The nuclear deal between Iran and the P5+1 powers announced today in Vienna will likely go down in history alongside other pioneering historic U.S. initiatives like Nixon’s visit to China, Jimmy Carter’s Camp David Accords, and Reagan-Bush presiding over the end of the Soviet Union. The agreement would place restraints on Iran’s nuclear program for the next decade in return for eliminating two decades worth of punishing sanctions which have stunted Iran’s economy. It would allow Iran to continue enriching uranium to 3.6%, which is far below weapons-grade and reduce its highly enriched stockpile from several thousand, down to 300 kg. It would convert the Arak plutonium reactor so that it could not make a nuclear weapon. It would open Iran to a full inspections regime, though it’s yet unclear what access would be offered to purely military sites.
The deal has the Republicans and Israelis howling. Which is as it should be. Remember that George Bush was offered a Grand Bargain by Pres. Khatami in 2003. Ending Iran’s nuclear program in return for ending sanctions and normalizing relations. The Bush-Cheney response was the American version of Khrushchev’s infamous: Nyet. If a Republican president turned down the most generous offer Iran’s ever made to end its nuclear program, what would you expect his successors in Congress to do?
Among other entertaining comments, Bibi’s warned us that Iran wants to “take over the world.” Does he realize that the more such ridiculous comments he makes the less seriously anyone in the world takes him? Does he care?
As an aside, I note a semi-official Birthright alumni group has been enlisted to lobby against the Iran deal. Though the group claims it is independent of the official Birthright group, it share an important figure, Michael Steinhardt, one of Birthright’s founders and leading donors. Next time you read pablum from Birthright officials claiming it is non-political, you’ll know where to tell ’em to stick it.
What the deal naysayers don’t realize is that the world will long note and long remember their obstreporousness. It will remember they turned their backs on this momentous agreement which promises to change relations in the entire region for the better for decades to come. The world and Americans in particular will liken Republicans who oppose this measure to the John Birchers, the Ku Kluxers, the Hooverites, all those who tried to stand in the way of progress. When history offers an opportunity to break out of old paradigms and restraints, the brave and bold grasp it. The frail, frightened and timid walk away uttering old shibboleths.
Bibi Netanyahu is also one of the obdurate. As Yossi Melman notes, he had a chance to embrace the agreement as an Israeli achievement, even if it didn’t give him all he expected. Instead, Netanyahu has chosen to adopt the role of the ominous Charles Foster Kane figure who walks the halls muttering beneath his breath. I picture him walking through the prime minister’s residence with a pint of open pistachio ice cream murmuring: “They’ve ruined me. What can I do now? Where can I turn?”
The prime minister is a resourceful politician, if not one with great imagination. He will succeed in switching from the Iranian bogeyman to another suitable one. He has numerous prospects to choose from: Hamas, Hezbollah, the Democrats (a joke), etc. But none of these has a nuclear program. This is what grabs the world’s attention. So with Iran removed from Bibi’s bag of political tricks, he will become a much reduced figure, something like Ebenezer Scrooge confronting Christmas Future.
Today, history met at the intersection of Destiny and Past. Bibi and the GOP massed themselves in front of Past. History chose Destiny instead.
I would never make the mistake of claiming the future holds nothing but hope for all concerned. Iran and the U.S. still have many outstanding differences. Even harsh ones. But the Obama administration and Rouhani government have shown there is a mutual will to overcome them and achieve something enduring that will improve not just their own citizens’ lives, but those of the entire region.
This agreement said nothing about other conflicts in the region like Syria, Iraq, or Yemen, in which Iran is involved. It confined itself rightly to the nuclear issue. But there is a huge opportunity in future years for Iran to play a more constructive role in the region. There is an opportunity to negotiate a resolution of the Syrian quagmire. There is an opportunity to join forces to end the threat of ISIS in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere. There is an opportunity for Iran to play a constructive role with its Palestinian allies in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
There is no guarantee that any of the above will happen. But if I were a betting man I’d wager than at least one of these outcomes will come about.
