Subject: Re: Iran - The Difference in Assessment
Yep, I'll push back. Venezuela hasn't been cleared - it's still run by a socialist authoritarian dictatorship that's a firm ally of China. Iran hasn't been cleared - it's still run by a fundamentalist Islamic terrorist dictatorship that's a firm ally of China. Cuba might be next - we'll see what happens - but unless the regime is willing to fundamentally change what it is, it's not clear what the benefits will be to us.

Oh, okay. I must have missed the giant show of force the Chinese made to keep their ally in the fold.

It was beyond obvious to both Obama's and Biden's foreign policy team that a nuclear-armed Iran that had ballistic missile capabilities was a dire threat. No one disputes that - either then or now. The difference isn't the threat assessment. The difference is in assessing whether fighting an aerial war against Iran will make enough of a material difference in that threat to be worth the sizable costs.

LOl. Those guys were so concerned about Iran's ballistic missile programs that the JCPOA - which Iran ended up ignoring anyway - never mentioned their missiles. Obama's policies in particular strengthened Iran as a regional hegemon.

It's early days, but right now it looks like Obama and Biden were right.

Sorry, but they aren't in the same zip code as "right". In fact you can draw a bright line between the JCPOA and Obama's coddling of the mullahs to October 7th.