This time, when he threw out the challenge of coming up with something better, he probably didn't expect much of a response. But he got one.
Obama challenged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu to come up with an alternative to his pathetic "deal" with Iran over their nuclear program. Even Iran is saying that John Kerry and the United States gave up everything and they gave up nothing in return. And they're proving it by continuing to refine nuclear materials, fund terrorism and threaten Israel.
“The prime minister of Israel is deeply opposed to it, I think he’s made that very clear,” Obama said during a press conference in Panama on Saturday.
“I have repeatedly asked, what is the alternative that you present that you think makes it less likely for Iran to get a nuclear weapon? And I have yet to obtain a good answer on that.”
Well... sometimes you get what you ask for. Netanyahu yesterday responded to Obama's challenge with a sound, common sense alternative - one where Iran actually has to give up something and the U.S. keeps sanctions in place until it happens. You know - like Kerry was supposed to do.
Bibi has been an opponent of Obama's nuclear deal with Iran since negotiations began. Iran is Israel's greatest threat in the region, having threatened to "wipe them off the map" numerous times over the years. Iran refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist. If the Iranian government attains a nuclear weapon it will increase the danger ten fold. Netanyahu knows this. Iran knows this. Everyone knows this. And Netanyahu has stated his opposition to the deal publicly numerous times, much to the disdain of President Obama. Obama doesn't much like to be criticized by other world leaders - particularly those he doesn't like.
Obama apparently doesn't care about the threat to Israel however, since he refused to make Israel's security from Iranian aggression a part of the deal. One would think, given that Israel has been our friend and strong ally since its repatriation in 1948, that her security would be one of the foremost things specified in the deal. But when asked about it the President let it be known that Israeli security wasn't a concern when it came to striking a deal with Iran.
"Well, let me say this — it's not that the idea of Iran recognizing Israel is unreasonable," Obama said. "It's completely reasonable and that's U.S. policy...."
"There's still going to be a whole host of differences between us and Iran, and one of the most profound ones is the vile, anti-Semitic statements that have often come out of the highest levels of the Iranian regime. But the notion that we would condition Iran not getting nuclear weapons, in a verifiable deal, on Iran recognizing Israel is really akin to saying that we won't sign a deal unless the nature of the Iranian regime completely transforms. And that is, I think, a fundamental misjudgment."
So President Obama says that Iran recognizing Israel is "completely reasonable and that's U.S. policy," but because Iran says they don't want to do that it's off the table. It's hard to argue with negotiating skills like that.
Netanyahu responded to the President's challenge yesterday. Never one to mince words, Bibi laid out his ideas for a deal if, in fact, there had to be one. I'm pretty sure Obama didn't like Bibi's ideas. They sounded exactly like the deal that Kerry should have been negotiating.
“First, instead of allowing Iran to preserve and develop its nuclear capabilities, a better deal would significantly roll back these capabilities, for example, by shutting down the illicit underground facilities that Iran concealed for years from the international community,” Netanyahu said from his office in Jerusalem. “Second, instead of lifting the restrictions on Iran’s nuclear facilities and program at a fixed date, a better deal would link the lifting of these restrictions to an end of Iran’s aggression in the region, its worldwide terrorism and its threats to annihilate Israel.”
Common sense negotiating. Iran gets nothing, including the lifting of sanctions, if they don't agree to our demands. But instead, Kerry gave up all of our demands and Iran gave up nothing. We didn't even walk out when we discovered Iran had a secret, underground centrifuge facility. We told them it was OK; they could keep it operational.
Two days after the deal Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, said on international television that they were giving up nothing and that the United States gave in to all of their demands. Very few people in the world believe this deal to be a positive thing. Even some Democrats are denouncing it. And the President is having temper tantrums because he's being criticized. Once again his narcissism is getting in the way of sound judgement.
“I don’t understand why everyone is working so hard to anticipate how we can fail,” Obama whined in Panama City.
“My only question is why we’re trying to short-circuit our own negotiations. That’s not how we’re supposed to run foreign policy regardless of who is president or secretary of state. It needs to stop.”
Senator John McLame criticized John Kerry's assessment of the deal insinuating that Kerry's explanation, when compared to the Ayatollah's, was less trustworthy. The President didn't like that much.
“That’s an indication of the degree to which partisanship has crossed all boundaries,” Obama said in a news conference. “And we’re seeing this again and again.”
Secretary of State John "I Lie About Everything" Kerry said yesterday in an interview that we can trust his deal with Iran because it's a good deal. He said Russia would back him up on that. Except Russia is an ally of Iran. So sure - we can believe Kerry. Because he has Russia on his side.
Here's the "deal" Mr. President. Your deal sucks. It has sucked since its inception. You're negotiating with an enemy at the peril of our allies - an enemy whom you know won't live up to any deal you make unless they get to continue what they've been doing. Everyone knows this yet you continue to push for a deal. That's why you're being criticized. Because what you're doing is subversive and dangerous.
Obama should seriously throw his animosity toward Netanyahu aside and listen to him. Netanyahu is possibly the most intelligent and effective leader in the world today. His ideas for dealing with Iran echo those of Republicans in Washington and those Democrats who are open to the truth about Iran instead of giving blind allegiance to Obama. Obama's negotiations, whether through deliberate intent or complete ignorance, are dangerous and will absolutely allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon in the near future - if they haven't already.
Send in the A-Team, Mr. President. Your Secretary of Idiocy has worn out his usefulness.