Tom Cotton came under fire for sending a letter to Iranian leaders informing them how the Constitution of the US works. Liberals were quick to label the two Middle East tours Bronze Star recipient a “traitor.” The press has allowed Joe Biden’s lamentation
“In thirty-six years in the United States Senate, I cannot recall another instance in which Senators wrote directly to advise another country.”
to go unchallenged with a fact check and additionally has entirely ignored all the times democrats undermined Republican Presidents.
Most importantly, the press has also chosen to ignore Barack Obama’s “traitorous” actions. In 2008 the Bush administration was communicating with Iran in what the NY Times called a “policy shift.” According to Michael Ledeen Barack Obama sent a message to Iranian leaders in 2008 assuring them that he would be much easier to deal with than George W. Bush. In July of 2008, the Bush/Iran talks collapsed.
And they call Tom Cotton a traitor.
Obama is so desirous of an alliance with Iran that he has pursued four different channels:
Ever since, President Obama’s quest for an alliance with Iran has been conducted through at least four channels: Iraq, Switzerland (the official U.S. representative to Tehran), Oman, and a variety of American intermediaries, the most notable of whom is probably Valerie Jarrett, his closest adviser.
The Iranian born Valerie Jarrett. Go figure.
That’s not the end of it. Obama himself wrote a “secret letter” to Iran in October:
WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama secretly wrote to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the middle of last month and described a shared interest in fighting Islamic State militants in Iraq and Syria, according to people briefed on the correspondence.
The letter appeared aimed both at buttressing the campaign against Islamic State and nudging Iran’s religious leader closer to a nuclear deal.
Mr. Obama stressed to Mr. Khamenei that any cooperation on Islamic State was largely contingent on Iran reaching a comprehensive agreement with global powers on the future of Tehran’s nuclear program by a Nov. 24 diplomatic deadline, the same people say.
That letter was said to “f*ck up everything”:
The congressional source told Fox News that the letter would upset the inroads they’ve tried to make with “the Sunni league,” noting that the president should have informed Congress of this back-channel if it was in fact going on.
“This f***s up everything,” the source said.
This does begin to clarify the Obama goals. Josh Earnest:
“The United States will not cooperate militarily with Iran in that effort [against ISIS]. We won’t share intelligence with them,” he said. “But their interests in the outcome is something that’s been widely commented on … and something that on a couple of occasions has been discussed on the sidelines of other conversations.”
Hold that thought.
Despite Obama’s assurances, ISIS is gaining ground. Not long ago Chuck Hagel suggested that American ground troops might be necessary to defeat ISIS.
“I think just as the president has said, and it is the advice I have given the president, it’s what General Dempsey has, is that we have to look at all the options,” said Hagel in the exit interview. “And I think it may require a forward deployment of some of our troops, not doing the fighting, not doing the combat work that we did at one time for six years in Iraq and we did for many, many years in Afghanistan, but to help air strike -“
Obama knows that deploying ground troops to Iraq to fight ISIS would be humiliating to him, having recklessly drawn out all US troops from Iraq and allowing ISIS to flourish. Therefore, he needs a proxy to conduct the ground war against ISIS, and Iran is that proxy.
What is Obama willing to give to Iran in return? Two things.
1. Nuclear weapons.
2. Assurances that the US will leave Assad and Syria alone.
Mr. Obama’s letter also sought to assuage Iran’s concerns about the future of its close ally, President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, according to another person briefed on the letter. It states that the U.S.’s military operations inside Syria aren’t targeted at Mr. Assad or his security forces.
There was a time when Obama absolutely promised that Iran would not get nuclear weapons. As pretty much everything else, his words had no durability.
Subsequently Obama said something that was accompanied by a nuance few noticed:
“As long as I am President of the United States Iran will not get a nuclear weapon.”
“As long as I am President…”
His “negotiations” with Iran now acknowledge that Iran will be allowed to have nuclear weapons. Just not while he is President.
“Let me ask you this, isn’t it true that even the deal that you are striving towards is not to eliminate any Iranian [nuclear] breakout capability, but to constrain the time in which you’ll get the notice of such breakout capability?” Sen. Robert Menendez (D., N.J.), a vocal critic of the White House’s dealings with Iran, asked Blinken during Wednesday’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. “Is that a fair statement, yes or no?”
“Yes, it is,” Blinken responded.
The plan is now clear. Obama is seeking to trade nuclear weapons and a hands-off policy toward Syria if Iran acts as Obama’s proxy on the ground against ISIS. As always, it’s all about saving Obama’s ass. Let someone else deal with the mess.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.