Category Archives: defense policy

John Kerry on the Law

Posted on by
Reply

Paul Mirengoff, over at Power Line, highlighted this exchange between the guy who sits in the Secretary of State’s chair and Congressman Brad Sherman (D, CA) while Kerry testified before the House Foreign Relations Committee regarding the Iranian nuclear weapons deal.

Sherman: You strongly do not want [Congress] to override a presidential veto, but if we do, that triggers certain American laws…. You don’t want us to do it. You think its terrible policy. You think the rest of the world would be against us.

But let’s say Congress doesn’t take your advice—we override a veto—and the law that’s triggered then imposes certain sanctions. Will you follow the law even though you think it violates this agreement, and even if you think it’s absolutely terrible policy?

Kerry: I can’t begin to answer that at this point without consulting with the President and determining what the circumstances are.

Sherman: So you’re not committed to following the law?

Kerry: I’m not going to deal with a hypothetical, that’s all.

But, Skipper, what’s hypothetical about whether you’ll follow the law? And why do you need to consult with President Barack Obama before you’ll say whether you’ll follow the law or break it?

Yet More Dishonesty Regarding the Iran Nuclear Weapons Deal

Posted on by
Reply

John Kerry is at it again. Kerry was speaking to Council on Foreign Relations in New York when he said this:

I fear that what could happen is, if Congress were to overturn it [Kerry’s just concluded deal with Iran], our friends in Israel could actually end up being more isolated and more blamed….

Of course, Kerry knows, and so does his boss, President Barack Obama, that such isolation is entirely this administration’s decision. All the US would need to do is openly stand with Israel on the matter. Kerry is projecting his and Obama’s own behavior.

Kerry also said this to the CFR:

And we would lose Europe and China and Russia with respect to whatever military action we might have to take.

We’ve already lost the PRC and Russia; it’s hard for me to believe Kerry is unaware of that. Europe, in this context, is France and Germany. France publicly wanted a stronger, more measurable, more stringent deal that actually would have required Iran to agree to 24/7 (that’s 24 hour, 7 days per week, not 24 days’ notice with 7 appeals steps in the sequence) inspections and to verifiably completely dismantle its nuclear weapons program. Germany might have demurred, but that’s all. And if German intransigence killed the deal, that would have been better than what we got.

The Republicans are right on this travesty. The Democrats need to figure out whether they’re on the side of us and of Israel or on the side of Obama.

Defeating Islamic Terrorism

Posted on by
Reply

Britain’s Prime Minister, David Cameron, has a thought on the matter.

[A]ny strategy to defeat extremism must confront, head on, the extreme ideology that underpins it. We must take its component parts to pieces – the cultish worldview, the conspiracy theories, and yes, the so-called glamorous parts of it as well.

In doing so, let’s not forget our strongest weapon: our own liberal values. We should expose their extremism for what it is – a belief system that glorifies violence and subjugates its people – not least Muslim people.

We should contrast their bigotry, aggression and theocracy with our values. We have, in our country, a very clear creed and we need to promote it much more confidently.
…
[T]here is also the question of identity.

For all our successes as multi-racial, multi-faith democracy, we have to confront a tragic truth that there are people born and raised in this country who don’t really identify with Britain – and who feel little or no attachment to other people here. Indeed, there is a danger in some of our communities that you can go your whole life and have little to do with people from other faiths and backgrounds.

All of that applies here, too, can this administration—or more likely, its successor in 18 too-long months—find the moral courage actually to apply it.

More Dishonesty Regarding the Iran Nuclear Weapons Deal

Posted on by
Reply

Fred Leitz at National Review has identified a couple of secret—as in deliberately attempted to be kept secret from Congress—side deals. Senator Tom Cotton (R, AR) and Congressmen Mike Pompeo (R, KS) have gotten wind of them, too, though, so….

One of these side deals concerns inspection of the Parchin military base, where Iran reportedly has conducted explosive testing related to nuclear-warhead development. The Iranian government has refused to allow the IAEA to visit this site. Over the last several years, Iran has taken steps to clean up evidence of weapons-related activity at Parchin.

The other secret side deal concerns how the IAEA and Iran will resolve outstanding issues on possible military dimensions (PMDs) of Iran’s nuclear program. In late 2013, Iran agreed to resolve IAEA questions about nuclear weapons-related work in twelve areas. Iran only answered questions in one of these areas and rejected the rest as based on forgeries and fabrications.

President Barack Obama and his motorboat skipper occupant of SecState’s chair have kept these secret (unsuccessfully, it seems) from Congress. Of course, the administration denies this. They wouldn’t be secrets, if they talked about them, though.

It’s one more reason to toss this deal and then to override Obama’s veto of the tossing.

Iran’s Nuclear Weapons Deal

Posted on by
Reply

Department of Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz is arguing most…earnestly.

Under the agreement, it will be “virtually impossible” for Iran to cover up nuclear activity, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz says.

“We are better off forever in terms of Iranian nuclear activity under this agreement than we would be without it,” Moniz told Fox News Sunday.

We’ll watch the Hell out their cheating, we’ll know that they’re cheating. And then what?

Hmm….