I’ve written often here about the regional competition between Israel and Iran. One of the reasons Bibi has adopted such an intransigent position on this matter is that Israel detests any nation challenging power dynamics. It wants no threat to its military dominance. Nor commercial competition. Iran is ten times Israel’s population. It has everything that other Arab nations around Israel do not: excellent educational system, thriving commercial interests, economic competition, democracy. It poses a genuine threat to Israel on many fronts.
This new development marks Iran as a herald of the future and Israel as a symbol of the past. The region now has an opportunity to turn away from the strong-man autocracy represented by Mubarak, al-Sisi, the Saudis and even Assad. It has an opportunity to unite against Israeli miliary adventurism to blaze a new path. Again, there is no guarantee that the Middle East will embrace this prospect. It may remain mired in the past. But this is one of the truly great opportunities to chart a new path. If T.E. Lawrence were alive today he’d be beating a path to Iran’s door as a harbinger of a new regional future.
Those of us who laughed bitterly when Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize may yet have reason to say he deserved it. But it’s still an open question.
I’ve just created a petition asking for the Senate, particularly moderate Democrats on the fence, to support the deal and sustain the President’s veto. Please sign it and circulate it to your social media followers and e mail contacts.
Grand Bargain debunked. Via Washington Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2013/12/09/kerrys-claim-that-iran-offered-bush-a-nuclear-deal-in-2003/?tid=hpModule_ba0d4c2a-86a2-11e2-9d71-f0feafdd1394
All that “Washington Post debunk” actually says is that
a) The State Department did, indeed, receive that offer from Iran for A Grand Bargain, and
b) They dismissed that offer out-of-hand
What followed were self-serving “recollections” of people such as Rich Armitage, Stephen Hadley, and William Burns “explaining” why they decided to dismiss that offer out-of-hand.
Big Whoopie.
Q: Did the Iranians actually make that offer?
A: Why, yes. they did. Even those three scoundrels admit as much.
Q: Did those three clowns admit that they threw that offer in the bin?
A: Well, ummm, OK, yes, I suppose we did.
NOTE ALSO that the Washington Post gives its entire focus to the two-page fax from the Swiss Ambassador, while dismissing Kristof’s reporting that this was merely the SECOND route by which that offer was delivered to the State Department i.e. it was sent by two different routes so that the State Department would know that it was a genuine offer, and not just a low-ranking flunky who has gone rogue.
NYTimes: “Iran faxed it to the State Department and sent it, through an intermediary, to the White House”
Whoever received that other copy at the White House (and the Washington Post alludes to Karl Rove being the recipient) was even more dismissive. Dismissive to the point of criminal negligence.
Basically, what you think is a “debunking” is actually confirmation of Kerry;s claim i.e. the White House could have had a grand bargain as long ago as 2003. The Iranians were offering one, and the Bush Administration was too incompetent to even realize that fact.
So incompetent, indeed, that those clowns STILL don’t realize it.
Denial, it ain’t just no river in De’Egypt.
“It [Iran]has everything that other Arab nations around Israel do not: excellent educational system, thriving commercial interests, economic competition, democracy. ”
Democracy!?
Richard. If the educational system is so good, and there is thriving commercial interests, than why do so many Iranian women have to prostitute themselves?
“More than 90% of Tehran’s prostitutes have passed the university entrance exam, according to the results of one study, and more than 30% of them are registered at a university or studying,”
http://derstandard.at/1233586592607/Die-Wahrheit-hinter-der-islamischen-Fassade
Shouldn’t they be able to find employment somewhere other than on the streets?
And there is an extensive trade in poor Iranian women who are trafficked to the Gulf states in huge numbers, as well as to Europe and Japan.
The European Commission’s most comprehensive surveys of human trafficking found that Iranian women made up 10-15% of the prostitutes working in Belgium, the Netherlands and Italy.– ‘Research Based on Case Studies of Victims of Trafficking in Human Beings in 3 EU Member States, ie Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands (pdf file)’
I’d argue that country that has loses it’s women to the overseas sex trade, is on the ropes economically.
