You know that "air of inevitability" that still fits Hillary Clinton like a tube top? I think the media has transferred it to Uncle Barry's nuclear sellout and renamed it "permanence":
Unhappy with Barack Obama's nuclear deal with Iran? Republicans running for the White House are vowing to rescind the agreement, some on their first day in office.
But it may not be that easy.
If Iran lives up to its obligations, a new president could face big obstacles in turning that campaign promise into U.S. policy. Among them: resistance from longtime American allies, an unraveling of the carefully crafted international sanctions, and damage to U.S. standing with the rest of the world, according to foreign policy experts.
First of all, Iran won't live up to its obligations, because this deal does not require anything from them other than to accept Barack Obama's unconditional surrender. They've been violating "agreements" and "frameworks" and "preliminary whatevers" on their nuclear program for well over a decade, and part of this deal is that we're forgiving and forgetting those earlier wholesale violations without getting any - zero, zip, nada, bupkis - inspection/verification requirements in the one concluded on Tuesday.
That gets us to "resistance from longtime American allies," who are so cowardly, slaveringly eager to do deals with the Iranian devils that the latter could nuke their capital cities and they'd still look the other way (to avoid the flash, of course). And, of course, with the mullahs having veto power over all inspections, it will be all but impossible for any "failure to live up to obligations" to be detected, which suits our "longtime allies" just fine. And can we just come right out and refer to them as the Euros? Some of our other longtime allies like Israel and Saudi Arabia are not so enamored of this "deal" and are not considering themselves bound by it at all. And then there are the Russians and ChiComms, who've never been "allies" in the first place.
The "carefully crafted international sanctions" were bargained away in this deal, and they are, indeed, never coming back other than whatever the U.S. can unilaterally do. But then that's why it's called "global leadership".
And as to "damage to U.S. standing with the rest of the world," after what Barack Obama has done to that particular commodity, including via this "deal," the Assholiated Press should shut the hell up.
"The president does not have infinite ability to get other countries to go along with them," said Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "One of the consequences is the United States would be increasingly isolated at a time when Iran is increasingly integrated with the rest of the world."
Oh, so the U.S. would become an "international pariah" for regaining its collective sanity while the bloodthirsty savages who continue to spread jihadism across the world and now have nuclear weapons with which to arm their unholy "warriors" and who still lead their followers in daily, crazed, shouting chants of "Death to America! Death to America!" will be a "member in good standing of the community of nations"? To that ridiculous assertion I have just three words: "BRING....IT....ON". Because I, Mr. Alterman, do not think it would turn out the way you think it would.
And there's one other thing for y'all to remember: This "deal" isn't a treaty. It should have been, but Barack Obama made sure it was not. It is an international executive order. Hell, he's rushing it through the U.N. Security Council before the U.S. Congress can even get a look at it under the meaningless Corker-Menendez legislation, leaving the latter in the position of having little or no reason to even bother.
And executive orders promulgated by one POTUS can just as easily be withdrawn by the next. Especially if the Senate, under the proper legal authority of Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, does vote on the "deal" and it gets any fewer than sixty-seven "aye" votes, which, thanks to Corker-Menendez, won't technically scotch the deal in power terms but will clearly indicate that such a treaty would not have been ratified and thus back up a President Walker's rescission.
And he'll do it at 12:01 PM, EST, January 20th, 2017:
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker says he would "terminate the bad deal with Iran on day one" and work to persuade allies to reinstate economic sanctions lifted under the deal.
The Left has this implicit, mandatory assumption that everything Barack Obama does will be in place forever, immutable and untouchable. If Barack Obama ever voluntarily steps down from power and Scott Walker succeeds him, that is a cherished illusionary bubble that is going to be merrily and brutally popped with extreme prejudice for the succeeding eight years.
Or until the mullahs nuke us, whichever comes first.
UPDATE: Speaking of which, that Grand U.S.-Iranian (oops, sorry, Iranian-U.S.) Alliance that O thinks he's created....he's gonna have to get some more lies on the launching pad real quick-like:
Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Saturday that a historic nuclear deal reached with world powers earlier this week won’t have any effect on Iran’s policy toward the U.S.
Khamenei said in a televised speech that U.S. policy in the Middle East runs counter to Tehran’s strategy and that Iran will continue to support its allies in the Middle East including the Lebanese, Hezbollah, Palestinian resistance groups and the Syrian government.
“Our policy towards the arrogant U.S. government won’t change at all,” he said. He was addressing a large crowd in Tehran, broadcast live on state TV, to mark the end of the Muslim holy fasting month of Ramadan. [emphases added]
The "arrogant U.S. government" that has spent six and a half years humbly, obsequiously, humiliatingly, and bootlickingly prostrating itself at Khamenei's feet, kissing his ring, tonguing his butthole, and sucking his "Tower of Allah". Evidently this "arrogance" of which the Ayatollah speaks does not derive from actual U.S. policy, but from our very existence.
And, oh by the way, this "deal" that "foreign policy experts" are calling "done'? Not according to our newest, best pal Ali:
In a speech at a Tehran mosque punctuated by chants of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel”, Khamenei said he wanted [subordinates] to examine the agreement to ensure national interests were preserved, as Iran would not allow the disruption of its revolutionary principles or defensive abilities [nuclear weapons program].
....Khamenei repeatedly used the phrase “whether this text is approved or not”, implying the accord has yet to win definitive backing from Iran’s [Supreme Leader]
You know, if I didn't know better - and we're all required to by royal decree - I could almost think that Uncle Barry's good, close, personal turbaned friend could give a good Allahdamn about The One's foreign policy "legacy".
But he wouldn't do us such a huge favor - would he?
No comments:
Post a Comment