Posted: 07/15/15 17:09
by Dave Mindeman
This Iran treaty is very important to the United States and Republicans are not even considering the strategic ramifications. It used to be said that politics ended at our country's shores and foreign policy, especially international treaties, was off limits to the petty vagaries of partisan politics.
Our Republican friends have ground that theory into dust.
What I don't understand about the instant criticism from Republicans is a failure to look at the bigger picture.
Yes, Iran wants sanctions lifted and yes, the money could be used for more interventions across the Mideast. But the goal has been to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon and this treaty puts an indefinite hold on that acquisition.
But even beyond that, no treaty would be signed unless both parties have broader goals to meet and it sure looks like both parties have ISIS in mind.
Iran is a Shiite dominated country. ISIS is a Sunni organization. Iran has already been involved in Iraq with ground forces against this group. Doesn't it feel like Iran has a more immediate problem with ISIS than a longer term goal of a nuclear weapon? Is it possible that the more immediate threat has become the more important threat to deal with.....and a treaty to remove some of the sanctions and get the US off their back might be, in broader terms, a means to let them gear up for an ISIS fight?
The US not only gets to stop Iran from moving toward nuclear weapons, but they open up a possible "ally" in the fight with ISIS. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Chances are good that if Iran uses new sanction free money to obtain conventional weapons and strengthening their economy, their target will not be Israel, not the United States, but the Sunni dominated ISIS group.
Something to consider.