Obama: Critics of Iran nuclear deal 'selling a fantasy'

[webfact]

Obama: Critics of Iran nuclear deal 'selling a fantasy'
By JULIE PACE

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama assailed critics of his Iran nuclear deal Wednesday as "selling a fantasy" to the American people, warning Congress that blocking the accord would damage the nation's credibility and increase the likelihood of more war in the Middle East.

Besides challenging opponents at home, Obama cast Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as an isolated international opponent of the historic accord, saying, "I do not doubt his sincerity, but I believe he is wrong."

The agreement would require Iran to dismantle most of its nuclear program for at least a decade in exchange for billions of dollars in relief from international sanctions. But Netanyahu and some critics in the U.S. argue that it would not stop Iran from building a bomb.

The president's blunt remarks, in an hour-long address at American University, were part of an intense lobbying campaign by the White House ahead of Congress' vote next month to either approve or disapprove the international agreement. Opponents of the agreement have streamed to Capitol Hill, too, to make their case, and they have spent tens of millions of dollars on advertisements.

The stakes are high, Obama said, contending that it isn't just Iran's ability to build a bomb that is on the line but also "America's credibility as the anchor of the international system."

"The choice we face is ultimately between diplomacy and some form of war," Obama said. "Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not three months from now, but soon."

Obama's diplomatic overtures to Iran, a centerpiece of his foreign policy agenda, have put him at odds with Republicans and some Democrats, as well as with Netanyahu, who has campaigned vigorously against the deal.

Netanyahu and U.S. critics of the Iran deal say Obama is presenting a false choice between accepting the deal at hand and going to war to stop Iran from building a bomb.

"I think everyone in the United States knows that this president is not going to carry out military action against Iran," said Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. "Iran knows that."

Obama told Jewish leaders in a private meeting Tuesday that he understood their concerns about being cast as warmongers. But he made his case even more aggressively Wednesday by linking critics of the deal to those who pushed for the invasion of Iraq in 2003, a conflict now widely considered a mistake.

"I have repeatedly challenged anyone opposed to this deal to put forward a better, plausible alternative," he said. "I have yet to hear one. What I've heard instead are the same types of arguments that we heard in the run-up to the Iraq war."

While Obama was an early opponent of that war, several of his top foreign policy advisers voted to authorize the conflict, including Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Drawing on more distant history, Obama said the Iran deal was in line with America's long tradition of "strong, principled diplomacy" with adversaries, including the former Soviet Union. He spoke at the same university where John F. Kennedy called for Cold War diplomacy and nuclear disarmament, and he referred to Presidents Kennedy and Ronald Reagan a number of times.

The Iran accord was finalized last month after more than a year of tense negotiations between Iran, the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia. The president argues that if Congress blocks the accord, the European Union and the United Nations will lift their sanctions anyway, collapsing the best leverage the international community has to stop Iran from building a bomb.

Opponents say the deal leaves too much of Iran's nuclear infrastructure in place and allows Tehran to rebuild its program too quickly. Critics also contend Iran will use an influx of funds now frozen under the sanctions to boost terrorist activity around the Middle East.

Obama said he has no illusions about Iran's support for terrorism and takes seriously its incendiary rhetoric about the U.S. But he also said the Iranian hardliners chanting "Death to America" in the streets of Tehran don't represent all of Iran.

"In fact, it's those hardliners who are most comfortable with the status quo," he said. "It's those hardliners chanting "Death to America" who have been most opposed to the deal. They're making common cause with the Republican caucus."

The White House is preparing for the likelihood that lawmakers will vote against the deal next month and is focusing its lobbying efforts on getting enough Democrats to sustain a presidential veto. Only one chamber of Congress is needed to sustain a veto and keep the deal in place.

Obama needs 146 Democrats in the House or 34 in the Senate to sustain a veto. As of Wednesday afternoon, 16 House Democrats and 11 senators had publicly declared their support for the deal.

