Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Iraq vs Iran, Democrats Have Consequences

The deep meaning of Ben Rhodes | Power Line:

During most of the '00s we got to listen to endless discussion about "Bush lied", his (or Cheney's) supposedly deep and dark motives for the "lies" -- money for Halliburton, they planned to kill W's daddy, neoconservative delusions, etc, etc. Everything was "false pretenses", and of course Saddam was a great guy that we would be much better off to still have torturing and killing dissidents.

In the late '70s, Jimmuh Carter lost Iran in plain site. Since he was a D, that was "inevitable" to the extent the MSM cared to cover it at all. The left likes to make the establishment of Israel as the source of "Islamic extremism", but the loss of Iran is a far more proximate genesis. Democrats never screw up, so it can't be that.

If and when an Iranian sourced nuke explodes somewhere in the world, we can rest assured that it will NOT be the fault of BO! Either there will be a close proximity R to take the blame, or some R in the past (possibly W), or the blame will go back to the creation of Israel -- or maybe just "religion". Only positive causality ever accrues to Ds ... which tends to make one wonder if they ever really "cause" anything after enough years have passed! I mean, FDR isn't responsible for problems with FICA is he?

Here is a nice concise summary of how BO misled us on Iran. When that bomb blows up, we will know that Jimmuh's 2nd and 3rd terms really did have some results beyond just the destruction of the Constitution, the US economy and the conversion of a once great nation into BOistan.

The strategic goal of the President, Doran says, was to end the conflict with Iran in order to extricate the US from the Middle East and make Iran part of the “security architecture of the region.” To do this, he misrepresented not only what was in the deal itself, but everything around it. 
Doran identified five components of the deception: 
Conjuring moderates within the Iranian government. This created a false moral equivalence between those opposed to deal in the US and Iranian hardliners, as well as a false sense of security about the concessions the US has made. 
Falsifying the chronology of negotiations, which started prior to Rouhani’s assuming office. 
Erasing US concessions
Hiding the regional cost, in particular with respect to Syria. Rhodes, Doran argues, tried to prevent people from connecting Obama’s Syria policy to his Iran policy (as Doran correctly identified over a year ago). 
Blaming the US’s Sunni Muslim allies as well as Prime Minister Netanyahu.
Finally, Doran points out that even today, we still don’t know the full terms of the deal.
BO is a D ... "misleading" is simply "convincing the foolish to follow him" from the MSM point of view. Nobody cares -- when it goes "blindingly boom" it won't be his fault.

'via Blog this'

No comments:

Post a Comment