Kerry doesn’t want us to screw the Ayatollah
And “screw” is our illustrious Secretary of State’s word, not mine.
Here is the full Kerry quote, from a Jeffrey Goldberg interview in the Atlantic. It is worth pondering and understanding that Kerry is the man in charge of the negotiations, and that the following is either what he actually believes or what he wants us to believe (I think the latter, because I don’t think Kerry is that stupid or that naive, but perhaps I’m wrong):
The ayatollah approached this entire exercise extremely charily. He gave a kind of dismissive OK to [President Hassan] Rouhani and company to go do this, in the sense that he didn’t want to be blamed if this didn’t work. It was all Rouhani’s risk. He was playing the IRGC [Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps], and this and that. And so it was clear to me from my many conversations with Zarif and from the entire dynamic how fragile that journey was with him. The ayatollah constantly believed that we are untrustworthy, that you can’t negotiate with us, that we will screw them. This will be the ultimate screwing. We cut a deal, we stand up, it’s announced, five other countries believe in it””six other countries, because Iran signs off, and we’re the seventh””but you know, China, Russia, France, Germany, Britain, all sign off. Now the United States Congress will prove the ayatollah’s suspicion, and there’s no way he’s ever coming back. He will not come back to negotiate. Out of dignity, out of a suspicion that you can’t trust America. America is not going to negotiate in good faith. It didn’t negotiate in good faith now, would be his point.
Actually, what Obama, Kerry, and company did to the interests of the US, Congress, the people of the US, Israel, and quite a few of the US’s ostensible allies in the Arab world will be the “ultimate screwing” if the deal goes though. And what Kerry is saying here, among other things, is that neither Congress nor the American people have a right to go against anything that the executive branch does unilaterally in this regard, even if that executive action screws us and our allies (or the pooch, for that matter). All to placate and reassure a homicidal, fanatical, tyrannical dictator of a state that is a sworn enemy and has been for over thirty years?
One of the most interesting things about that Kerry quote is this sentence: “The ayatollah constantly believed that we are untrustworthy, that you can’t negotiate with us, that we will screw them.” It is unusually rich in irony, isn’t it? The idea that we have to prove ourselves trustworthy to him rather than the reverse would be ludicrous if it weren’t so dangerous. Kerry is correct, however, that the behavior of Kerry and company has taught Khamenei something about the US. But the thing it has taught has not been our trustworthiness; it has been our fecklessness, cravenness, stupidity, and impotence.
I have focused on this one remark of Kerry’s because it is so dramatic, and because it is featured in the headline of the article. But there are many other jaw-droppers in the interview. For example:
Goldberg: But does it bother you that money will be going to [Syrian President Bashar] Assad and Hezbollah?
Kerry: Yes, but it’s not dispositive. It’s not money that’s going to make a difference ultimately in what is happening. We have huge mechanisms by which we can push back and make the counter-difference. And the biggest, most important thing this is doing is that it is galvanizing a stronger, more defined security relationship between us and the Gulf states, and it will with Israel. We have countless ways to push back against those activities. And this will put to test whether or not Rouhani and Zarif are serious when they say they want a different relationship with the region.
It’s the equivalent of “Hey, let’s give Hitler (or Stalin, or choose your dictator) a ton of money and see what he does with it, and hope we can stop him in time if he uses it for ill. Isn’t that a great idea?”
Or how about this from Kerry:
Kerry: Let me put this in very precise terms. Look, I’ve gone through this backwards and forwards a hundred times and I’m telling you, this deal is as pro-Israel, as pro-Israel’s security, as it gets. And I believe that just saying no to this is, in fact, reckless.
Goldberg: So why do you think you can’t convince the majority of Israelis, or the majority of the organized Jewish community, of this?
Kerry: Because there’s a huge level of fear and mistrust and, frankly, there’s an inherent sense that, given Iran’s gains and avoidance in the past, that somehow they’re going to avoid something again. It’s a visceral feeling, it’s very emotional and visceral and I’m very in tune with that and very sensitive to that.