The White House has said it is confident it can sustain a veto at least in the House.
___

Associated Press writers Josh Lederman, Donna Cassata and Deb Riechmann contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-08-06

[sdanielmcev]

When is this guy going to wake up and smell the napalm? Out of 535 Congressmen only 27 support it. It was a bad deal now and in the future. And, I have never, ever heard this kind of smearing by a sitting President. I'd say "shame on you," but the dems haven't had that feeling since they sold their soul to the Clintons. He's starting to make Carter look good, now.

[sirineou]

When is this guy going to wake up and smell the napalm? Out of 535 Congressmen only 27 support it. It was a bad deal now and in the future. And, I have never, ever heard this kind of smearing by a sitting President. I'd say "shame on you," but the dems haven't had that feeling since they sold their soul to the Clintons. He's starting to make Carter look good, now.

Congress does not always act in the best interest of the country. At the very least you can say that they have political considerations.

This agreement is not between the US and Iran, There are other countries involved, it is a miracle that sanctions coalition has lasted this long, How much longer do you think all the other countries involved will adhere to the sanctions if the US does not ratify this agreement?

[Publicus]

Prez Obama already has the votes in the House to veto Congress where House D leader Nancy Pelosi has never lost a major vote.

Three more senators announced yesterday they support the Agreement and the President, which brings the Senate closer to it too. The three senators are the D Nelson of FL, D Boxer of CA, Independent Angus King of Maine.

Nothing is final as the crucial Congressional votes and Executive veto will come next month. Expect tons more of Republican disinformation between now and then. Which helps to explain why this is an Executive Agreement instead of a treaty.

[kamahele]

When is this guy going to wake up and smell the napalm? Out of 535 Congressmen only 27 support it. It was a bad deal now and in the future. And, I have never, ever heard this kind of smearing by a sitting President. I'd say "shame on you," but the dems haven't had that feeling since they sold their soul to the Clintons. He's starting to make Carter look good, now.

When you are basing your argument on facts, it isn't called "smearing" it is called "truth"

[Pakboong]

• Many from Israeli leadership who have expressed their approval of the deal:
• Shlomo Gaza, Chief of Intelligence, Major General
• Carmi Gillon, Director of Israel Security Agency
• Ami Ayalon, Vice Admiral, Director of Israel Security Agency
• Itamar Yaar, Colonel Deputy Israeli National Security Council
• Arie Pellman, Israeli Security Agency official
• Amiram Levin, deputy of the Mossad director, Major General
• Itzhak Barzilay, Mossad official
• Nathan Sharony, Major General, head of planning for the armed forces

Numerous admirals and generals signed the letter as well:

• David Ben Bashat, Vice Admiral
• Micha Ram, Vice Admiral
• Alex Tal, Vice Admiral
• Amira Dotan, Brigadier General, member of Parliament
• Uzi Eilam, Brigadier General, Director of Israel’s Atomic Energy Commission
• Aviezer Yaari, Major General
• Giora Romm, Major General
• Moshe Lichtman, Major General
• Amram Mitzna, Major General, member of Parliament
• Abraham Almog, Brigadier General, Medal of Courage
• Asher Levy, Brigadier General
• Yossi Gonen, Brigadier General
• Giora Inbar, Brigadier General
• Arie Keren, Brigadier General
• Yoram Cohen, Brigadier General
• Shlomo Egozy. Brigadier General
• Yosef Eyal, Brigadier General
• Asaf Agmon, Brigadier General
• Uriel Agmon, Brigadier General
• Yoram Agmon, Brigadier General
• Amos Amir Brigadier General
• Mordechai ‘Motke’ Ben Porat, Brigadier General
• Shaul Gavoli, Police Major Geneneral, LDF Brigadier General
• Ilan Paz, Brigadier General
• Yitzhak Rabin, Brigadier General
• Giora Ram (Furman), PhD, Brigadier General
• Yaron Ram, Brigadier General
• Gilad Ramot, Brigadier General
• Gilad Raz, Brigadier General
• lftach Spector, Brigadier General
• Benny Taran , Brigadier General
• Aharon Vardi, Brigadier General
• Shlomo Waxe. Brigadier General
• Izak Zamir, Brigadier General
• Gadi Zohar, Brigadier General
• Amnon Reshef, General
• Ran Ronen, General
• Danny Rothschild, General

