I've heard some people saying that new report claiming that Obama administration has been negotiating a deal since before Rouhani came on the scene is not a concern - ah, sorry, but that's very wrong - the whole reason we're supposed to buy into this agreement is because a putative 'liberal' is now president of Iran, it's because of that that this is labeled a great opportunity that cannot be squandered - if negotiations have been going on since before Rouhani came along then that proves my point: this has nothing to do with denying Iran the bomb and everything to do with getting Obama out from under the burden of the military option. There was only one way short of a military intercession to keep Iran from getting the bomb: tough sanctions combined with a committed, believable threat to use force if the sanctions didn't work - as soon as you enter into 'negotiations' about an alternative to force the Iranians know right away that force is no longer on the table - I mean, I think you can infer that from the get go given everything Obama has said and done foreign policy-wise since becoming president - but a desperate turn to negotiations that do not imply the ending of Iran's nuclear operations combined with Obama's behaviour in Syria means that Iran has known for quite some time they have Obama over a barrel and the only problem now was keeping Israel on the sidelines.
Think about it - if Obama never intended to use the military option then once you get to a certain point in development of nuke fuel cycle you only have two options - sit on the sanctions until which time Israel acts or Iran tests a device - both bad if you're Obama - or enter into an agreement that everyone knows is an illusion but at least constrains Israel and allows Obama to say when Iran tests a device "well, I negotiated a good deal in good faith and they betrayed that trust - don't blame me for their dishonesty" - I've essentially always believed that to be the truth of what's going on here but news that they were in talks before Rouhani came on the scene now confirms it for me.
[John Bolton agrees with me that this agreement is all about saving face for Obama viz the use of force and keeping Israel in a box - and he raises the big question now on the table - faced with the now unavoidable reality that Obama has stabbed them in the back and decided Iran with the bomb is better than all the options available to him to stop such a thing, what now does Israel do? Bolton thinks the logic of the situation drives them towards acting if they feel their actions could make a difference - that has always been the big question impossible to answer from the outside looking in: does Israel see a way it can tolerate a nuked up Iran, and if not how confident are they that by themselves they can manage a successful military strike? Another question also arises given recent unconfirmed reports: are the Saudis worried enough about a nuked up Iran and pissed off enough at Obama to actually contemplate helping the hated Zionists? If true, how would such a fragile and tentative alliance impact Israel's calculations, not just on the military feasibility side, but just as importantly as regards the deep and unpredictable political fallout from an attack by them?]
[another curiosity to consider: recently Netanyahu has stated unequivocally that he will not allow Iran to acquire a nuclear capability - now, clearly Obama has no problem making America look weak by announcing red lines and then refusing to honor them - but looking weak is not an option for Israel - not an option for America either really, unless of course you're liberal and then it's almost an imperative - so, since it's hard to believe Bibi would draw a red line and then back away from it thereby looking weak, what does one make of his claim? That Israel has already decided in the affirmative viz military strikes? Or how 'bout that indeed rumors of an alliance with the Saudis are true and plans have already been drawn up on how to confront Iran?]
Think about it - if Obama never intended to use the military option then once you get to a certain point in development of nuke fuel cycle you only have two options - sit on the sanctions until which time Israel acts or Iran tests a device - both bad if you're Obama - or enter into an agreement that everyone knows is an illusion but at least constrains Israel and allows Obama to say when Iran tests a device "well, I negotiated a good deal in good faith and they betrayed that trust - don't blame me for their dishonesty" - I've essentially always believed that to be the truth of what's going on here but news that they were in talks before Rouhani came on the scene now confirms it for me.
[John Bolton agrees with me that this agreement is all about saving face for Obama viz the use of force and keeping Israel in a box - and he raises the big question now on the table - faced with the now unavoidable reality that Obama has stabbed them in the back and decided Iran with the bomb is better than all the options available to him to stop such a thing, what now does Israel do? Bolton thinks the logic of the situation drives them towards acting if they feel their actions could make a difference - that has always been the big question impossible to answer from the outside looking in: does Israel see a way it can tolerate a nuked up Iran, and if not how confident are they that by themselves they can manage a successful military strike? Another question also arises given recent unconfirmed reports: are the Saudis worried enough about a nuked up Iran and pissed off enough at Obama to actually contemplate helping the hated Zionists? If true, how would such a fragile and tentative alliance impact Israel's calculations, not just on the military feasibility side, but just as importantly as regards the deep and unpredictable political fallout from an attack by them?]
[another curiosity to consider: recently Netanyahu has stated unequivocally that he will not allow Iran to acquire a nuclear capability - now, clearly Obama has no problem making America look weak by announcing red lines and then refusing to honor them - but looking weak is not an option for Israel - not an option for America either really, unless of course you're liberal and then it's almost an imperative - so, since it's hard to believe Bibi would draw a red line and then back away from it thereby looking weak, what does one make of his claim? That Israel has already decided in the affirmative viz military strikes? Or how 'bout that indeed rumors of an alliance with the Saudis are true and plans have already been drawn up on how to confront Iran?]