For the benefit of those of us who find it intellectually
gratifying to watch a case-study develop from start to finish or go into a
never-ending period of haggling––as the case may be––the Jews are staging a
case study that promises to yield a wealth of information.
The occasion is the decertification by the President of the United States of the Iran nuclear deal, a move that
tells the Congress Iran is complying with the provisions of the deal. Because
such periodic certification was enacted into law by a Congress that gets orders
from Israel
via the local Jewish lobby, President Trump got tired of this humiliating
ritual after doing the certification twice. This is what motivated him to
finally tell the Congress the equivalent of: Take that certification law and
shove it.
So now, the Congress of treasonous knuckleheads has 60 days
to find another way to serve the interests of Israel
at the expense of America 's
interests. At least that's what the knuckleheads believe they are expected to
do. But the reality is that Israel
has already been served and will continue to be served indefinitely. How so,
you ask? By the fact that the entire operation has been placed on the infamous
highway of never-ending haggle.
This will contribute to the paralysis of the Congress as far
as the eye can see in all matters where the interests of America are
supposed to be served. As to the matter of Jewish and Israeli interests, the
Congress will be waken-up long enough as usual to respond in a hurry when those
needs arise.
Two pieces in National Review Online (NRO) – an editorial
and an article – show in detail how this process is expected to unfold at
perpetuity. The editorial came under the title “Trump Decertifies,” published
on October 13, 2017. The article came under the title: “Will the Iran Deal Be
Obamacare Repeal All Over Again?” written by Matthew Continetti and published
on October 14, 2017.
Here is what the editors of NRO wish for, and how they see
things: “We would prefer that the U.S. pull out of the deal, reimpose
the sanctions, and force the Europeans to choose between us and the Iranians.
The goal would be to bring the [Iran ]
regime to its knees or force it to rip up its nuclear program. The Trump
administration isn't willing to go this far. President Trump will seek to get
Congress to pass a series of triggers, further sanctioning Iran . This reflects the White House
divisions. Trump wants to get out of the deal, but most of his principals
don't. But it will take 60 votes for the Senate to pass anything.” It is
obvious from this passage that the editors of National Review Online are not
hopeful they'll get what they wish for.
So here is how they assess the situation: “Trump's speech
addressed more than the nuclear deal. This was to the good, although much will
depend on execution; the administration doesn't yet have a strategy. Remember
that the regime has the ability to hit back against us. But Trump's speech was
a welcome dose –– finally.” The message of the editors is that if they could
not get all they wanted, at least the President gave them a speech good enough
to start a haggle that will keep them fueled for an eternity. And that's no
chickenfeed.
Now to Matthew Continetti's article. The title itself, which
invokes the failure to repeal Obamacare despite several attempts over the years
to do so, tells of the writer's low expectation that success will be achieved
in the matter of trying to ditch the Iran nuclear deal. In fact,
Continetti complains that “none of the Republicans and Democrats has gone out
of their way to prepare the ground and make the case.” That's clear enough.
Unable to find something that tells of concrete steps being
taken to achieve the aspirations of folks like himself, Continetti does what
the editors of NRO did by falling on his default position. He welcomes the
opportunity of having a never ending haggle that he and his folks can seize and
follow a trajectory to an eternity of endless verbiage. Here is an example
showing the many leads that will open to future hagglers who will spend time
impressing each other with chattering bubbles full of nothingness:
“The Democrats are playing to type. The Republican silence
is maddening. This is the party that invited Netanyahu to criticize the deal in
the Congress. It is the party whose platform reads, 'A Republican president
will not be bound by the deal and retain all options.' It is the party that
elected a president who said his number one priority is to dismantle the
disastrous deal with Iran .”
The example goes on and on and on.
Yes, it's a good thing to have an opportunity to haggle for
ever, but like the guy who eyed the jackpot but ended-up winning the second
prize, Matthew Continetti throws a nostalgic look at what might have been,
before he leaves the scene: “Are Republicans prepared to close ranks? Or will
they prove disunited, reckless, spiteful and incompetent as they did during the
repeal of the Obamacare debacle? I'm not sure I want to know the answer”.