In addition, numerous top Israeli military brass have previously come out in favor of the Iran deal, including:

• Efraim Halevy, Mossad Director; former head of National Security Council
• Shlomo Ben-Ami, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Internal Security
• Shlomo Brom, brigadier general; former director of IDF strategic planning division; former deputy national security advisor
• Uzi Arad, national security advisor
• Dov Tamari, military intelligence chief; former head of special operations
• Chuck Freilich, deputy national security advisor
• Yitzhak Ben-Yisrael, Chair of Israel’s space agency; former IDF general
• Uzi Even, lead scientist at Israel’s Dimona nuclear reactor
• Eran Etzion, Deputy Head of the Israeli National Security Council; former Head of Policy Planning at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
• Israel Ziv, major general
• Eli Levite, deputy director general of Israel’s atomic energy commission

Haaretz

[sdanielmcev]

When is this guy going to wake up and smell the napalm? Out of 535 Congressmen only 27 support it. It was a bad deal now and in the future. And, I have never, ever heard this kind of smearing by a sitting President. I'd say "shame on you," but the dems haven't had that feeling since they sold their soul to the Clintons. He's starting to make Carter look good, now.

When you are basing your argument on facts, it isn't called "smearing" it is called "truth"

Nice try. Obama isn't basing anything on facts. It is promise to do something. No facts involved. It is called a dictionary. Thereby smearing.

[sdanielmcev]

When is this guy going to wake up and smell the napalm? Out of 535 Congressmen only 27 support it. It was a bad deal now and in the future. And, I have never, ever heard this kind of smearing by a sitting President. I'd say "shame on you," but the dems haven't had that feeling since they sold their soul to the Clintons. He's starting to make Carter look good, now.

Congress does not always act in the best interest of the country. At the very least you can say that they have political considerations.

This agreement is not between the US and Iran, There are other countries involved, it is a miracle that sanctions coalition has lasted this long, How much longer do you think all the other countries involved will adhere to the sanctions if the US does not ratify this agreement?

They'll probably negotiate without the US.

[sdanielmcev]

Prez Obama already has the votes in the House to veto Congress where House D leader Nancy Pelosi has never lost a major vote.

Three more senators announced yesterday they support the Agreement and the President, which brings the Senate closer to it too. The three senators are the D Nelson of FL, D Boxer of CA, Independent Angus King of Maine.

Nothing is final as the crucial Congressional votes and Executive veto will come next month. Expect tons more of Republican disinformation between now and then. Which helps to explain why this is an Executive Agreement instead of a treaty.

And null and void when he leaves office. Not a very lasting legacy. Obama made a promise he could not keep. Kerry is no statesman. Neither is Obama. Moderate dems, the majority, are the ones not siding with Obama.

[FangFerang]

Every single US government official who opposes the Iran deal is either 1) a hawk from a weapons-producing state 2) a hawk who gains from warfare a'la Cheney or 3) is from a state or district where they coddle to the powerful Jewish lobby.

They are really upset that their drumbeats to send everyone else's kids to war have been interrupted.

War pigs.

Edited August 6, 2015 by FangFerang

[FangFerang]

When is this guy going to wake up and smell the napalm? Out of 535 Congressmen only 27 support it. It was a bad deal now and in the future. And, I have never, ever heard this kind of smearing by a sitting President. I'd say "shame on you," but the dems haven't had that feeling since they sold their soul to the Clintons. He's starting to make Carter look good, now.

Funny you didn't mention the walking grammatical and foreign affairs disaster G W Bush still is, nor the actor suffering from dementia that confused his movie roles with real life, like Reagan did at meetings at the end...nor Cheney being an international war criminal...

No centrist is buying what you're selling, but it was a good laugh.

Thanks.

[Seastallion]

When is this guy going to wake up and smell the napalm? Out of 535 Congressmen only 27 support it. It was a bad deal now and in the future. And, I have never, ever heard this kind of smearing by a sitting President. I'd say "shame on you," but the dems haven't had that feeling since they sold their soul to the Clintons. He's starting to make Carter look good, now.

