Browse By

Ben Carson Unable To Craft Coherent Iran Policy

Last night, the Ben Carson for President campaign posted a message on Twitter, saying: “You can do something right now to stop Iran from obtaining the power it needs to threaten the free world. Write Congress RT #NoDeal”

ben carson no deal iran

It’s a well-established tradition for Republican presidential candidates to freak out about Iran.

Early in 2012, Mitt Romney warned that “the Iranians are making rapid progress toward obtaining the most destructive weapons in the history of the world.” Three and a half years later, that “rapid progress” still hasn’t brought the Iranians even one nuclear bomb for testing.

In 2007, John McCain said that Iran was so close to obtaining nuclear weapons that the only solution was war: “Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran!” he sang. Eight years later, we haven’t had to go to war against Iran at all. The deadly urgency turned out not to be so urgent after all.

Yet, Republicans are still trying to convince us that Iran is on the verge of attacking America with a first generation nuclear weapon. It’s like a foreign policy End Times conspiracy theory, with the GOP trying to convince us, year after year, that this time, their prophecies of an imminent attack from Iran are sure to be accurate.

So, it’s no surprise that we now have Ben Carson rattling the same old saber, warning that, just like four years ago, and eight years ago before that, Iran will soon attack Israel and the United States unless we “do something” drastic right now. But, what is this “something” Ben Carson wants us to do?

Carson wants Americans to write letters to Congress saying that there should be no agreement to the deal (read it) that will:

– deprive Iran of most of the centrifuges it needs to enrich uranium
– reduce Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium by 98 percent
– establishes inspection and reporting measures to ensure compliance, with access to previously undisclosed locations throughout Iran’s nuclear supply chain
– include an agreement that “Iran reaffirms that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons.”

ben carson pointsWhat Ben Carson never explains is how blocking a deal that secures a permanent commitment from Iran to never develop nuclear weapons, and cripples the infrastructure required to do so, will “stop Iran from obtaining the power it needs to threaten the free world.” Does Carson think that Iran will be prevented from developing nuclear weapons simply by not engaging in diplomacy?

The truth is that Ben Carson has no plan for how to deal with Iran. Ben Carson has no plan for stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Ben Carson has developed no alternative to the agreement secured by the Obama Administration.

All that the Ben Carson for President campaign has been capable of producing is a quick, off-the-cuff statement written on the day that the agreement with Iran was secured. Carson wrote, “The Iran deal announced today with fanfare and another heaping dose of false hope is almost certain to prove an historic mistake with potentially deadly consequences. A careful review of the 100-plus pages is in order to fully understand the lengths to which the negotiators were willing to stoop to secure a deal at any cost with the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and a regime dedicated in word and deed to bringing Death to America. Without anywhere anytime surprise inspections, a full accounting of Iran’s past secret nuclear arms pursuits, elimination of Iran’s uranium stockpiles and the lifting of any sanctions only upon verification of Iranian compliance this is not a good deal, but a recipe for disaster and the first fateful step toward a frenzied nuclear arms race in the Middle East.”

The Carson for President campaign then quickly deleted this statement from its web site. Ben Carson wasn’t willing to stand by this statement, and he hasn’t come up with an alternative proposal yet.

Ben Carson offers America nothing when it comes to international diplomacy. He has no experience negotiating with former leaders or working with foreign policy. Carson’s lack of experience and inability to craft a coherent foreign policy plan may have served him well as a TV personality on Fox News, but it won’t serve the American people well if Carson is given access to the power of the Oval Office.

5 thoughts on “Ben Carson Unable To Craft Coherent Iran Policy”

  1. frank says:

    While these clowns in the White House now have a coherent policy? Lmao.

  2. J Clifford says:

    Well, Frank, as even Ben Carson had to admit, the Obama Administration has been able to craft a 100-page agreement. That’s 100 pages more than what Ben Carson has on his hands.