That’s not a parody; that’s a quote.
[ADDENDUM: Commenter “F” in the thread below describes Kerry’s narcissism, so I thought I would add that that was one of the first topics I wrote about when I first began this blog (see this, this, and this).]
Having observed him for many years and knowing people who dealt with him more closely the truth is that Kerry is not very smart. The problem is that he thinks he’s very smart. A dangerous combination.
He also lacks shrewdness. Obama for all his other enormous faults is a very shrewd guy.
Agree with above comment.. What is not well known is that Kerry’s daughter married an Iranian with family connections to an Iranian negotiator at these talks.
Mike:
I’m aware of that connection, but I actually don’t think it means much. Kerry has a long long history of that sort of thing regarding international relations in general, and it way predates that marriage.
Mark and Mike:
I’m not saying Kerry is some mental giant. But it doesn’t take more than a modicum of intelligence to realize the absurdity of what he’s saying. And he has that modicum of intelligence.
Therefore I come down on the “knave” side of “knave vs. fool” for Kerry, although “somewhat of a fool” is also in there.
Today BHO gave some remarks on the “treaty.” Said there were NO reasonable arguments against it. None whatsoever.
You are an idiot if you disagree with BHO and JFK.
Stunning. But he constantly uses that “appeal to authority” line of attack re AGW.
Idiot.
He can’t begin to conceive that well-meaning experts in this field disagree with him for damn good reasons.
And what if he is wrong on this?
Then the entire ME goes nuke.
When this turns out badly, charge Ketchup and King Putt with crimes against humanity.
@Cornhead: But this strategy is very effective. It completely shuts down conversation, and the media and other useful idiots buy into it in spades: You’re an idiot if you disagree with Obama, Kerry, etc.
I see this every day, and most of the people who feel this way cannot, and have no interest in, actually defending these people, their ideas or their policies. It’s just like when Obama was elected and the press was falling all over itself to tell us how intelligent he is. No matter that there is absolutely no proof of his intelligence being any higher than that of a mid-level bureaucrat or manager… he’s smart because they agree with him, and to question that is to attack them.
If this isn’t a religion, I don’t know what is.
I will not disagree with the suggestion that Kerry is a knave. But I’ll add to it my own opinion: that is thinks this agreement is his ticket to the Nobel Peace Prize, which he dearly covets. Those two traits taken together are a VERY dangerous combination. Kerry (and Obama) believes that they can bend the world to their will if they use the right combination of words. Never mind that the words don’t parse. Never mind that taken together they constitute a flat out lie. The important is that you bend to his will. I wonder at times if people like this have any self-doubt at all. In Kerry’s case, I seriously doubt it. Even when he was committing treason in Paris during the talks with Vietnam, I am guessing he was absolutely certain he was in the right.
My guess is that historians will look back at Kerry and Obama as having worked against the greatest good, for the USA and for the rest of the world. And between the two, they will judge Kerry the most feckless.
Elections don’t rid us of traitors. See this guy, J fing Kerry, that lost a US Presidential election? That type of person needs something else to remove.
Michael Rubin | @mrubin1971
08.05.2015 – 1:30 PM
The Iran Nuclear Deal A Simple Guide
“The ayatollah approached this entire exercise extremely charily. He gave a kind of dismissive OK to [President Hassan] Rouhani and company to go do this, in the sense that he didn’t want to be blamed if this didn’t work. It was all Rouhani’s risk. He was playing the IRGC [Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps], and this and that. And so it was clear to me from my many conversations with Zarif and from the entire dynamic how fragile that journey was with him.”