Look at the Ukraine, to cite one example.
“than why do so many Iranian women have to prostitute themselves?
“More than 90% of Tehran’s prostitutes have passed the university entrance exam, according to the results of one study, and more than 30% of them are registered at a university or studying,””
Nothing special about Iran. Lots of British women students do that to make a living. It’s usually the quickest way to get cash to pay for the studies. I don’t think British women are particularly oppressed.
Many studies on American women doing the same thing.
And in the “holy land”
The customer isn’t right: Criminalizing prostitution in Israel …
972mag.com/the-customer…prostitution-in-israel/87887/
Mar 3, 2014 – The sex industry in Israel generates nearly NIS 2 billion a year.
And the US over 15$ billion
China 73$ billion
Spain 26$ billion
Germany 18$ billion
Japan 24$ billion
4.1.2. Nationality
The most important representative nationalities of the victims are: China (18%), Albania (14%), Ecuador (14%), Iran (10%) and Iraq (9%).
Numbers according to study: 79 dossiers of victims of smuggling were analysed.
Not in percentages but in real number of victims: China (14), Albania (11), Ecuador (11), Iran (8) and Iraq (7).
Hardly a representative study don’t you think?
The crap in your story is completely debunked here.
MB: “Democracy!?”
Why, yes. Elections ‘n’ all, with universal suffrage, secret ballots, and a high turnout at the polls.
MB: “Richard. If the educational system is so good, and there is thriving commercial interests, than why do so many Iranian women have to prostitute themselves?”
Note that the above is a bold statement that There Are A Lot Of Iranian Women Who Prostitute Themselves.
“More than 90% of Tehran’s prostitutes have passed the university entrance exam, according to the results of one study, and more than 30% of them are registered at a university or studying,”
Note the non-sequitor.
The above sentence says only that prostitution is the province of Highly Educated Iranian Women.
It is not a sentence that in any way “proves” that There Are A Lot Of Iranian Women Who Prostitute Themselves.
Prostitution in Iran may, indeed, be very rare.
So rare that it commands a high premium, which would tend to make it a more lucrative proposition and, therefore, a more attractive prospect for highly-educated women,
I don’t know if that’s true or not.
But I do know that the quote that Mitchell pulls from “derstandard.at” tells us nothing about how widespread prostitution is in Iran, it tells us only that if Mitchell did go to visit an Iranian prostitute there is the unnerving likelihood that she will prove to be way, way smarter that he is.
Which means that the quote does nothing – absolutely nothing – to support Mitchell’s claim that “many Iranian women have to prostitute themselves”.
Exactly “how many” would constitute your definition of “so many”, Mitch?
“Prostitution in Iran may, indeed, be very rare. So rare that it commands a high premium, which would tend to make it a more lucrative proposition and, therefore, a more attractive prospect for highly-educated women,”
This does not make sense. The only effect of a high premium would be that only rich men could hire a prostitute. Poor women would jump at the chance if the premium was so high.
And anyway it is not true. Prostitution is, like everywhere, the domain of poor women. I saw a documentary film about it once: There is a special institution called ‘temporary marriage’ for it in Iran, so Islamic law does not have to be violated. Nevertheless the women are harassed by police officers who demand sex for free etc. Depressing.
“This does not make sense.”
It makes more sense than Mitchell’s nonsense, precisely because it is internally-consistent.
“The only effect of a high premium would be that only rich men could hire a prostitute.”
Yep. And rich men are more discriminating.
“Poor women would jump at the chance if the premium was so high.”
No doubt that is true, but if the clientele is rich then this is going to be a buyers market.
Because rich men are not going to want to spend their time and, ahem, energies on anything less than The Very Best that prostitution has to offer.
If prostitution is rare in Iran (and, again, I don’t know if that is true) then it is very likely to be carried out in an environment that can only be described as “rarified”. Poor women need not apply, simply because in a rarified environment you don’t need them because they are not wanted.
