LIVE VIDEO: Obama Defends Iran Deal

“President Obama delivers remarks on Wednesday about the Iran nuclear deal at American University, where President John F. Kennedy delivered a speech in 1963 on nuclear diplomacy.”

UPDATE: I’ve replaced the live-stream with a recap.

  • TommyTune

    It’s patently ridiculous that the president should have to work this hard to overcome the absurd pushback coming from the Republican side or even from spineless, Bibi-appeasing Democrats like Chuck Schumer. But then, what’s not ridiculous about American politics these days?

    • MattM

      Everything about the status and behavior of today’s Republican party is patently ridiculous. They don’t limit this ridiculousness to just one realm of influence. Everything done it its name these days is patently ridiculous.

    • another_steve

      The Republicans view the State of Israel as a runway for Air Jesus to use when Jesus returns to Planet Earth to save us. Or something. Anything that threatens that fantasy is bad. That’s why they want war with Iran.

      Schumer may (I’m only guessing) be receiving massive “funding” from Israel in return for him acting as a chief lobbyist for Israel in Congress.

    • Bill_Perdue

      The squabbles between your party and their Republican siblings are not very important.

      After Obama orders the destruction of all US nuclear, bacteriological and chemical weapons stocks and after he sends in the military to seize and destroy all zionist nuclear, bacteriological and chemical weapons stocks then he can talk about other nations.

      “The United States was the first country to develop nuclear weapons, and is the only country to have used them in warfare, with the separate bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II.” wiki

      “United States: According to the March 2015 New START declaration, the United States has 1,597 strategic nuclear warheads deployed on 785 ICBMs, SLBMs, and strategic bombers. The Federation of American Scientists estimates that the United States’ nondeployed strategic arsenal is approximately 2,800 warheads and the U.S. tactical nuclear arsenal numbers 500 warheads. In total, the U.S. has about 4,800 nuclear warheads, including tactical, strategic, and nondeployed weapons.”

      The zionists have between 80-100 nuclear warheads, with fissile material for up to 200 and delivery systems linked to missiles, aircraft and subs.

  • Ninja0980

    It’s amazing how people have learned nothing from Iraq.
    A war with Iran would be a blunder that would make Iraq and Vietnam look like child’s play.

    • Capritaur

      But it’ll make some people really, really rich.

      • here’s where we Little People get to play philosopher. who is more powerful, today? the oil industry, or the weapons manufacturers?

        the answer to that question will tell you what will happen. my money is on the oil industry. the warmongerers can always convince our pols to invade outer mongolia, or something, when they need another trillion.

    • metrored

      That’s what I just wrote to my congressman.

    • Jean-Marc in Canada

      Quite right. Even Jane’s* makes it clear that Iran is no Iraq or Afghanistan for that matter. Iran is surprisingly quite secular given its recent history but only a fool would think they’d be an easy foe to defeat. Unlike Iraq, Iran has a huge military structure and a competent air force. Again, only the most deluded of people would think Iran is weak.

      *For those who don’t know: IHS Janes is a military/defence review magazine/website. Considered to be the place to get information on all things military/geopolitical/current events.

  • oikos

    Ads are running on TV here in NYS saying the deal should be rejected and the US should push for a “better deal.” What that “better deal” is, is conveniently omitted because telling people you want to send their kids to die in a war for profit is harder work than producing a vague ad criticizing the President.

    • Gustav2

      Same ads in Columbus.

    • BearEyes

      Same ads in CT.

    • Polterguest

      Maryland as well.

    • lattebud

      Sounds like the same logic as repeal the ACA but have no alternatives. But it just needs to be repealed

  • here are the facts. Iran is a huge, young, powerful country with a lot of money. we will NEVER invade. b/c even our stupid, closet case rethug leaders have been told by their Ma$ters: talk, but don’t go there for real.

    also, let’s remember the Raygun years. it is to all of the right wing leaders’ benefit, here, in Persia, in Russia, etc., that this charade of ‘deals’ and ‘talks’ and whatnot continue.

    they get to posture, and nothing important really happens. similarly, however much Iran has in terms of nuke tech (which is a lot) the same applies to them. they will never use it. it does make for a nice deterrent, however.

    the US has fought a lot of wars in the last 70 years. but not against an actual nuclear power. just little or messed up countries. i wonder why that is?

    • Gustav2

      And even tho the young in Iran love the US and the West, they would rightly defend their own country from invasion. US politicians shouldn’t think for a moment, “We will be greeted as Liberators!”

      • Gyeo

        The politicians will say it but they won’t believe it. They’re just in it for the quick cash. The ones that will believe we will be “liberators” are the constituents. And they are also the ones willing to go in and poorly handle the situation if it ever comes to war.

  • bkmn

    If they want a better deal we need to push for specifics, which they can’t/won’t be able to spell out since the pushback on the deal is all talk.

  • Hip Byroads

    Important speech.

  • VodkaAndPolitics

    I’m an alumnus of American University, and I’m very proud of my Alma Mater, President, and Country today.

  • ElJiffy

    Iran is a powerhouse in the Middle East and has been for the past two thousand years or so. It makes no sense to refuse to treat with them because of what happened way back in the Carter presidency. After all, they’re negotiating with us, even though we (or the CIA) overthrew a popularly elected, secular government of theirs in the 195Os, installing the shah in its place — which led to the revolution, and the Ayatollah, and the taking of American hostages in the first fucking place. Whoops!
    I think this deal is a positive step forward in bringing Iran out of its limbo. Two years of intensive negotiating have gone into it. Maybe it isn’t perfect, but it’s a good start. Rejecting it would certainly be a triumph for the hard-line religious fundamentalists here in both countries. The mullahs want to hold onto power. A US rejection would be a terrific propaganda coup for them, proving that they’ve been right all along about the wicked West and the Great Satan. Our own homegrown zealots would be able to continue beating the drum against an Iran that would most probably resume trying to acquire nuclear capability, without check or scrutiny; they might even relish inciting a war against Iran, in the hope that it would bring on the apocalypse and the return of you-know-who.