When you are basing your argument on facts, it isn't called "smearing" it is called "truth"

Nice try. Obama isn't basing anything on facts. It is promise to do something. No facts involved. It is called a dictionary. Thereby smearing.

Fact: The connection between those that criticise this deal and those that supported the blunderous Iraq war.

[stoli]

When is this guy going to wake up and smell the napalm? Out of 535 Congressmen only 27 support it. It was a bad deal now and in the future. And, I have never, ever heard this kind of smearing by a sitting President. I'd say "shame on you," but the dems haven't had that feeling since they sold their soul to the Clintons. He's starting to make Carter look good, now.

Funny you didn't mention the walking grammatical and foreign affairs disaster G W Bush still is, nor the actor suffering from dementia that confused his movie roles with real life, like Reagan did at meetings at the end...nor Cheney being an international war criminal...

No centrist is buying what you're selling, but it was a good laugh.

Thanks.

I am only saying that an extremely small portion of the US citizens have anything negative to say about former President Reagan. Most Americans agree that he was the best President ever. But every now & then, you hear someone from the UK come up with this BS about him just being an actor. If you don't know what you are talking about, why talk?

[arjunadawn]

When is this guy going to wake up and smell the napalm? Out of 535 Congressmen only 27 support it. It was a bad deal now and in the future. And, I have never, ever heard this kind of smearing by a sitting President. I'd say "shame on you," but the dems haven't had that feeling since they sold their soul to the Clintons. He's starting to make Carter look good, now.

...and stop the strawman argument that this deal is the alternative to war. It is a false choice as evidenced by Kerry. "I will walk away from a bad deal;" does this presumably mean war was was/is in fact a valid option? For me, instead of shame I see an abomination.

[Ulysses G.]

When is this guy going to wake up and smell the napalm? Out of 535 Congressmen only 27 support it. It was a bad deal now and in the future. And, I have never, ever heard this kind of smearing by a sitting President. I'd say "shame on you," but the dems haven't had that feeling since they sold their soul to the Clintons. He's starting to make Carter look good, now.

Obama is the one selling a fantasy. Congress does not support this crazy deal and the American people also reject it. If democrats help Obama veto a Congressional override, it will show exactly how broken the system really is.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/28/politics/obama-approval-iran-economy/

[Publicus]

 

Prez Obama already has the votes in the House to veto Congress where House D leader Nancy Pelosi has never lost a major vote.

Three more senators announced yesterday they support the Agreement and the President, which brings the Senate closer to it too. The three senators are the D Nelson of FL, D Boxer of CA, Independent Angus King of Maine.

Nothing is final as the crucial Congressional votes and Executive veto will come next month. Expect tons more of Republican disinformation between now and then. Which helps to explain why this is an Executive Agreement instead of a treaty.

And null and void when he leaves office. Not a very lasting legacy. Obama made a promise he could not keep. Kerry is no statesman. Neither is Obama. Moderate dems, the majority, are the ones not siding with Obama.

 

Executive Agreements have existed for a long time and since the end of WW2 hundreds of Executive Agreements have been issued and remain in effect. My bet is that the next president will leave this EA intact as she has already said she supports it.

The right keeps moving the goal posts further away from each point in the P5+1 negotiations and now that there is an EA final agreement the goal posts have been hauled away by night to be set in January 2017.

That's not quite the Sword of Damocles you've got going on there.

[Seastallion]

• Many from Israeli leadership who have expressed their approval of the deal:
• Shlomo Gaza, Chief of Intelligence, Major General
• Carmi Gillon, Director of Israel Security Agency
• Ami Ayalon, Vice Admiral, Director of Israel Security Agency
• Itamar Yaar, Colonel Deputy Israeli National Security Council
• Arie Pellman, Israeli Security Agency official
• Amiram Levin, deputy of the Mossad director, Major General
• Itzhak Barzilay, Mossad official
• Nathan Sharony, Major General, head of planning for the armed forces

Numerous admirals and generals signed the letter as well:

