Fox News host shreds GOP’s ‘horrific’ Iran letter: Republicans are ‘pen pals’ with the Ayatollah

[DonViejo]

Fox News host Greta Van Susteren on Sunday blasted Republican senators for sending a “horrific” letter to Iran, and attempting an “end run” around the president.

David Remnick, editor of The New Yorker, told an ABC News panel that the 46 senators who joined Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R-AR) letter undermine President Barack Obama’s negotiations with Iran had made a “horrendous” mistake.

“If you read the text of the letter, it is the most condescending, infantile text assuming that the leaders of Iran — whatever you may think of them, and there’s a lot on the record to think terribly of them — that somehow, that they have no idea what the American system is all about,” Remnick explained. “It’s an absurd comical exercise.”

Susteren agreed: “I think that letter was horrific.”

“It end runs the president, which I think is terrible,” she said. “I think they could have achieved the same goal without sending a letter becoming pen pals with the leadership of Iran.”

-snip-

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/fox-news-host-shreds-gops-horrific-iran-letter-republicans-are-pen-pals-with-the-ayatollah/

[arcane1]

1. Ok, WTF is going on here? That's the hardest hitting I have ever seen on Fox!

[Blue_In_AK]

2. Maybe Greta hasn't totally sold her soul?

[arcane1]

3. And I just realized it was on ABC :)

[Kber]

5. No worries

If you watch the clip, she's ovbiously still in bed with the devil.

She condems just enough to bow to public outrage, and then launches into an attack on Obama by calling the negotiations a "deal between two countries" rather than the multi national effort it is.

[Thinkingabout]

4. It is one thing to have signed the letter and especially if you signed it without reading and

Finding out to whom it was being sent but now come back and try to defend themselves with kindergarten excuses. Is there no shame in what they are doing? Cotton did not come off as knowing it should not be done, he needs to hurry and fall on his so he could develop a good story.

[Blue_In_AK]

6. And of course, Iran must be stopped because

they already control Tehran. What an IDIOT.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=47&v=mX8y-91tfCo

[Thinkingabout]

7. Iran has gotten closer to getting a nuclear weapon because W invaded Iraq on the advise of

Netanyahu and because Saddam threatened his daddy, Saddam would not have allowed Iran to have advanced on their nuclear weapon development. Dumb and Dumber.

[Scootaloo]

8. Two things...

First off, there is zero evidence whatsoever that Iran has any interest in nuclear weapons. Considering that the source of hte claim is wholly Israel, and the evidence they offer is "trust us, we're your friends," there's really no good reason for this fiasco in the first damned palce

Second, even if they were, Saddam Hussein would be in absolutely no position to do anything about it

[Thinkingabout]

9. Maybe you should review history again.

[Scootaloo]

10. No, my history is fine, thanks

it is in fact the basis of my statement.

Rather than type it all out for you, I'll just link to the last time I corrected this claim of yours.

[Thinkingabout]

12. What is the problemIran wasn't developing nuclear weapons when the US invaded.

Many knew Iraq was holding Iran back. Netanyahu advocated striking Iraq, these are facts. Did I step on the toes of W and Bibi?

[Scootaloo]

13. You've got two "facts" wrong

One. There is no evidence Iran is developing nuclear weapons. None. Nothing. Not a shred. There's evidence that they're bitchy about being threatened by two nuclear powers constantly. There's evidence they're insulted that we believe that muslims should not have rights under the NPT. But there's no evidence that htey are seeking or developing a nuclear weapon.

Two. Iraq was incapable of doing anything at all to Iran, after the war ended in '88. Iraq lost. it had the backing of the Arab states, and the United States (even direct military aid; the US engaged Iran in a few naval skirmishes, and our fighters bombed some of their ports), and still completely failed to achieve any goals against Iran. Iraq lost. Two years later, Iraq invaded Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, and had its military annihilated by the United States, followed by thirteen years of crippling sanctions, two no-fly zones, and occasional bombing strafes.

Your premise is simply wrong on two fronts. Sorry.

[Thinkingabout]

15. You can continue to say what you want, why in the hell would there be any negotiations against

Iran developing a nuclear weapon unless there was a need to prevent them from developing a nuclear weapon now or in the future? We can agree to disagree about whether Saddam would have allowed Iran to develop a nuclear weapon.

[Scootaloo]

17. That's a circular argument

Fact is, if Iran were seeking nuclear weapons, there would be no negotiations. It would be breaking a treaty, and would labor under the penalties for doing so until it reversed course to the satisfaction of the IAEA. There wouldn't be a "let's talk it over" phase, it would just be penalty until correction. The negotiations are happening to get Iran out of unneeded sanctions that were brought about wholly by the scaremongering of two nuclear powers that want to ensure their own regional hegemony. it's not about weapons. it's about dominance.

And it's not a matter of opinion. Iraq had no functional military after 1990, and absolutely no diplomatic or economic influence. There would have been nothing Iraq could do to stop Iran on anything.

[Thinkingabout]

18. Like the non functioning military in a country we stayed in for ten years, try that one on someone

Else.

[Android3.14]

11. The first thing simply isn't so

The second thing doesn't even relate.

[vlyons]

14. Republicans cannot be embarrassed

They have no shame, because they are sociopaths.

[blm]

16. And that is the simple truth that compels nearly ALL of their actions.

.

[erronis]

24. +1 - It's almost like the frat brothers trying to outdo each other

With stupidities.

But that's OK, because Big Daddy will bail them out.

Big Daddy (put any klepto/plutocrats name here) got them into their mess on purpose, now he _might_ get them out.

It's got to be hard for the other professional people in government dealing with these juveniles!

[snort]

19. The evil shit has fallen hard on his ass.

Bet nobody wants to play with tommy right now.

[Faygo Kid]

20. Goodbye, Greta. Roger Ailes will kick you out.

Can't do that at Faux.

[marym625]

21. First time ever playing to their base made them do the right thing.

Besides, how will they dis Democrats if they allow this to go down without a little outrage?

[Rex]

22. WHAAAAAAAAA?????

Hold on...let me get Jon to do it right...

[Hekate]

23. Has the political idiocracy finally, finally hit its apogee?

[Buns_of_Fire]

25. Memo to Greta: Please stop by Mr. Ailes office first thing Monday morning. nt

[DeSwiss]

26. K&R

[UTUSN]

27. I've always had little "feelings" she should be on our side. Wish she'd decide. n/t