Mister President, Members of Congress,

July 2015 Mr. President,  Members of Congress, The Congress and the American people now have a choice between “The Deal”  or war with Iran.

I think this is a false choice.  The Iranian leaders, in particular Ayatollah Khameini, have averred that even with the signed “Deal”,  the  goal of the Islamic Republic to  destroy the United States and Israel will stay in place.  The frequently repeated public expressions of “Death to the U.S.” and “Death to Israel” must be accepted as declarations of war.  But well before these latest proclamations,  the first terrorist, State-sponsored acts of terror, in Lebanon, in Saudi-Arabia, and elsewhere, and the mobilization of Hezbollah and Hamas, with the aim of wiping the State of Israel off the map, are clearly acts of war.

This changes the narrative, Mr. President.  War is not an option. War exists. The real question  is whether we will continue to play defense and allow the Iranians and their proxies to determine when and where the war will continue,  whether hot or cold, or whether we will fight it on our terms.  This is the real choice Mr. President.

“The Deal” is a denial that we are at war with Iran. “The Deal” narrowly deals with “the nuclear issue” and whether we will allow the Iranians to have the nuclear bomb sooner or later.  “The Deal” is actually a bribe. It is a bribe,  because if the Iranians agree to delay the acquisition of the bomb, we agree to pay them off by lifting the sanctions.  By agreeing on the delay, we are validating and strengthening the regime.   This is the path of Appeasement that recalls the 1938 Munich Agreement of Neville Chamberlain. It will likely lead to a proliferation of nuclear arsenals in the Mid East and possibly cause another world war.

Mr. President, you asked that those who oppose “The Deal” offer an alternative. The alternative is to see things are they are, to accept the fact that we are at war and therefore scotch the gamble, the false hope that,  during the time frame of “The Deal”,  the leadership of the Islamic Republic will reform itself; that it will give up its ambition to hegemonize the Middle East, abandon its terrorist practice, disarm its proxies, recognize the right of Israel to exist and that it will, instead,  embrace a world order based on trade-agreements.   It’s an unrealistic bet.  It’s a bad deal.

What then, are our options with regard to the ongoing war?  We should take a page from the Israeli playbook:  telephone the workers of the Iranian nuclear installations to leave before we destroy them. This is the first step.  The aim is not to gain a  few years until the work for the bomb is resumed. The aim must be to defeat the Islamic Republic and to remove those in control as well as to disarm its proxies. In WWII,  the allies not only defeated the German war machine: they destroyed the Nazi regime.

One cannot negotiate with tyrants and fanatics. it is wrong to limit the negotiation to the containment of a nuclear weapon.  The proliferation of nuclear arms as well as chemical and biological weapons doubtless poses a formidable threat.  But our tolerance for warfare with the so-called conventional weapons is equally unacceptable.  Mr. President,  your red line to contain the use of Bashar al-Assad’s use of the biological weapons, has not stopped the massacre of 300,000 Syrians by means of “conventional” weapons. There too, your aim was narrow, and arguable immoral.

Those who  endorse “The Deal” argue that the U.S. cannot and should not start another war.  But there is a war and “The Deal” will not bring peace.  We must seek to end the war. And we must be clear about the peace we seek. The deal you have accepted does neither.