We keep hearing from Democratic critics of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech that if we don’t reach an agreement with Iran, then the path will be clear for Iran to have a bomb soon. Explicit is the idea that even a bad agreement is better than no agreement.
Hold on a minute. Isn’t there something missing here? I thought “all options were on the table.” Obama has said this repeatedly. Now he and his political allies seem to admit it isn’t true. After all, shouldn’t Obama’s and John Kerry’s message to Iran in their Geneva talks be this simple and direct: “Either you reach a good agreement, or we bomb your nuclear sites into oblivion”?
Ah, yes: I see the obvious problem: such a threat from Obama and John Kerry has no credibility.
Still, someone should josh Earnest directly at a White House press gaggle: “So are we to understand that the use of military force against Iran is off the table?”