This is a negotiating ploy that is old as the art of bargaining over “rare” Persian carpets. As in, the owner of the carpet is very loathe to sell. However, if the buyer shows enough good will and comes up with the right price, then maybe, just maybe a deal can be made. The U.S. and their allies held all the trump cards. The sanctions were working. The Iranian economy is in a shambles. The only reason they offered to bargain was because economically they were hurting very badly. Yet they acted like they had an ace up their sleeves and Obama/Kerry bought it.
As the talks went on the Iranians realized that Obama and Kerry wanted the deal very badly. (They just had to add this rare and beautiful carpet to their collection! 🙂 ) Obama seems obsessed with the need to prove that diplomacy always, always trumps using economic/military pressure to resolve the problems of rogue states. As the negotiations wore on, the Iranians managed to take advantage of that overwhelming desire to get a deal, even if it was not very good.
Obama’s speech today was predicated on that belief in the superiority of diplomacy. And his opinion that the U.S. has been wrong in the ME since the invasion of Iraq. (Which verifies Eric’s idea that in order to combat the progs you have to set straight the history of what led to the invasion of Iraq.) He’s all about, “Let’s give peace a chance,” a chant I heard with regularity back in my days of Navy recruiting at California colleges. The progs do not want to hear any alternatives. That’s why Obama claims there are no alternatives.
I believe that Obama and Kerry are truly blind to the consequences of their actions because of their deeply-held, near-religious belief that we should emulate Switzerland in our foreign relations.
As a 35 year resident of Massachusetts and having observed Kerry on and off over that time, I can state that the correct description is neither fool or knave, it’s bloviating idiot. Here’s a man that peddled his story about Christmas in Cambodia expecting never to be found out, going so far as to insert it into the Congressional Record, and was then shocked that his chief Swift Boat gunner told the whole world it was a lie during his run for the Presidency. Out of 200 men in the Swift Boats 190 despised him. The same was true when he was in the AGs office here in MA. This is a man who lives in a fog of self-regard inside his tiny little brain where the outside world never intrudes. It’s sickening that he and Obama are the top two executives in the US government.
Afghan planes transport fighters to Iraq and Syria from Iran
When Iran gets the bomb, and they will, history will NOT be kind to the Obama administration.
That’s if there is anyone left to write history.
Why is this man laughing ?
Kerry: Israel Will Be ‘Blamed’ If Congress Rejects Iran Deal
Is this conspiracy theories specially coming by Secretary of State, so is deserve his position in a country most powerful and democratic in the world?
Translation: “Those darn Israelis seem to think the Ayatollah is serious when he says he will wipe Israel off the map. If only I could set them straight.”
(And I’m imagining Netanyu et. al. have been essentially saying Kerry “What part of ‘Never Forget’ don’t you understand?”)
F:
Yes, they are both narcissitic knaves.
In fact, Kerry the narcissist in the 2004 election was one of the first topics I wrote about when I began this blog (see this, this, and this). I have detested Kerry since the early 1970s, despite having been a liberal Democrat at the time. He rubbed me very much the wrong way even then.
Jimmy J is spot on here. Kerry and Obama needed to have a deal for their own egos. They believe that getting a grouchy Ayatollah to sign an agreement – any agreement – is a sign of success, that he is softening and joining the ranks of reasonable men.
“I think those wolves in the woods are starting to get used to us honey. We made it 200 yards further in before they started eating the children today.”
Jimmy J,
There were two aces up the sleeve – bho and kerry.
I think an often overlooked aspect of both Obama and Kerry is that they are each physical cowards. Thus ‘negotiations’ and ‘diplomacy’ with murderous, religious fanatics is all that they have… for the coward, no other response but appeasement is possible.
The question was never if they would try to buy off the Mullahs but rather, how high would be the price set by the Iranians.
ALL sanctions lifted, no meaningful inspections and the return of 100 Billion+ with NO Iranian concessions whatsoever is the price of ‘appeasement’. An agreement that the Iranians will publicly dismiss as soon as it is to their advantage to do so.
