The Republican Letter to Iran

The recent letter to the Iranian leaders about American civics in government has caused many supporters and non-supporters to advocate their arguments. The opposition thinks it was as an attempt to torpedo the Obama quest for a nuclear agreement with Iran for a nuclear bomb, an agreement riddled with loopholes and does little to prevent Iran from getting it. At best, it delays it, which is pathetic. Obama has said himself he was shocked by the Republican party's letter to the leader of Iran, basically calling it a cheap shot and it weakens the U.S. position even more. Some of the Republicans who signed it, now, sort of step back indicating it was not the most ideal thing to do, but the premise remained valid.

What was the impact of this letter?

The American position in the Iranian negotiations was already in a weaken state before it. Obama lessened the sanctions on Iran that had forced them to the negotiation table. With the relief off and the over zealous eagerness of America to get just about any deal, signaled to the Iranians, they had the upper hand. The reluctance to resume the sanctions, let alone, increase them, also showed Iran America was reluctant to play their hand effectively in pursuit of stopping Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. Iran knows it has the upper hand. The possibility of military actions from America is about nil, from Israel, maybe 30%. The Israeli elections may show that Netanyahu is no longer its majority party and a less hawkish government will be in power. So, Iran, is almost in a win-win situation. Even if the deal is reached, after 10 years, it is game over and they will get what they want. Once they do, the shiite-sunni conflict in Iraq and Syria now, will turn nuclear because Saudi Arabia, which is Sunni, hates Iran and they will buy even more nuclear weapons than what they already possess. One can just what is will happen when Iran has it and uses to threaten others. This is NOT rocket science. Iran has been secretive about its quest for 10 years and why would anyone think this agreement will suddenly make inspections open to them? When inspectors in the past have wanted to see development area that Iran did not want them to see, access was denied. Nothing will change with this weak agreement.

The purpose of the Republican letter was to put Iran on notice. Even if Obama excludes Congress from the deal, it needs to be approved in some part by Congress, that Republicans control. And if the deal falters to conclude, the result does not mean war as some suggest. It means that Obama needs to have a return to the sanctions that were stopped. Then, see how Iran reacts. If the reaction is negative, increase the sanctions. Obama was right about one thing- economic sanctions did work over time and crippled the ability of Iran to conduct international business. That is what got Iran to the table, then America wimped out by removing them. Why can the Iranians play hardball and America cannot? Screw them, until you get a good agreement that could stop a nuclear holocaust.

The Republicans did the right thing with the letter. Put Iran on notice.

More by this Author


Comments 9 comments

adagio4639 profile image

adagio4639 18 months ago from Brattleboro Vermont

Hard to tell where to begin with this. Lets start here:

1. The American position in the Iranian negotiations was already in a weaken state before it.

No it wasn't. The Iranians were in a terrible position due to the sanctions. They needed to cut a deal far more than anybody else. So the question is what are they willing to give up in order to reduce the sanctions. This you should understand is not simply a negotiation between Iran and the US. There are 5 other countries, all members of the Security Council + Germany that are involved. Iran will be forced to comply or face the consequences.

2. With the relief off and the overzealous eagerness of America to get just about any deal, signaled to the Iranians, they had the upper hand.

Wrong again. The Iranians know that in order to maintain relief they must give up something. They are not North Korea. They're very well educated and would face hostility on the home front if they end up with sanctions being imposed again.

3. The possibility of military actions from America is about nil, from Israel, maybe 30%.

Weak argument. The Iranians are already aware of the FACT that they have been labeled one of the Axis of Evil by the United States. They also know that we've invaded Iraq; one of the other Axis of Evil countries. Why would they gamble on the "possibility" that you suggest, when we've already shown that we would attack a country on the suspicion of WMD? Iraq didn't even have them and we attacked. If you're Iran, are you seriously going to take the chance that we won't attack you? We've already shown our willingness to do exactly that. You may have a short memory, but that's no reason to think that they do.

4. The Israeli elections may show that Netanyahu is no longer its majority party and a less hawkish government will be in power.

Hopefully, that will be the case. However, Iran has already seen the posture taken by Republican War Hawks in this country that would invite Bibi here to lecture our president on our foreign policy. They're fully aware of the Republican's position. The Pubs even sent them a letter spelling it out. They are with the Hardliners in Iran and against their own president. Something that Iran finds outrageous as does the vast majority of the sane world.

