I’m very disappointed in #SenCharlesSchumer (D-NY) #RepNitaLowey (D-NY), #RepTedDeutch (D-FL) and #RepSteveIsrael (D-NY) for announcing their intent to vote against the #IranDeal, when no one — in the US or Israel — has yet to propose a better viable alternative.
Is one of you out there prepared to put aside your AIPAC talking points for a minute and outline for the rest of us what would constitute a better achievable option for containing Iran’s nuclear ambitions? (A quick definition first: “achievable” does not mean fantasies, such as Iran rolling over and renouncing its regional ambitions, embracing the US and Israel as its BFFs. If you don’t know what that means, ask a teenager.)
Just a few more rules: you can’t use the words “they’re the world’s biggest sponsor of terrorism” or “they’ll use the money to build bombs” or “they’re anti-Semitic and want to destroy Israel” because none of that is relevant to the question at hand — what is a better achievable option? And no, whining about how it’s such a bad deal doesn’t constitute a viable alternative.
Kudos, by the way, to long-time former Congressman Mel Levine (D-CA) who has joined a growing who’s-who of former senior Israeli intelligence and military experts in countering the anti-#IranDeal arguments. Now, if only more current leaders could say no to the lobbying and financial pressures to support what they know is the best available among a series of imperfect options.
That’s all for now. Meanwhile, I’ll continue waiting for an answer to my question — a real answer — as I have been for the past several months.