It is not happenstance that every point Kerry and Obama make is the exact opposite of the truth of the matter.
“Woe to them who call evil, good and good, evil.” the Prophet Isiah
Besides hate for America, Obama’s motivation is to escape office before Iran announces nuclear capability. Obama knows that the Left will deny to their dying breath that Obama’s ‘deal’ facilitated and ensured Iran’s gaining nuclear weapons capability. That it led to a nuclear arms race and nukes falling into the hands of Islamic terrorist groups (ignoring that Kerry himself is on record as predicting those exact results should Iran get nukes).
Given his wealth and bankrupt political aspirations, Kerry’s motivation is the increased status of ‘winning’ a Nobel ‘Peace’ Prize. Something only sufficient political correctness can win.
BTW, with his condemnation of capitalism and other politically correct attitudes, Pope Francis is now a certain future recipient of the most politically correct ‘prize’. It would be supreme irony if the Pope beat out Lurch and in doing so, denied a traitor his most desired goal.
I believe that Obama and Kerry are truly blind to the consequences of their actions because of their deeply-held, near-religious belief that we should emulate Switzerland in our foreign relations.
1. Switzerland wouldn’t ally with Islam, Jihad, terrorists, or any other world disrupting faction. They are neutral, making money.
2. Switzerland’s neutrality comes from a strong civic natured army and military culture. Plus a lot of international banks.
3. Too much patience isn’t a virtue, it’s more like wishful thinking equal to Chamberlain when it comes to what people are or are not.
Kerry is just being Kerry; a snotty,overbearing treasonous pig.
“All to placate and reassure a homicidal, fanatical, tyrannical dictator of a state that is a sworn enemy and has been for over thirty years?”
It’s hard to know if you’re referring to Obama, or the Ayatollah.
That last quote is something else. It basically says that people don’t trust Iran because they have a history of being untrustworthy. Sheesh!
That’s not a parody; that’s a quote.
Beyond parody?
Why read fiction, why read satire.
TWANLOC!
Ymasakar, my comment repeats what many progs and LIVs have said to me when I asked them what we should do in our foreign policy.
They point to Switzerland as a country that doesn’t threaten its neighbors and works hard maintain neutrality in international affairs. When I point out the facts about why Switzerland does what it does, it doesn’t faze them. I guess it’s necessary for me to set up all my comments more completely so you won’t think I’m an idiot. You do think I’m an idiot don’t you? Well, you aren’t the only one. You’ll have get in the long line that thinks me an idiot. 🙂
Oh, I posted this link on the post about Obama’s speech on the Iran deal. It’s more appropriate here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaHe9PBnFdA&feature=youtu.be
They point to Switzerland as a country that doesn’t threaten its neighbors and works hard maintain neutrality in international affairs.
Did you counter attack with Switzerland’s gun regulation policies and amount of firearms in citizen homes?
When I point out the facts about why Switzerland does what it does, it doesn’t faze them.
Why would facts faze the Leftist zombies? Only a hard attack or counter would.
I guess it’s necessary for me to set up all my comments more completely so you won’t think I’m an idiot.
That won’t necessarily change anything.
What I said or implied is that if you are the same JJ as before, then your anger management over the last 50 years has produced an extreme amount of patience, to the point where you are now on the other side of the extreme from ira or wroth.
That is an issue of virtues and vices, not intelligence.
Jimmy J: Your description of the Middle East bargaining process was spot on — but you need to carry it farther. When the merchant quotes you his “final price” for the carpet, which has gone down from ridiculous to merely outrageous, you say, “Sorry, that’s still too much,” and walk out of the shop. And before you get more than a few steps away, the merchant comes running out of the shop and shouts, “Habibi, wait! I made a mistake! The price is only [too high].” That is when you get into the serious bargaining.
But of course, Kerry and Obama, never having had to bargain for anything in their privileged lives, either don’t know that, or, more likely, don’t care.