• David Ben Bashat, Vice Admiral
• Micha Ram, Vice Admiral
• Alex Tal, Vice Admiral
• Amira Dotan, Brigadier General, member of Parliament
• Uzi Eilam, Brigadier General, Director of Israel’s Atomic Energy Commission
• Aviezer Yaari, Major General
• Giora Romm, Major General
• Moshe Lichtman, Major General
• Amram Mitzna, Major General, member of Parliament
• Abraham Almog, Brigadier General, Medal of Courage
• Asher Levy, Brigadier General
• Yossi Gonen, Brigadier General
• Giora Inbar, Brigadier General
• Arie Keren, Brigadier General
• Yoram Cohen, Brigadier General
• Shlomo Egozy. Brigadier General
• Yosef Eyal, Brigadier General
• Asaf Agmon, Brigadier General
• Uriel Agmon, Brigadier General
• Yoram Agmon, Brigadier General
• Amos Amir Brigadier General
• Mordechai ‘Motke’ Ben Porat, Brigadier General
• Shaul Gavoli, Police Major Geneneral, LDF Brigadier General
• Ilan Paz, Brigadier General
• Yitzhak Rabin, Brigadier General
• Giora Ram (Furman), PhD, Brigadier General
• Yaron Ram, Brigadier General
• Gilad Ramot, Brigadier General
• Gilad Raz, Brigadier General
• lftach Spector, Brigadier General
• Benny Taran , Brigadier General
• Aharon Vardi, Brigadier General
• Shlomo Waxe. Brigadier General
• Izak Zamir, Brigadier General
• Gadi Zohar, Brigadier General
• Amnon Reshef, General
• Ran Ronen, General
• Danny Rothschild, General

In addition, numerous top Israeli military brass have previously come out in favor of the Iran deal, including:

• Efraim Halevy, Mossad Director; former head of National Security Council
• Shlomo Ben-Ami, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Internal Security
• Shlomo Brom, brigadier general; former director of IDF strategic planning division; former deputy national security advisor
• Uzi Arad, national security advisor
• Dov Tamari, military intelligence chief; former head of special operations
• Chuck Freilich, deputy national security advisor
• Yitzhak Ben-Yisrael, Chair of Israel’s space agency; former IDF general
• Uzi Even, lead scientist at Israel’s Dimona nuclear reactor
• Eran Etzion, Deputy Head of the Israeli National Security Council; former Head of Policy Planning at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
• Israel Ziv, major general
• Eli Levite, deputy director general of Israel’s atomic energy commission

Haaretz

That's quite an impressive list!

Yet armchair warriors here imply all these men are wrong. Go figure.

[Ulysses G.]

My bet is that the next president will leave this EA intact as she has already said she supports it.

Maybe, but things are not looking certain about Hillary being the next president and besides, she is a friend of Israel. Obama despises them.

A republican will certainly bin this "deal" and Hillary might after she had gotten elected and was not dependent on Obama's support.

[Ulysses G.]

Yet armchair warriors here imply all these men are wrong. Go figure.

Your list forgot to include all the Israelis who were AGAINST the crazy deal. It is a lot longer than that one.

[bendejo]

War for the sake of selling weaons.

Last night Christie gave a talk for these guys, a munitions lobby.

http://peaceprosperitysecurity.org/

[chuckd]

When is this guy going to wake up and smell the napalm? Out of 535 Congressmen only 27 support it. It was a bad deal now and in the future. And, I have never, ever heard this kind of smearing by a sitting President. I'd say "shame on you," but the dems haven't had that feeling since they sold their soul to the Clintons. He's starting to make Carter look good, now.

When you are basing your argument on facts, it isn't called "smearing" it is called "truth"

Nice try. Obama isn't basing anything on facts. It is promise to do something. No facts involved. It is called a dictionary. Thereby smearing.

Fact: The connection between those that criticise this deal and those that supported the blunderous Iraq war.

Here's another fact.

From the OP:

"While Obama was an early opponent of that war, several of his top foreign policy advisers voted to authorize the conflict, including Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination."

The "blunderous Iraq war" would never have happened without the support and votes of 82 Democratic members of the House of Representatives and 29 Democratic Senators, including the infamous three listed in the OP.

Both parties are equally responsible for the Iraq war and no amount of rewriting history can change that simple "fact".

