^All good points, though Israel would strike, even if it is not a logical move to some.
I agree to an extent. I am not sure as I dont sit in the room during negotiations, BUT I think Israel coordinates actions more often than not in accordance with American and Israeli intent. We are allies as aligned as possible. Probably the only greater in 'lock step' foreign policy with our nation is how we coordinate with the last empire. Yours, of course. The point is we can make a case and until they are actually producing weapons grade uranium, Israel will remain bristled but patient. Iran is too big considering the current dysfunction in the middle east.
The problem was that the Bush administration did not calculate the demographic make up of Iraq, likely because Republicans are not terribly cultured or aware of the outside world. Two thirds subscribe to Shiite Islam. What was a replacement government supposed to look like?
Agreed. They should have followed the time honored policy of keeping the foot soldiers of the previous authority in Iraq, and then told them the new policies. It would have maintained much more order than the replace model. Regardless of their previous shameful crimes in the name of Saddaam, the locust of power has a way of maintaining authenticity if only because that is how is has been for so long.
The plan failed in almost every aspect until a recovery tactic under Patreus managed to establish controlling order once again at great loss of life. It was not necessary.
The people whining include many top dem Senators who want more sanctions against Iran.
What triggers my distrust more than anything is the need to sign an agreement at 3am in the morning. What could be that important that it couldn't wait until daylight? Is Iran that close to fully building a nuclear bomb?
The only thing I would ask you, while it is easy to stand back and armchair quarterback, after you have been negotiating for months and years, then when the opposition caves to a point previously agreed, then you close. You don't fucking wait till Tom, Dick, JACK or Harry chime in with their approval. After months and years you have already reached a consensus as to what is an acceptable agreement. You take it and you seal it when agreed before other entities can make it impossible to sign. No offense, but you have never actually negotiated anything of substantial weight with massive political implications. One does not wait for the thousand of useless voices to tear it apart. A deadline for doing is exactly how you move forward. Saying it is a red line is just ignorant word play.
In the end, a situation where we negotiate our way to success under a democratic president is an election nightmare for republicans. That is the main complaint here, nothing substantial or worth consideration. Plus any thing we agree to long term has to meet the test of our congress. If it proves worthy then it will, if not then it wont. Crying about a chance is simply political chicanery.
The Israeli Government's hawkish position serves to encourage Iran to negotiate seriously, and deliver on its agreement with the international community...whilst, it is reported that Israel's security services, and military have rejected an air assault on Iran's nuclear industry sites.
I quote:
http://972mag.com/anonymous-decision-maker-advocating-war-with-iran-is-ehud-barak/52617/
Furthermore it is also understood that any assault on Iran would embolden the postion of the hawks in the Iran government:
http://thediplomat.com/2012/08/why-israel-wont-attack-iran/
I quote:
I agree with you here which is odd since our thought processes rarely align. This is very logical but would be entirely defused if Iran acts as it has indicated in the first step of negotiations.
What bothers me most is that there are entities in our political leadership that would derail this simply to deny Obama a political win. That is bad for America, Israel, and the rest of the world. A grown up, diplomatic middle east would be a boon to the world. Iran is the keystone to such an environment. Chopping that off for national political gain is an affront to humanity.