5. Even if the deal is reached, after 10 years, it is game over and they will get what they want.a

Possibly. If it's Atomic energy for peaceful purposes. On the other hand, they know that Israel already has Nukes which are probably pointed right at them. Even if they ever did have a bomb. Why would they use it ? Unless of course it was a defensive weapon. What would they gain, knowing that they'd be vaporized in minutes if they did. During the Bronze age Iran was home to several civilizations such as Elam, Jiroft and Zayandeh Rud civilisations. Elam, the most prominent of these civilisations developed in the southwest of Iran alongside those in Mesopotamia. The development of writing in Elam in 4th millennium BC paralleled that in Sumer.[58] The Elamite kingdom continued its existence until the emergence of the Median and Achaemenid Empires. So, you're looking at one of the oldest civilizations on the planet. And it would all cease to exist within minutes if they ever launched. The leaders of Iran all have PhD's mostly from western universities. I would say that they're too smart to use something that would guarantee the end of their civilization. They have more at stake than you do, or your Republican friends.

6. Once they do, the shiite-sunni conflict in Iraq and Syria now, will turn nuclear because Saudi Arabia, which is Sunni, hates Iran and they will buy even more nuclear weapons than what they already possess.

Saudi Arabia has Nukes?? Really? How many do they have? You seem to know that they have them. How many do they have? Where did they get them? They didn't make them on their own. Are you saying that we are supplying the Saudi's with Nukes? Israel has them and that's the worst kept secret in the world, and we know where they got them from. Are you telling me that we are supplying BOTH Israel and Saudi Arabia with Nukes? And that's OK with Israel? Bibi never said a word about all these Nukes in Saudi Arabia?? Why not? He doesn't have a problem with an Arab/Muslim state right next door having Nukes?? Sorry, but I doubt what you're saying as being true. Demonstrate the truth of this for me.

7. One can just what is will happen when Iran has it and uses to threaten others. This is NOT rocket science.

I suppose people can "guess" or speculate as much as they want, but that doesn't prove that any of this is true or will happen. It's an exercise in inductive reasoning, and inductive reasoning never proves the truth of anything. I think it's better to conduct foreign policy on what we know as fact, rather than speculation.

8. Iran has been secretive about its quest for 10 years and why would anyone think this agreement will suddenly make inspections open to them?

Because any violation or reluctance on their part to open up to inspections, will trigger heavy sanctions that they don't want.

9.When inspectors in the past have wanted to see development area that Iran did not want them to see, access was denied. Nothing will change with this weak agreement.

That was then. This is now and the situation is different. We called them one of three of the Axis of Evil countries and we attacked one of them and forced a regime change upon their heads, and that was all based on the suspicion of WMD, which they didn't have.. We're the only country in the world that used Nukes on another country. Why would they think we won't do that to them? Invade them or Nuke them? They've already seen that we'll do it. Aren't you even a bit tired of this reckless cowboy crap that never solves a problem and only makes things worse? If we hadn't removed Saddam, there would be no ISIS today. They wouldn't exist because Saddam would NEVER have permitted anybody to challenge his authority in Iraq. Once he was gone, the door was open and now you see the results. You want another war?

10. The purpose of the Republican letter was to put Iran on notice.

The Republican Party has no authority to put any country on "notice". That's the job of the President of the United States and his Secretary of State. That's how our system works. They invited Iran's enemy to speak in our House of Representatives to lecture our president on how we must conduct OUR foreign policy. And they did this without ever including the president in their plans. That was clearly a move to disrespect him. They're known for that. "YOU LIE" coming from an idiot during the SOTU address is just one example. I could offer more coming from Lyndsey Graham on Sunday talk shows. Or pick Ted Cruz. Or Rubio. In fact, you could name any Republican and you'll see more efforts to disrespect this president then we've ever seen before. I'm 67 years old, and I've NEVER seen anything like the treatment he gets from the opposition, including racial slurs. To suggest that they are serving notice to Iran by sending a letter to the Ayatollah telling him that they shouldn't trust the President or the US in this deal amount to treason.

11. Even if Obama excludes Congress from the deal, it needs to be approved in some part by Congress, that Republicans control.

No it doesn't. It's not a treaty. And there are 5 other countries involved. Our congress cannot nullify an agreement that involves other countries. As badly as Republicans want to assert their power, they're really out of the loop here.

11. And if the deal falters to conclude, the result does not mean war as some suggest.

Yes. I'm afraid it does. There is nothing standing in their way if the deal isn't done. The sanctions have not stopped them. If the deal doesn't go down, they'll know that they MUST continue on a nuclear trajectory because that may be their only recourse. Israel wants a war with Iran. They just want us to do the fighting.