So Iran, a country with a lot of poverty, has only high class, highly paid escorts? Get real man, and stop wasting my time. Jeez…
“So Iran, a country with a lot of poverty, has only high class, highly paid escorts?”
*sigh*
I’m saying that THIS claim:
“Richard. If the educational system is so good, and there is thriving commercial interests, than why do so many Iranian women have to prostitute themselves?”
is not supported by THIS statement:
“More than 90% of Tehran’s prostitutes have passed the university entrance exam, according to the results of one study, and more than 30% of them are registered at a university or studying”
The former is a claim that prostitution in Iran is widespread.
The latter is a breakdown of the level of education of Iranian prostitutes.
The latter statistic therefore does not “prove” the former claim.
That’s what I am pointing out, and it appears to fly way, way over your head.
“Get real man, and stop wasting my time.”
Look, luvvie, you are speaking from AS MUCH IGNORANCE as anyone else, so stop pretending that you “know” what you are talking about because… you “know”.
You. Don’t. Know.
“Jeez…”
Ignorance, writ large, and wrapped in self-righteousness .
Jeez, not very very attractive…..
I am not your ‘luvvie’. If you have to resort to sexism to make your ‘point’ you had better keep silent.
@ Yeah Right: I agree with Elisabeth. I appreciate your irony and sarcasm most of the time because it seems well-directed. But in this case, I think “luvvie” crosses the line. Let’s remain respectful even in disagreement.
Mitchell, I agree that a country that exports its women for the international sex trade is not in good shape. Lift those sanctions and those university-educated women will have a chance at more dignified employment! ‘Thriving economic interests’ does not deny that the country’s economy is being crippled by sanctions. As you care so much for the fate of Iranian women I am sure you will applaud lifting the sanctions…
And Laguerre, a study published by Swansea University in March 2015 found that “nearly 5% of UK students had been involved sex work in some capacity, including prostitution.” This would include working for (phone) sexlines, pole dancing, stripping etc. and does not have to mean prostitution at all. But let’s say it was prostitution just to humor you; Do you think 90% and 5% are comparable?
Don’t play down what prostitution means and the effects it has on people who work in that dangerous and demeaning trade by suggestion that liberated British women, massively, happily and voluntarily enter into the sex trade.
Prostitution and coercion go hand in hand all over the world as -everywhere- demand surpasses voluntary supply. In the Netherlands were I live for instance, prostitution is legal, but study after study indicates that coercion is the norm, with the exception of a very small section of highly paid escorts. If men want to visit prostitutes who really work voluntarily, they will have to pay a lot more than what the average ‘John’ is willing to pay.
Sorry Laguerre those 90% and 5% figures are not comparable, I see now, but you get my point, I trust.
@ Mitchell: I find it offensive that of all the things you have to say about Iran, you latch onto the issue of prostitution. Let’s talk about Israeli prostitution shall we? Better yet, let’s not. This is completely off-topic.
Richard, you and Bibi have one thing in common, you’re both 100% sure of being right on this agreement.
So it’s a gamble: maybe it’s a hitler-chamberlain type agreement or maybe a Nixon- China agreement. One leads to war one to normalization.
The risk? For Israel, great (not party to the agreement). For Richard, zilch. Seattle won’t be bombed this decade.
@ Shmuel: Our government supposedly included a ban on intercontinental ballistic missiles because it feared we would be bombed by the Ayatollahs! So someone in Washington is afraid Seattle will be bombed (I’m not). Nor am I afraid Israel will be, unless you attack Iran.
This deal will release frozen assets and put 100 billion dollars into Iran which these funds will help fund more terrorism. The 24/7 inspections only apply to known nuclear sites. If the inspectors suspect that Iran is cheating in a secret nuclear site and ask to visit, Iran has 24 days to delay more than enough time to hide any cheating. Pres. Obama said today if Iran is caught cheating then sanctions will “spring back.” That of course is not how these things work. Once sanctions are lifted and the world starts to do business with Iran it will be very slow and difficult to reimpose them. That is why those of us who love Israel are against this deal.
