Obama figures sanctions always can be slapped again on Iran if it reneges on the deal, but by the time the United States has proof – and it won’t do anything without proof – it may be too late for Israel.
But the president assures Netanyahu and Jews that the “Israeli people are absolutely protected not just by their own capacities, but also by our commitments.”
If Israel is attacked, The United States of America will defend it. but President Obama forgets that if Israel had not staged a pre-emptive strike before being attacked by seven enemy countries in 1967, there might not have been any Israel to defend. Similarly, if Iran, or more likely Hezbollah, attacks Israel with a nuclear weapon, the American Armed Forces will end up defending not Israel but an emerging Caliphate State.
That is exactly why the Sunni Arab kingdoms, led by Saudi Arabia, are standing next to Israel in opposing the emerging deal with Iran.
President Obama’s answer to Friedman concerning the Sunni kingdoms displays an incredible and embarrassing ignorance about the Middle East.
Obama has forgotten that Osama bin Laden and other leading terrorists came from wealthy families. Instead, he rolled out the false premise that poverty breeds terror and stated:
[Some Muslim] populations are alienated [and] youth…are underemployed [with] an ideology that is destructive and nihilistic, and in some cases, just a belief that there are no legitimate political outlets for grievances… I think the biggest threats that they face may not be coming from Iran invading. It’s going to be from dissatisfaction inside their own countries ….
Why is it that we can’t have Arabs fighting [against] the terrible human rights abuses that have been perpetrated, or fighting against what Assad has done? I also think that I can send a message to them about the U.S.’s commitments to work with them and ensure that they are not invaded from the outside, and that perhaps will ease some of their concerns and allow them to have a more fruitful conversation with the Iranians.
He actually believes that Saudi Arabia and other countries that are among the worse human rights violators would even imagine standing up for humanity and fighting for humanity against Assad, whom Obama chose to not to fight. And it should not be forgotten that it was Obama’s previous Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who called Assad a “reformer,” at the begging of the Arab Spring rebellion there.
The interview with Friedman clearly shows that Obama is concerned that Congress, with the help of Prime Minister Netanyahu, will scuttle the emerging deal with Iran.
He admitted, “It’s not a secret that the Republicans may feel more affinity with Prime Minister Netanyahu’s views of the Iran issue than they do with mine. But [we need to be] keeping that within some formal boundaries, so that the executive branch, when it goes overseas, when it’s communicating with foreign leaders, is understood to be speaking on behalf of the United States of America, not a divided United States of America, making sure that whether that president is a Democrat or a Republican that once the debates have been had here, that he or she is the spokesperson on behalf of U.S. foreign policy.”
He reiterated his promise that, “I’ve been very clear that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon on my watch.”
The problem is that proposed deal could pave the way, as Netanyahu has said, for Iran to get a bomb, during his successor’s administration.
Obama’s defense of the framework arrangement with Iran was expressed from a position of weakness, exactly the same position in which he placed himself and the United States when he extended the November deadline in talks with Iran.
The moment he assumes that Iran is stronger than sanctions, he is telling the Islamic Republic it also is stronger than “engagement.”
