The Iran deal: Put U.S. interests first
As President Obama's acolytes defended the indefensible Iranian nuclear deal over the Labor Day weekend, Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Pat Toomey cut through their empty rhetoric and explained how this misbegotten accord increases, not decreases, the likelihood of a military conflict with the Islamic Republic.
Never mind delays of up to 24 days to inspect undeclared Iranian nuclear sites under this accord. The agreement gives “hundreds of billions of dollars to the world's largest and worst state sponsor of terrorism,” which openly despises America, Mr. Toomey said.
“And this deal would give Iran the capacity to inflict harm in much more destructive ways than it is currently able to do,” said Toomey. That “will make military conflict more likely, not less.”
And yet Mr. Obama's water carriers still insist that this bargain for Tehran is better than no deal at all. Joining the bucket brigade is Colin Powell, who called various aspects of the deal “remarkable.”
Of course, the former secretary of State also told the United Nations 12 years ago, in the run-up to war with Iraq, that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein at the time supposedly had amassed a world-threatening stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. That cover story quickly fell apart.
Lawmakers have until Sept. 17 to vote on the Iran nuke deal, The Hill newspaper reports. More's the pity that Obama's supportive Senate Democrats would endorse this agreement despite the overwhelming arguments against it.