Point by point these concerns were addressed by President Obama during his press conference and fully answered. The sanctions were put in place because of abuse of trust not to move towards a nuclear arms program 10-12 years ago. It’s not about other issues and it’s not about Israel and it’s stock of nuclear bombs, lack of transparency and not being a signatory of the NPT treaty.
My concern lies with Israel and it’s inability to live side by side with its neighbours. We don’t have to review the history and the opportunities missed to further relationships and bi-lateral peace treaties. Look how president Jimmy Carter is viewed by Israel, its leadership and Knesset members. The drive by president Obama and John Kerry to revive negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians were stonewalled by Netanyahu and his ministers. Personal insult upon insult were heaped on both representatives of the U.S. and Israel’s most important ally. Netanyahu has been a colossal failure as leader. Yes, an Israeli bombing raid on Iranian nuclear facilities in 2012 was blocked by the U.S., and rightly so.
Of course Israel has the right to defend itself and as PM Netanyahu rightly states, Israel is not bound by the P5+1 nuclear deal with Iran. All options remain on the table including the military option. And no, Iran isn’t trying to take over the world & it isn’t ISIL.
@Rabbi: Not at all. International sanctions might take some time, but the U.S. Congress would be only too happy to slap a new round of sanctions on Iran. I’ll make a major wager with you that the removal of sanctions will spur the Iranian economy & cause huge growth domestically. Iran’s future is not with terrorism or military adventures. That’s Israel’s path. Of course all gets are off if Bibi attacks Iran himself. In that event, there will be a bloody mess.
ryl: “This deal will release frozen assets and put 100 billion dollars into Iran which these funds will help fund more terrorism.”
So you are, basically, arguing that “the west” can simply steal $100 billion of Iran’s money.
Because you do appear to be saying that Iran is never, ever, ever going to get that money back No Matter What.
ryl: “The 24/7 inspections only apply to known nuclear sites”
Say that again?
You also want 24/7 inspections of nuclear sites that the USA doesn’t know about?
How does that work, exactly?
rly: “If the inspectors suspect that Iran is cheating in a secret nuclear site and ask to visit, Iran has 24 days to delay more than enough time to hide any cheating.”
A secret nuclear site can be scrubbed clean in three weeks? Really?
You do know that radioactive stuff is, well, radioactive? Right?
So it does tend to “radioactivate” the stuff around it, and so you can’t just hose it down and expect the IAEA to find nothing.
They’ll just go downwind and test the soil there……
rly: “Pres. Obama said today if Iran is caught cheating then sanctions will “spring back.” That of course is not how these things work.”
Actually, that’s exactly how the agreement works.
If there is an accusation of cheating then it goes to a committee of the P5+1+Iran.
If Iran is outvoted (USA+UK+France+Germany = majority) then it goes to the UNSC. And if the UNSC *does* *nothing* (i.e. a Russian veto isn’t going to help Iran) then 30 days later the suspension the sanctions are automatically re-imposed.
rly: “Once sanctions are lifted and the world starts to do business with Iran it will be very slow and difficult to reimpose them.”
Logically, that is just as “valid” an argument for why the original sanctions were – obviously! – impossible to impose in the first place.
Yet imposed they were, and obeyed they were.
Odd, hey?
rly: “That is why those of us who love Israel are against this deal.”
Well, honesty at last: Netanyahu has spoken, and so you sing along from the chorus.
One of the main effects of the deal seems to me that it makes clear what should have been clear all along namely that US.foreign policy interests and those of Likud-Israel are not identical. Hamas and Hezbollah are a threat to that Israel, not to the US. ISIS is a threat to the US and on that front it can expect cooperation from Iran.
Bibi’s ridiculous claim that Iran is out to take over the world is just that: ridiculous. According to Chris Hedges Iran’s military budget is similar to that of Singapore or Norway.
