Bad Intel, Who Likes the Deal
[Wednesday’s] New York Times reports that the Pentagon’s inspector general has launched an investigation into the possible manipulation of intelligence data from Iraq. No, this has nothing to do with Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction and George Bush’s decision to go to war. This investigation is attempting to determine whether “skewed intelligence assessments” are providing “a more optimistic account of progress” against ISIS. That is a shocking revelation.
Bad Intel?
[Wednesday’s] New York Times reports that the Pentagon’s inspector general has launched an investigation into the possible manipulation of intelligence data from Iraq.
No, this has nothing to do with Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction and George Bush’s decision to go to war. This investigation is attempting to determine whether “skewed intelligence assessments” are providing “a more optimistic account of progress” against ISIS.
That is a shocking revelation.
Most Americans know the campaign against ISIS has been ineffective, largely because President Obama has overly constrained the military. A recent CNN poll found that only 28% of Americans thought the war against ISIS was going “very well or somewhat well” and 62% disapproved of Obama’s handling of ISIS.
The Times report suggests that the situation could be even worse than we realize.
But consider this: Right now Congress is evaluating an ill-conceived deal that makes the Islamic Republic of Iran a threshold nuclear state and removes virtually all of our economic leverage against that rogue regime.
Members of Congress are being pressured to support this deal because, in spite of Iran’s well-documented history of cheating, President Obama confidently asserts, “If Iran cheats, we can catch them and we will.”
We did not discover North Korea’s nuclear cheating. Sadly, [yesterday’s] New York Times report is a good indication of just how unreliable the intelligence on Iran is likely to be.
Who Likes The Deal?
In recent days, a number of senators, including Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid, have endorsed the nuclear deal with Iran. They might want to reconsider, based on who else is endorsing it.
Ali Larijani, the speaker of the Iranian parliament, praised the deal Sunday as a “good achievement” for Iran. Keep in mind who is advising him.
[Tuesday], Hossein Sheikholeslam, Larijani’s adviser for international affairs, was asked whether Iran was moderating its position toward Israel. He told reporters, “Our positions against the usurper Zionist regime have not changed at all; Israel should be annihilated and this is our ultimate slogan.”
This is important to remember, because President Obama and his allies insist that this deal will strengthen the hand of so-called “moderates” in Iran. But they are not in charge, and the hard-liners appear to be embracing Obama’s deal.
Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad also hailed the deal [Tuesday] during an interview with Hezbollah’s television network, saying that it would boost Iran’s role internationally, which would help Syria. “The power of Iran is the power of Syria, and a victory for Syria is a victory for Iran,” Assad said. “We are on the same axis, the axis of resistance,” he added.
As more and more left-wing members of Congress line-up to support Obama’s disastrous deal with Iran, conservatives in Congress are vowing to keep up the pressure. They plan to introduce additional sanctions measures, even if this deal is approved.
Why? Because it will force politicians to declare their position on the record again and again. It will also send a signal to banks and businesses eager to do business with Iran that U.S. policy toward the Islamic regime could change on a dime come January 2017, perhaps dissuading many from making such a risky investment.
