I sense some feelings of inadequacy when it comes to the Obama administration’s recent deal with Iran. During President Obama’s press conference on Wednesday covering what the deal with the rogue Muslim nation will look like, the President got a bit testy.
When CBS News’s Major Garrett asked President Obama about the Americans left languishing in Iranian prisons, the President responded tersely, “That’s nonsense. And you should know better.”
Then, when ABC News’s Jon Karl wondered if the President was worried now that Iran and Syria seemed so excited about their end of the deal, he acted as if the Middle Eastern despots were simply trying to save face.
Jon Karl: Mr. President, does it give you a pause to see the deal praised by Syria as a great deal to Iran and yet our closest allies call its a mistake. I know you can veto rejection, but do you have concern about the people’s representatives in Congress saying it is a bad deal…
Obama: It does not give me pause that Mr. Assad or others in Tehran may be trying to spin the deal in a way that they think is favorable to what their constituents want to hear. That’s what politicians do.
President Obama also attacked the idea that we could have brokered a better deal with the Iranian regime, wondering what that even means.
Now, you’ll hear critics say we could have negotiated a better deal.
What does that mean?
The suggestion among the critics has been a better deal and acceptable deal would be one in which Iran has no nuclear capacity at all. Peaceful or otherwise.
The problem with that position is that there is nobody who thinks that Iran would or could ever accept that and the international community does not take the view that Iran can’t have a peaceful nuclear program.
But we do have the leverage to make sure they don’t have the weapon. That’s exactly what we have done.
So, to go back Congress, I challenge those who are objecting this agreement to, number one read the agreement before they comment on it. Number two, to explain specifically where it is that they think that the agreement does not prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. And why they are right and the experts are wrong. Why the rest of the world is wrong. And then present an alternative. And if the alternative is that we should bring Iran to heel through military forces, those critics should say so, and that will be an honest debate.