will continue."

America is now considered "serious" by the rest of the world? Road apples!

In his opinion piece, Cohen tells us of a conversation that he had with Nicholas Burns:

"The deal will become the 'Obamacare of foreign policy,' Nicholas Burns, a Harvard professor and former under secretary of state, told me. Yes, it will. That is, something sensible (at least in the eyes of most people across the world) to which Republicans will never acquiesce and which they will try to use in every conceivable way to undermine a president they loathe."

Needless to say, Cohen doesn't mention that Burns, in a recent Times op-ed, acknowledged:

"Republicans have been right to highlight the deal’s principal weakness — it could permit Iran to emerge stronger 10 to 15 years from now as restrictions on its nuclear program begin to lapse."

To overcome this "weakness," Burns, in his op-ed, recommended five measures, which surely should have been implemented prior to, and not after, agreeing to this illusory arrangement.

Sorry, but Obama's nuclear deal is indeed a disaster in the making, and Democrats will live to rue the day when Iran builds an arsenal of nuclear-tipped ICBMs capable of striking New York and Washington in the not too distant future.

Nicholas Burns, "What Should Obama Do Next on Iran?": Actually, What Obama Should Have Done First

Tweet

In a guest New York Times op-ed entitled "What Should Obama Do Next on Iran?," Harvard professor and former under secretary of state Nicholas Burns tells us that he "testified in favor of the [Iran nuclear] agreement before four congressional committees, and talked with many members individually during July and August." Informing us that Obama now has sufficient support from Democrats in Congress to override majority opposition to his deal with Khamenei, Burns acknowledges that "Republicans have been right to highlight the deal’s principal weakness — it could permit Iran to emerge stronger 10 to 15 years from now as restrictions on its nuclear program begin to lapse." To overcome this weakness and "win the long-term struggle with Iran for power in the Middle East," Burns recommends:

1. "Mr. Obama could reaffirm President Jimmy Carter’s doctrine from the 1970s that the United States will defend its vital interests in the security of the Persian Gulf region against any aggressor."
2. "Mr. Obama could state in unmistakably clear terms that the United States would use military force to strike Iran should it violate the nuclear agreement and drive toward a nuclear weapon."
3. "Mr. Obama could announce the expedited renewal this autumn of the United States-Israel military assistance agreement, set to expire in 2017."
4. "[T]he administration could reaffirm America’s commitment to form a strong regional coalition with moderate Arab states, Turkey, the European allies and our Asian allies to reimpose sanctions on Iran, should that be necessary."

Question: Shouldn't Obama have announced these measures prior to reaching agreement with Iran? Oh, that's right: These measures would have killed any agreement with Iran in its infancy, they are anathema to Obama, and he has no intention of implementing them.

But Obama thanks you anyway, Nicholas, for providing avid support for this legacy-establishing undertaking, which ensures that Iran will ultimately be only weeks away from an arsenal of nuclear-tipped ICBMs.