Team Rubicon - Operation Seabird in Tacloban, Philippines
Methinks a Caption Contest is in Order

Peace in our time with Iran

I would say this deal is abject surrender from a winning position, but that is far too kind. Naivete, foolishness, hubris, and the arrogant misconception that wolves will become sheep if we just treat them sweetly, have combined to give the world's most dangerous totalitarian theocracy a green light to build a nuclear bomb at their leisure.

I could go on, and on and on. This deal is really that bad. But James Carafano of Heritage did the heavy lifting.  Over to you Mr. Carafano.

No, that’s not a facile, partisan jab. What just went down in Geneva is, in fact, a replay of the greatest diplomatic tragedy of the 20th century.

The Munich deal rested on the ridiculous notion that Hitler could be satiated. The new pact builds on the equally ludicrous idea that Iran would give up the means to build a nuclear weapon that will serve as the tip of its foreign-policy spear.

The saddest part of this negotiated fiasco is that everyone agrees why Iran came to the bargaining table. The sanctions worked; the mullahs had run out of cash, and Tehran determined that the easiest way to get the funds flowing was to get the West to back off.

This is where the realists and the idealists part company. Realists knew that the sanctions were good for only one purpose: to weaken the regime to the point where it would collapse or be overthrown.  They crossed their fingers, hoping that would happen before Tehran got a nuke it could turn on the West. Regime change remains the only realistic option to bombing or bearing the danger of living with a nuclear-armed Iran.

Idealists, on the other hand, held that sanctions were the magic button for getting the Iranians to be reasonable. Once Tehran started on the path to accommodating the West (they theorized), the mullahs would realize that the benefits of collaboration and transparency outweighed the burdens of isolation and confrontation.