This is a statement by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu regarding the proposed framework for a deal with Iran.
Reasonable people ask: If this framework for a deal with America and Iran is so bad, why on earth is Obama pursuing it with such fanatic zeal?
To answer this question, one has to understand that this non-deal-deal is not about Iran as a nuclear weapon nation. In fact, Obama has, through the framework, already conceded Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons. That’s why Iran’s ICBMs are not even mentioned in the framework. ICBMs are expressly for delivering nuclear warheads to their targets.
This is about Richard Nixon and his American-Chinese rapprochement.
Team Obama, from the day they came into office, have been fixated on the idea of an historic (they love that word) agreement that will mend relations between Iran and America. Don’t forget, Obama kicked off his first term with an apology tour to the Muslim world. America, said Obama, was guilty of foreign policy overreach. The days of American neocolonial power plays are over, said Obama. America would retreat from her position as world’s policeman and deal respectfully with the Muslim world.
Team Obama determined that Iran was the key to a new world order in the Middle East. Thus, from the beginning, Obama sent secret letters to the mullahs in which he extended a hand of friendship.
Now, there is nothing wrong with trying to turn a hostile nation into a friend. Provided, of course, that said hostile nation which has been exporting terror, and murdering Americans and Jews from Argentina to Iraq, ceases its murderous ways. The problem is, Obama’s outreach has had the opposite effect. Iran has been emboldened by Obama’s slavish attitude.
But reality is not a factor with Obama, or for that matter with the postmodern Democrat world view.
And this brings us to the central problem, the philosophic difference between conservatives and liberals.
Conservatives believe that human nature is deeply flawed, that there are people who are fundamentally evil, people with whom one cannot reason. There are people and regimes that must be destroyed in order to put a stop to their wicked designs.
Postmodern liberals believe that man is perfectible, that with the proper government engineering bad can be transformed into good. That’s why liberals will pour endless streams of money into programs designed by “experts” that not only fail at every metric, but make bad situations even worse. The excuses for systemic failure are: We didn’t spend enough money. Or, we need to set up another more efficient bureaucracy. Or, we weren’t sensitive enough to the root causes of the problem.
Thus, team Obama treats the IslamoNazis of Iran as just another inner city social problem. The mullahs are confused adolescents. All we have to do is reach out and show them we really care, and presto! violent delinquents will modify their behavior. Because, like James Dean in “Rebel Without a Cause” they are just poor, misunderstood kids in need of some serious social work.
The problem is, the mullahs are evil theocratic fascists who persecute women, homosexuals and religious minorities. And who, because of Obama’s tenuous grasp of reality, now control four Middle Eastern capitals: Damascus, Baghdad, Saana, and Beirut.
Obama believes that when the mullahs threaten to annihilate the Jewish State and every Jew on the face of the earth, they are just posing. They don’t really mean it. They’re making trash talk.
And here, Obama is projecting.
Because Barack Obama uses language so promiscuously, with such disregard for the very meaning of words, he thinks this is the norm among other politicians. And because Obama routinely lies and strikes poses that are so obviously at odds with reality (“If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor”) he calculates that others rape language with the same abandon.
This is a narcissist’s view of the world where nothing exists beyond Obama’s fevered word count, where reality is replaced by vocabulary. And, lets face it, it is an endless stream of Obamanisms. Has any POTUS every talked so much about himself, so endlessly, and in such tedious cliches?
The bottom line is this: Obama is selling the Iranian framework non-deal-deal as an historic agreement. As if the word historic is itself a sign of legitimacy.
Of course, Chamberlain’s Munch agreement with Hitler was also historic.
Obama would have us believe that he has opened up Cuba—not so much—and now Iran, just the way Kissinger and Nixon opened up relations with China.
The problem is, Kerry is no Kissinger. And Obama is not a Nixon.
Kerry is good at marrying mentally unbalanced billionairesses, but dim at the business of foreign policy. Obama is good at getting elected and selling his failed programs. But policies that actually work are above his pay grade.
Nixon’s notion of an American-Chinese alliance was visionary and successful.
Obama’s vision of an American-Iranian alliance is delusional and catastrophic.