12. The Republicans did the right thing with the letter.

The people of the United States and every sane country disagree with you. End GOP stupidity.


perrya profile image

perrya 18 months ago Author

Thanks your points and opinion. Well presented. However, while i am in no way pro Republican, they have valid points as do the Demos. Heavier sanctions would force Iran back to the table should the deal fail. Nobody wants war for fear it would spin out of control. The Saudis bought a few nuclear missiles from china years ago and evidence shows this. They greatly fear Iran getting a bomb because they would use it to threaten or via one of their proxy groups in a tactical sense. The US would never attack Iran fearing repercussions, I doubt if Israel would either. The only thing left are stiffer sanctions and even that may not work. I fear one way or another, it is just a matter of time until Iran gets the bombs. Then it will be far harder to control them.


peoplepower73 profile image

peoplepower73 18 months ago from Placentia California

adagio4639: Thank you. Perrya. Thanks for the graphics showing the range of Iranian missiles. You notice we are not within in that range. If we put this entire conflict in perspective, we are defending Israel's position on this. Put another way, let Israel fight their own wars. Iran is not a nuclear threat to the U.S. but they are to Israel. We have already fought one war for Israel. It's called Iraq and we lost blood and treasure. When the Bush administration talked about Saddam and his WMDs being a threat to his neighbors, they were talking about Israel. The rest of Iraq's neighbors are Arabs. In my humble opinion, we have no reason to even be in the middle east in the middle of a three-way civil war between the Sunnis, Shias, and Kurds. But that's another story.


adagio4639 profile image

adagio4639 18 months ago from Brattleboro Vermont

"The Saudis bought a few nuclear missiles from china years ago and evidence shows this" - What evidence? I've never seen any evidence of that, and I'm certain that Israel would be pretty concerned since they are actually right next door to them. Where did you get this "evidence"? I'd fact check that if I were you. Also, I find it hard to believe that we're doing business with a country that is buying nukes from China. Think about it. When you hear something like that doesn't it wave a red flag of some kind about the truth of the claim? Wouldn't that drastically complicate our relationship with Saudi Arabia, not to mention Israel? A healthy dose of skepticism might be called for on this.

"The US would never attack Iran fearing repercussions, I doubt if Israel would either" -

Why not? We attacked Iraq didn't we? If you're Iran, why would you be convinced that we'd be concerned about repercussions of any kind? Would you be willing to bet on that at the risk of the security of your own country? Israel isn't going to attack them on their own. They'd need to know that we have their back. They came here to solicit our backing for what they want with regards to our foreign policy, and Bibi is looking for war. He knows exactly who to appeal to in this country, and that's the Neo-Cons and Republicans in congress that still think that the invasion of Iraq was a good idea.

" I fear one way or another, it is just a matter of time until Iran gets the bombs. Then it will be far harder to control them."

I'd prefer not to conduct our foreign policy based on fear. But rather respect. That's what got us into Iraq. The Iranian (Persian) civilization goes back to the Bronze age. It's one of, if not the oldest civilization on earth. I'm sure they're very proud of that, and I don't think that they have any interest in ending it by being foolish enough to launch nukes, knowing that they'd face the full response that would vaporize them and turn Iran into glass. Unlike North Korea they have too many well educated people in their society and their government to risk losing everything. If they want nuclear energy for peaceful purposes then we have no ground to stand on to deny that to them. But we must make certain that this is their goal, and not using it for weaponizing terrorism or offensive threats to other countries. I think we can do that, and that's what these negotiations are for.


perrya profile image

perrya 18 months ago Author

Foreign policy based on respect alone works only if both trust and respects the other. That said, America is trying too hard to respect and trust Iran, Iran has never felt that way about the US, except in pre-1979 years when the Shah was there. Don't be foolish with Iran.


adagio4639 profile image

adagio4639 18 months ago from Brattleboro Vermont

I have a question. I'm trying to start a Hub, and every time I try after putting in the title and filling out the other crap, when I hit continue, I get this: "Please specify a web address for your Hub." But there is no place to enter a web address. Under Hub Title, there is this "Permalink: http://adagio4639.hubpages.com/hub/....but that isn't what they want. The page is asking me to enter something, but doesn't offer a place to enter it. I don't recall having this problem before. Any suggestions?


perrya profile image

perrya 18 months ago Author

it could be that your title has already been used, so try a different one.


adagio4639 profile image

adagio4639 18 months ago from Brattleboro Vermont

No. It's not the title. It's asking for web address and it doesn't give me a place to enter it. Never had this problem before.

About Iran. They never had any trust for us. We put the Shah on the Peacock throne. It was our CIA that did it. The Shah tortured and disappeared people all the time, and when he was out of the country they had their revolution and he remained in exile until he died. They despised us for our backing of the tyrant that was as bad as they come. When they had their revolution, they turned on everything that had anything to do with the US. If you're an Iranian, you might understand why. We had a bad record of backing some pretty despicable characters. We backed Saddam and provided the poison gas that he used on the Iranians in their war with Iraq. They're going to remember shit like this. So when you say, don't be foolish with Iran, I'm pretty certain that there are those in Iran that share that same sentiment toward the US.


perrya profile image

perrya 18 months ago Author

No doubt, Its like when a married couple no longer trusts another because of lies and deceit, just on an international scale. Both have not helped the issue.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working