‘Remarkably Spiteful Comment’: Obama’s Preemptive Attack on Iran Deal Critics

IMG_9162

 writes:

…Obama’s press conference this afternoon was notable for its tone. Though he was ostensibly announcing what he considers something of a diplomatic victory, he was agitated and defensive. But it was not just the tone. Here is what Obama said about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:obama-incandescent

It’s no secret that the Israeli prime minister and I don’t agree about whether the United States should move forward with a peaceful resolution to the Iranian issue. If in fact Prime Minister Netanyahu is looking for the most effective way to ensure Iran doesn’t get a nuclear weapon, this is the best option.

It is a remarkably spiteful comment. What the president is saying is not that he and Netanyahu disagree about how to achieve a peaceful resolution. He says they disagree on “whether the United States should move forward with a peaceful resolution” (emphasis added). In other words, Obama is saying publicly that Netanyahu wants war with Iran, and he wants the United States to fight it.

This is significant not just because of what it says about the president’s opinion of Netanyahu. It’s also important because Netanyahu is not just speaking for Israel. As we’ve seen throughout this process, Netanyahu has of late become the public spokesman for a coalition consisting of Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and other regional allies. And he’s voicing concerns that the French clearly possess as well, but won’t risk their seat at the table to say publicly….(read more)

Commentary Magazine


4 Comments on “‘Remarkably Spiteful Comment’: Obama’s Preemptive Attack on Iran Deal Critics”

  1. mhasegawa says:

    I didn’t get any “agitated and defensive.” Must have watched a different press conference.

    • The Butcher says:

      Your subjective view is almost certainly influenced by your view of the deal, and of the president’s credibility.

      If a viewer is inclined to support Obama’s rhetoric, and agree with his confrontational message to his critics, then to that viewer, Obama wasn’t agitated or defensive, he was just being presidential, and making his case.

      However, if a viewer is inclined to view the Iran deal critically, and view Obama’s rhetoric with alert skepticism, then Obama’s annoyed, confrontational tone, and agitated, defensive posturing was obvious, and self evident.

  2. The Butcher says:

    In other words, you saw the same speech, noted the defensive agitated delivery, and simply agreed with it. Not the same thing as pretending you didn’t see it.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.