Sunday, April 05, 2015

Devils, Details, and Delusions

I was going to go through the talking points of our nuclear "deal" with Iran, but Iran objects to what we say it is.

Further negotiations will be required to define what "is" is. The Devil is in the details mullahs, right?

And if our president is to be believed, those cheering Iranians lack the nuance to appreciate the great diplomatic triumph for America that this deal with Iran represents.

Forgive me if I have doubts about what the president says "is" is.

Actually, Iran's president, Rouhani, doesn't even think the deal is about nukes--which they deny having any program to develop or procure. No, Iran sees this proto-deal as a way to end Iran's economic and diplomatic isolation:

"This is a first step towards productive interactions with the world," he said.

That's a tad different than the president's claim that this deal will prevent war and a nuclear Iran.

With money in Iran's coffers, everything is possible, whether it is nuclear weapons or an Iran-led Shia alliance throughout the Middle East that ejects us and our influence from the region.

More to the point, this isn't actually a deal--so why pretend like it is?

Although it is fitting to have a pretend deal up for discussion when an actual deal that these talking points describe relies on pretending--Iran will pretend not to have a nuclear program; and we will pretend to believe them.

When the history of Iran's path to nuclear weapons (and I don't think we will even see it coming) is written--even if it takes the entire period of the agreement to achieve (now that's strategic patience), President Obama's complementary path of retreat will be prominent.

But if you want the ultimate proof that this is a bad framework for making a deal, I give you Exhibit Z--Fareed Zakaria thinks the deal is just dandy.

And that man couldn't find his own buttocks with both hands and a GPS signal.

UPDATE: Yeah, it does sound bad when you put it this way:

US President Barack Obama, his advisers and media cheerleaders have long presented his nuclear diplomacy with the Iran as the only way to avoid war. Obama and his supporters have castigated as warmongers those who oppose his policy of nuclear appeasement with the world’s most prolific state sponsor of terrorism.

But the opposite is the case. Had their view carried the day, war could have been averted.

Through their nuclear diplomacy, Obama and his comrades started the countdown to war.

In recent weeks we have watched the collapse of the allied powers’ negotiating positions.

They have conceded every position that might have placed a significant obstacle in Iran’s path to developing a nuclear arsenal.

Well, Caroline Glick is writing from Israel's position under the bus, so she might not see the big picture of Iran responding to the awesome awesomisity of President Obama's Zakaria-approved ginormous brain and even larger hopeandchange power.

Although to be fair, I don't think the president's goal is to prevent nuclear war or proliferation as much as it is to prevent it while he is still president.

So maybe "mission accompished" congratulations are in order. And let's not forget that Nobel Peace Prize in the window of opportunity between signing ceremony and nuclear detonation!