If the US-Congress manages to torpedo the deal as far as the US is concerned that is not the end of the road for the five other powers concerned (that together with the US represent 40 % of humanity, and its most prosperous and influential part). There is a scenario possible in which the deal will be maintained in the UN (provided there is no US-veto). That would leave the US isolated on the sanctions.
“Instead, Netanyahu has chosen to adopt the role of the ominous Charles Foster Kane figure who walks the halls muttering beneath his breath. I picture him walking through the prime minister’s residence with a pint of open pistachio ice cream murmuring: “They’ve ruined me. What can I do now? Where can I turn?”
Yep, that’s a great visual!
As every year, on July 14th French President François Hollande was interviewed on the national television by two leadning journalists (presenting the evening news on the two biggest channels).
Here’s what he said about nuclear:
“What does nuclear proliferation means ? It means that Iran could get acces to nuclear weapons. And if Iran got acces to nuclear weapons, Saudi Arabia, uh ….uh, Israel, other contries would equally like to get acces to nuclear weapons (…)”
I just can’t believe it, when I read it I searched the video to hear it with my own ears, that’s what the guy is saying, and the two jouranlists don’t react at all ! And French MSM have all been silent on this lie or joke (I don’t really know).
Majed Bamya, a young palestinian diplomat who’s regularly interviewed on France24 wrote on his FB : one thing is during the negotiations on the Iranian nuclear deal to pretend not knowing there’s another country far more dangerous in the region which actually has nuclear weapons, another thing is publicly stating Israel hasn’t nuclear weapons yet, particularly when it’s the President of the country who helped Israel get nuclear weapons.”
@Deir Yassin: All I can say is Wow. Your president is either an idiot or willfully ignorant. Either fire the aide who prepared him for this interview or fire Hollande.
Impeachment in France now closely resembles the US and since being ignorant or an idiot is not a “high crime or misdemeanor” – it is not really an impeachable offense …
If idiot or ignoramouses were banned from politics – who would be a politician ?
I’m NOT a French citizen so he’s not my president but in fact I would really like to know what his motivations were. Someone analysed his ‘uh …uh’ just before saying Israel as maybe an astonishment, that is he didn’t write his speech himself neither read it before the interview. Francois Hollande has a ghostwriter, Paul Bernard, who’s a member of CRIF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conseil_Repr%C3%A9sentatif_des_Institutions_juives_de_France
Astonishment indeed seems the only likely explanation. I cannot think of anything else.
Consider the irony if Netanyahu *does* manage to torpedo this deal in the Congress.
Think about it: here is an deal that was negotiated by The Six Most Powerful Countries On Planet Earth.
Great Powers, all of them, with at least two of them worthy of the title of “Superpower”.
They collectively agree that This Agreement Is A Good Idea, even though a cabal of lobby groups controlled by very influential Jews declare that, nup, they don’t agree.
So they scupper that agreement by using Their Power And Influence, thereby conclusively demonstrating to the world that their cabal has much more influence over world affairs than The Six Most Powerful Countries On Earth.
Does anyone want to ponder how that plays out with respect to various anti-Semitic tropes about Who Actually Controls The World?
US prestige is now at stake. Perhaps it’s better to let Obama have the win, because at this point in time a last-minute snatching of “victory” by Netanyahu will do his cause more harm than good.
(For the record: I don’t believe that Jews Control The World. I’m just pointing out the irony of Influential Jewish Groups acting for all the world as if *they* believe that it’s true).
