Quote of the Day:

The notion that we would condition Iran not getting nuclear weapons in a verifiable deal on Iran recognizing Israel is really akin to saying that we won't sign a deal unless the nature of the Iranian regime completely transforms.

–President Obama on National Public Radio (courtesy the Weekly Standard)

Commentary’s Jonathan Tobin explains why President Obama in his NPR interview made the most compelling argument as to why the Iranian nuclear deal he is promoting would be disastrous for Israel and ultimately for the United States (like Israel not exactly a mullah favorite either):

Obama dismissed the suggestion that Iran be asked to recognize Israel as part of the nuclear deal he is promoting.

His reason: doing so would mean asking Iran to change the nature of its regime. To which critics must respond that this is exactly why it can’t be trusted with a nuclear infrastructure.His reason: doing so would mean asking Iran to change the nature of its regime.

To which critics must respond that this is exactly why it can’t be trusted with a nuclear infrastructure.

The U.S. does deal with other countries that do not recognize Israel. However, Iran's repeated calls to annihilate Israel make it–um–problematical. 

Despite the president’s protestations, the supposed agreement with Iran will hasten the regime’s ability to get a nuclear weapon, while at the same time lifting sanctions and thus giving Iran the economic wherewithal to engage in more mischief in the Middle East. Tobin adds:

[I]f the as yet unwritten deal actually ensured that Iran could never get a nuclear weapon, [the president] might have a strong case for ignoring the nature of the Iranian government.  

But despite his ardent salesmanship, he can’t honestly claim that it does. Obama has made an endless string of concessions that have allowed to keep its nuclear infrastructure, included its fortified bunker at Fordow, not forced it to export its stockpile of nuclear fuel, reveal the extent of its nuclear research and put an expiration date on the restrictions on its program.

All this means that Iran can, if it is patient, build up its nuclear capabilities and then have a bomb in short order at the end of the agreement. Or, if it is not that patient, it can easily cheat its way to a weapon due to the weakness of the deal and the lack of a truly strict inspections regime or the ability of the West to quickly reimpose sanctions.

Once the sanctions are lifted, it would be far more difficult to reimpose them than, say, going back to Iraq after precipitously withdrawing. Only Congress can lift the sanctions it has imposed (or that was the way it still worked last time I checked), but, if the U.N. lifts sanctions, ours would be irrelevant or worse actually crippling only to the United States, as other nations rush to do business with Iran.

The framework of the Iranian deal born from Secretary of State Kerry’s endless palaver in Lausanne is pure Obama—based on the president’s faculty lounge assumptions about the world but carrying real consequences that will likely prove devastating to the peace and stability of the world. There is also a heady dose of the president’s trademark egotism and narcissism.

In contrast to President Obama’s detachment from reality is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s increasingly desperate plea for the West to stop and reverse its course on this deal before it is too late. To which Senator Dianne Feinstein, the top-ranking Jew in the U.S. Senate essentially says “pipe down:”

"I wish that [Netanyahu] would contain himself, because he has put out no real alternative," Sen. Dianne Feinstein said on CNN's "State of the Union" Sunday — minutes after Netanyahu appeared on the show.

That is the talking point—that Netanyahu has “put no real alternative” on the table.

In a way, neither has President Obama. His fact sheet on a framework of the deal is being disputed by officials in Iran and so we don’t know what, beyond a lot of concessions, the president has put on the table.

And yet Netanyahu has put something on the table: it is easy to ignore that he called for a better deal because we know that a better one is not likely with an evil regime such as Iran. But implied is that until a better deal is forthcoming the world continues to squeeze Iran with sanctions. That pressure speaks more eloquently of the west's resolve than John Kerry’s concessions and sanctions would also make it more expensive for Iran to weaponize uranium while at the same time supporting terrorism.

As for piping down, Senator Feinstein, it is very hard to contain yourself when your supposed ally is negotiating a deal that would permit your mortal enemy to wipe your country off the face of the earth.