I've said it's very hard to believe that the Obama administration is foolish or naive enough to get suckered in by Iran on negotiations - negotiations that are designed as far as vile anti hope and change skeptics like myself are concerned to either forestall action by Israel while work towards a bomb continues in the shadows or begin an unstoppable process of slowly unwinding the sanctions - or both - and that therefore the reason that Kerry is pursuing these 'bogus' negotiations without Iran giving up much of anything must be because Obama has decided Iran with the bomb is better than the other options available to him - to do that, he can't just let Iran develop a bomb because he's sworn several times he won't let that happen and would look damn weak and foolish if they go ahead and test something - no, he needs to enter into a phony agreement so that when Iran breaks it, although he'll still certainly look bad, he won't look as bad - his main goal here is to avoid the military option and a phony agreement that also ties Israel's hand is pretty much the only way he can to do that. It's basically his red line in Syria all over again - a bogus agreement that gets him out of using the US military - America comes away looking weak and its allies are left harbouring grave concerns - but as Syria has shown us, indeed Obama's entire foreign policy has shown us, he doesn't care about those things, those conventional terms defining American might - he wants a weakened America, he wants a constrained if not hobbled US military that can no longer play the role of the 'necessary power' - this is what all uber liberal ideologues want and have so for a very long time, and this is what he's giving them - doesn't matter if it makes him look weak in those terms - he doesn't believe in those terms, they mean nothing to him - and besides, you cannot pay for the welfare state liberals need in order to govern if you're also paying for a military that makes a difference - just look at Europe.
Anyway, I've said this approach must be deliberate and not just a consequence of naive idiocy - but Kerry gave an interview to MSNBC today that makes we wonder if maybe they are after all just that stupid - I mean, I still believe the scenario above is correct - but Kerry said some outrageously dumb stuff in this interview, stuff that just made no sense, so you got to wonder if maybe indeed they are just idiots - or hopelessly naive. He tried to make point that if we don't soften sanctions now in order to get them to the table they won't come to the table and will continue towards a bomb - he in fact came very close to admitting that the military option is nothing but an empty threat and all that's left are the negotiations - but obviously if Iran is willing to walk away from negotiations because they're being asked to make real cuts to show they're serious, that means they already believe Obama has no intention of using force - they know as I do that Obama, as with Syria, is looking for a way out and therefore token gestures are enough - Iran and Obama have the same goal here: keep Israel in check until it's simply too late for them to do anything about what's happening via a military strike.
There has been talk that Iran and Kerry have been in secret negotiations for a while now and that a 'deal' of some sort has already been struck and would have been enacted last week but for the inscrutable French. You start peeling back the near incoherent verbiage Kerry is throwing about viz these negotiations, combined with what past behaviour by Obama when it comes to foreign policy tells about what to expect from him - and this all does seem like a staged bit of nonsense.
Obama needs an agreement to get out of his red line commitment - the Iranians need negotiations of some sort to continue in order to keep Israel at bay - therefore, if the US senate refuses to relent on sanctions as Kerry wants, then if I'm right Iran and Kerry will find some other way to keep them at the table, even if only marginally - Iran may not believe Obama would use force, but no one really knows what to expect from Israel. If I'm right and Obama has already agreed to something of this sort or Iran has simply come to the natural conclusion that this how things will play out given Obama's clear predilections, then essentially the US has no leverage - they need these negotiations more than the Iranians do - Iran has options if the talks fail - Obama doesn't, other than of course the military one - and as I've said before I've never believed he had any intention whatsoever of going down that road.
Anyway, I've said this approach must be deliberate and not just a consequence of naive idiocy - but Kerry gave an interview to MSNBC today that makes we wonder if maybe they are after all just that stupid - I mean, I still believe the scenario above is correct - but Kerry said some outrageously dumb stuff in this interview, stuff that just made no sense, so you got to wonder if maybe indeed they are just idiots - or hopelessly naive. He tried to make point that if we don't soften sanctions now in order to get them to the table they won't come to the table and will continue towards a bomb - he in fact came very close to admitting that the military option is nothing but an empty threat and all that's left are the negotiations - but obviously if Iran is willing to walk away from negotiations because they're being asked to make real cuts to show they're serious, that means they already believe Obama has no intention of using force - they know as I do that Obama, as with Syria, is looking for a way out and therefore token gestures are enough - Iran and Obama have the same goal here: keep Israel in check until it's simply too late for them to do anything about what's happening via a military strike.
There has been talk that Iran and Kerry have been in secret negotiations for a while now and that a 'deal' of some sort has already been struck and would have been enacted last week but for the inscrutable French. You start peeling back the near incoherent verbiage Kerry is throwing about viz these negotiations, combined with what past behaviour by Obama when it comes to foreign policy tells about what to expect from him - and this all does seem like a staged bit of nonsense.
Obama needs an agreement to get out of his red line commitment - the Iranians need negotiations of some sort to continue in order to keep Israel at bay - therefore, if the US senate refuses to relent on sanctions as Kerry wants, then if I'm right Iran and Kerry will find some other way to keep them at the table, even if only marginally - Iran may not believe Obama would use force, but no one really knows what to expect from Israel. If I'm right and Obama has already agreed to something of this sort or Iran has simply come to the natural conclusion that this how things will play out given Obama's clear predilections, then essentially the US has no leverage - they need these negotiations more than the Iranians do - Iran has options if the talks fail - Obama doesn't, other than of course the military one - and as I've said before I've never believed he had any intention whatsoever of going down that road.