Richard – delivered at SFCC July 1st after a successful academic freedom challegne – ‘The Successful 2nd American Revolution 4-2-2015*, 1P1V1S, and America free of the Israeli Lobby/Jewish Lobby’
WHEN: July 1st, Wed evening, 6:00 – 7:00pm
WHERE: Classroom 219, West Wing, Santa Fe Community College,
WHO: Dr Lance Dale Call SFCC@ 505-428-1000 to find classroom
A talk providing description and context of the historic clean break with the Israeli Lobby made *4-2-2015 with the signing of the Iran Framework Nuclear Deal (finalized June 30 with the Iran Nuclear Deal), the collapse of Israeli Apartheid and 1P1V1S, and America politically free of the Israeli Lobby
The critical US Strategic Pivots of the 2nd American Revolution:
The Pivot on Israel’s strategy on Iran *4-2-15
The Pivot on Israel’s strategy on Palestine
Dissolution of Israeli Apartheid
1P1V1S – One Person, One Vote, One State from the River to the Sea
The 3 causative ‘existential events’ of the Apartheid’s collapse:
The 3 dispositive and concurrent existential events seen as such by Israel itself:
Fresh History #1: The Iran Nuclear Deal: signed sealed and delivered June 30
Fresh History #2: Successfully advancing Palestinian case at the ICC
Fresh History #3: Catastrophic reversal of US Diplomatic cover at UN
– ‘Concurrency and synergy of crises and Strategic Collapse of Israeli Apartheid/Strategic Collapse of the Israeli Lobby’
American Political Consequences and Resets :
‘America politically free of the Israeli Lobby/Jewish Lobby’
Battle Royale – Obama’s Legacy slam-dunking Hillary’s Near-Presidency
Sheldon Adelson’s ‘Chinese Mafia links’ US Court Case
‘There is no Israel Lobby of Post-Apartheid 1P1V1S’
CHECKMATE: ‘Queen Hillary on an AIPAC Horse’
==========
Goals: General familiarity with current US and Israeli policy position and state of play amidst rapidly evolving events and importance of consumption of Israeli media to understanding above
Obama and Kerry are fools of Chamberlainesque proportions. And so are you.
@ Gary Fouse: Are you channeling Sen. Mark Kirk? Why not reference the Holocaust as well? And a new nuclear war? You left out a few critical memes.
Allow me to dissect your comparison of PM Chamberlain = President Obama. You are not the only American who holds this questionable if not completely false notion.
At the time of Munich the communist Soviet Union of Stalin and not Hitler’s Germany was considered the greatest political and military threat by the governments of Great Britain and France for their countries. Ergo the first question you must answer is: “which nation is the analog of the Soviet Union of 1938 today?” It cannot be Iran in your thinking. It must be a nation which our government fears much more than Iran which you hold is the analog of Hitler’s Germany. That threat must be both political and military.
Immediately after the end of WW1 there was a threat that Germany too would become a Soviet state. As a matter of fact the federal State of Bavaria had briefly been a Soviet state. That threat continued essentially unabated until Hitler became Chancellor of Germany. He ruthlessly destroyed not only the Communist party of Germany but also the Socialist (Social Democratic) party of Germany. Here is question two which you must answer: “Which Iranian parties that were considered a threat to our nation at the time of the Shah’s rule were destroyed by Ayatollah Khomeini’s government when it took over, if he was the analog of Hitler?”
At the time of Munich the governments of Great Britain and France were attempting to build a kind of political and military “firewall” against the Soviet Union. The designated front states of that firewall were Poland, Finland, the Baltic States, and Rumania. For them Hitler’s Germany could serve as a powerful military and political “backstop”. Czechoslovakia was considered by Chamberlain potentially friendly to the Soviet Union hence could be sacrificed to Hitler (1). Here is the third question you must answer: “Which states today are the analogs of Poland, Finland, the Baltic States, and Rumania?” A false answer will be : “Israel and Saudi Arabia”.
Question four: “Does your logic not demand that Iran is our backstop against your mystical Soviet Union of today?”
If you cannot satisfactorily answer these questions your analog of “Munich” = “Vienna” will be exposed as dangerous nonsense.
Footnote (1). The “firewall” policy explains the apparent mystery why Great Britain and France warned Hitler not to attack Poland. Hitler Germany was supposed to be a “backstop” and not a “front-line state” against the Soviet Union. The reason why Munich collapsed in 1939 is because the leaders of Great Britain and France had not understood in 1938 that Hitler would never consent to be merely a “backstop” for Poland which he hated. He wanted to become the “Savior” of Europe against the Russian “hordes of subhumans”. For that he needed to occupy Poland because his tanks could not fly over Poland.