Iran Hasn’t Broken the Deal’s Terms

Mattis wants the deal to remain. Pompeo does not. Netanyahu does not. Trump must decide by May 12.

Mattis says the deal is working. He’s correct. The IAEA verifies this.

Pompeo and Trump are making unreasonable demands:

“MIKE POMPEO: It [Iran] is indeed the greatest sponsor of terrorism in the world, and we are determined to make sure it never possesses a nuclear weapon. The Iran deal in its current form does not provide that assurance.”

The words “make sure it never possesses” are unreasonable. It makes no sense at all for Iran to agree to such a condition.

Netanyahu’s show is old news. It’s about the pre-2015 activities of Iran. There are Israeli experts who know and say this. It’s no surprise that Iran archived its nuclear files; the research and development was very costly. The Iran deal didn’t call for destroying the knowledge.

If the deal is broken, Iran can resume nuclear development and speed it up. The chance of attacks by Israel rises, which means war. Netanyahu is irrational to want to break the deal. “Uzi Arad, the former head of research at the Mossad and the head of Netanyahu’s own National Security Council from 2009 to 2011” says Netanyahu is daft on this policy. He uses the word for madness or craziness, “shigaon”, which is like the Yiddish, m’shuga and meshighaass. Someone off their head is meshugana. Indeed, Netanyahu has presented no case for why the deal should be broken.

Trump is as daft as Netanyahu and Pompeo on this too. He too has no sound reasons for breaking the deal. Without providing anything resembling a sound explanation, as is his custom, Trump also downplays the effect that breaking the U.S. covenant might have on North Korea. Trump acclaimed Netanyahu’s show and proclaimed himself “100 percent right”. Trump is always good for some outrageous line, but is this any way to run an Empire? Are we getting into our own skein of wacky emperors like Nero, Caligula, and others, but with our own peculiar forms of craziness? If McCain had been elected, we’d have had a president who represents an extreme of American warmongering. Nikki Haley has a little presidential boomlet going, and she’s way over the top in her demands. The arch-conservatism of Mike Pence is some sort of aberration of mind. Meanwhile, will not Democrats produce their full share of mad politicians and presidential hopefuls?

Share

7:09 pm on April 30, 2018