Commentary Magazine


Contentions

Oh, That

As historically dishonest and obnoxious in its moral relativism as Obama’s Cairo speech was, it was most egregious and damaging in its treatment of Iran — or its non-treatment of Iran’s nuclear threat. On the Fox News Sunday round table all of the commentators agreed that Obama has essentially thrown in the towel on preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Charles Krauthammer observed:

[The president] basically gave what was the weakest statement ever given by a president on the Iranian nuclear issue. He said nothing about enrichment. He didn’t even mention uranium enrichment. And he made it sound as if the entire dispute is over the interpretation of the nuclear proliferation treaty.

Indeed, the president suggested we don’t even have the right to tell Iran what it can and cannot do. But this is worse than his fractured re-telling of the Israeli-Palestinian history, as Bill Kristol notes:

You know, we were talking about at the beginning — it just — when you read those three paragraphs, they’re really startling. I mean, there are three U.N. security resolutions which the Bush administration went to a huge amount of trouble to try to get the Europeans signed on. The Russians and Chinese signed on. He doesn’t mention them.

Iran is in violation with its enrichment program of U.N. — this isn’t American Bush, you know, imperialism. This is the U.N. Security Council, and he doesn’t mention that fact. He really — he is really conceding an Iranian nuclear weapon and then the question becomes does Israel accept that.

[. . .]

And you know, it’s all fair and nice to talk about this peace process, but he has increased the chances of an Israeli strike on Iran.

And so the question remains: will Obama’s cockeyed history lesson get all the parties (which Palestinian party?) to the table for some grand deal or does that stalemate remain while a dangerous confrontation develops between Iran, on one hand, and Israel and its shaken Arab neighbors on the other? If, like Obama, you believe that all that was missing from the “peace process” was the emergence of Obama on the world stage and a dollop of U.S. hostility toward Israel, you think the former. If you don’t buy that, then there is cause for worry. (And,by the way, if the “peace process” blooms and a deal is reached, don’t we still have the problem of a nuclear-armed Iran?)



Join the discussion…

Are you a subscriber? Log in to comment »

Not a subscriber? Join the discussion today, subscribe to Commentary »





Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor to our site, you are allowed 8 free articles this month.
This is your first of 8 free articles.

If you are already a digital subscriber, log in here »

Print subscriber? For free access to the website and iPad, register here »

To subscribe, click here to see our subscription offers »

Please note this is an advertisement skip this ad
Clearly, you have a passion for ideas.
Subscribe today for unlimited digital access to the publication that shapes the minds of the people who shape our world.
Get for just
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor, you are allowed 8 free articles.
This is your first article.
You have read of 8 free articles this month.
YOU HAVE READ 8 OF 8
FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
for full access to
CommentaryMagazine.com
INCLUDES FULL ACCESS TO:
Digital subscriber?
Print subscriber? Get free access »
Call to subscribe: 1-800-829-6270
You can also subscribe
on your computer at
CommentaryMagazine.com.
LOG IN WITH YOUR
COMMENTARY MAGAZINE ID
Don't have a CommentaryMagazine.com log in?
CREATE A COMMENTARY
LOG IN ID
Enter you email address and password below. A confirmation email will be sent to the email address that you provide.