[chuckd]

Every single US government official who opposes the Iran deal is either 1) a hawk from a weapons-producing state 2) a hawk who gains from warfare a'la Cheney or 3) is from a state or district where they coddle to the powerful Jewish lobby.

They are really upset that their drumbeats to send everyone else's kids to war have been interrupted.

War pigs.

They are really upset that their drumbeats to send everyone else's kids to war have been interrupted.

Try to catch up with this century.

The US military is an all volunteer force.

"everyone else's kids" will not go to war.

[Publicus]

 

My bet is that the next president will leave this EA intact as she has already said she supports it.

Maybe, but things are not looking certain about Hillary being the next president and besides, she is a friend of Israel. Obama despises them.

A republican will certainly bin this "deal" and Hillary might after she had gotten elected and was not dependent on Obama's support.

 

Denial, fantasy and a gross speculation plus the word Israel do not necessarily add up to a viable post.

[Seastallion]

When you are basing your argument on facts, it isn't called "smearing" it is called "truth"

Nice try. Obama isn't basing anything on facts. It is promise to do something. No facts involved. It is called a dictionary. Thereby smearing.

Fact: The connection between those that criticise this deal and those that supported the blunderous Iraq war.

Here's another fact.

From the OP:

"While Obama was an early opponent of that war, several of his top foreign policy advisers voted to authorize the conflict, including Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination."

The "blunderous Iraq war" would never have happened without the support and votes of 82 Democratic members of the House of Representatives and 29 Democratic Senators, including the infamous three listed in the OP.

Both parties are equally responsible for the Iraq war and no amount of rewriting history can change that simple "fact".

Is 82 votes in the HoR and 29 votes in the senate half? If not, then it's not "equally".

Which brings us nicely back on topic and the OP...that these people sell fantasies (code for "lies") as they did back then when they swayed those Dems.

[Publicus]

 

Every single US government official who opposes the Iran deal is either 1) a hawk from a weapons-producing state 2) a hawk who gains from warfare a'la Cheney or 3) is from a state or district where they coddle to the powerful Jewish lobby.

They are really upset that their drumbeats to send everyone else's kids to war have been interrupted.

War pigs.

They are really upset that their drumbeats to send everyone else's kids to war have been interrupted.

Try to catch up with this century.

The US military is an all volunteer force.

"everyone else's kids" will not go to war.

The kids of the 1% will not go to war.

Nor of the 5%.

[elgordo38]

When is this guy going to wake up and smell the napalm? Out of 535 Congressmen only 27 support it. It was a bad deal now and in the future. And, I have never, ever heard this kind of smearing by a sitting President. I'd say "shame on you," but the dems haven't had that feeling since they sold their soul to the Clintons. He's starting to make Carter look good, now.

His selling points are as follows "A bad deal is better than no deal at all" or "Either vote for the deal or face a war" take your pick. He is trying to give that between a rock and a hard place feeling. The man's ego is trying to build a legacy. Once his arm twisting pork barrel campaign starts they will all fall into line. Its the nature of politics(the beast)

[Linky]

Yet armchair warriors here imply all these men are wrong. Go figure.

Your list forgot to include all the Israelis who were AGAINST the crazy deal. It is a lot longer than that one.

Where is that list?

[Seastallion]

Yet armchair warriors here imply all these men are wrong. Go figure.

Your list forgot to include all the Israelis who were AGAINST the crazy deal. It is a lot longer than that one.

Where is that list?

Moot. The Israelis that are against the deal do not count for anything as they are just beating the Zionist drum. What is significant are the numerous prominent, high-ranking military, security, and intelligence officers who think the deal is good. They know what is what and they know Iran will never attack first.

[Boon Mee]

Appeasment in our time.

Bottom line my friends. I-Ran wants to wipe Israel off the map and any Infidel that gets in it's way.

[Ulysses G.]

Appeasment in our time.

Bottom line my friends. I-Ran wants to wipe Israel off the map and any Infidel that gets in it's way.

It is interesting to note that all the posters that absolutely HATE Israel, the same ones who obsessively demonize it, lie about its history and call for its destruction are all FOR THE CRAZY DEAL 100%.

Actually, it is not all that surprising.