    Have you read the actual text of the agreement, Frank, or are you too busy lmao-ing to read these days?

  3. Charles Manning says:

    The issues concerning “the Iran deal” deserve our attention, even though Ben Carson seems not to have the matter in focus. Opponents base their opposition on two principal claims:

    1. The economic sanctions now in place are a vital part of stopping Iran from obtaining the power to threaten or destroy its enemies, including Israel. Approving the Iran deal will result in the sanctions being lifted.

    2. If the agreement is approved, Iran won’t comply with it, thereby thwarting the objectives of a) depriving Iran of most of the centrifuges it needs to enrich uranium, b) reducing reduce Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium by 98 percent, c) establishing inspection and reporting measures to ensure compliance, with access to previously undisclosed locations throughout Iran’s nuclear supply chain, and d) including an agreement reaffirming Iran’s long-standing pledge that it will never seek, develop or acquire nuclear weapons.

    Do you agree with me that the Obama administration hasn’t persuasively answered these claims? What do you think the administration should be saying?

  4. Peregrin Wood says:

    No, I don’t agree that the Obama Administration hasn’t persuasively answered these claims. They’ve addressed them directly, and with detail.

    What’s happened is that the right wing has reacted in the same way that they react to the demagoguery of Donald Trump: They ignore key facts, make up their own fantasy facts, and commit to believing what they want to believe, with the aid of talking heads who deliver them their lines. The more outrageous the claims, the more likely the Republican base is to embrace them.

    Take a look at https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/jcpoa_what_you_need_to_know.pdf

    It’s a document that the Obama Administration developed to counter the misinformation being spread by the Republicans. The fact that they’ve used this material persuasively is shown by the fact that Congress, though controlled by Republicans, is proving unable to pass legislation to stop the agreement with Iran.

    Let me address your points myself, though:

    1. The economic sanctions now in place have not been effective in stopping Iran from obtaining the ability to create nuclear weapons. Iran has developed that ability in spite of sanctions. What the sanctions have been useful for is getting Iran to the negotiating table, where a good deal to prevent development of nuclear weapons by Iran has been brokered.

    2. If Iran doesn’t comply with it, we will know about it, because of a strict regime of inspections and constant monitoring. If Iran breaks the deal, then the sanctions go back in place. That’s part of the deal.

  5. Charles Manning says:

    Thanks for citing the PDF, and for your response to the points I raised.

    Allow me to address further my first point. This statement appears on page 8 of the PDF: “Meanwhile, we will be keeping in place other unilateral sanctions that relate to non-nuclear issues, such as support for terrorism and human rights abuses.” This fact is never mentioned in the major media reports; even you didn’t mention it. I’m sure the vast majority of Americans believe that all sanctions will be lifted once the Iran deal is implemented. But President Obama’s statement beginning on page 79 is to the contrary. He says on pages 81 and 83:

    “And over the course of the next decade, Iran must abide by the deal before additional sanctions are lifted, including five years for restrictions related to arms, and eight years for restrictions related to ballistic missiles. . . . Meanwhile, we will maintain our own sanctions related to Iran’s support for terrorism, its ballistic missile program, and its human rights violations.”

    My quarrel with this is that it’s buried in the language about nuclear weapons. It should be treated as a major reason for approving the Iran deal. I’m unsure whether Iran will stand for the continuance of the sanctions against terrorism, ballistic missiles, and human rights violations. I haven’t seen that mentioned in the media. My impression is that Iran might back out of the deal because of those sanctions. Do you disagree?

    Iran has no intention of producing or using nuclear weapons. If it did, it could easily, I think, obtain them from other nuclear powers, such as North Korea. The real and immediate threat from Iran is its use of conventional weapons, as in the proxy war in Yemen. Or so it seems to me. So I wish Obama would emphasize more the sanctions that will remain after the Iran deal is approved. We need a fuller discussion of that, including what sanctions we’re talking about. And perhaps most importantly, we need to know if those sanctions are working.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!