the mindset of "war": the "military option" is no longer an option

diplomacy or war

The "mindset of war" is characterized by a preference for military action over diplomacy
"Leaders did not inform their people of the cost of war"

full text and video  of Obama's speach at American University on the topic of Iran deal:

http://wapo.st/1IHwBh4

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/08/05/text-obama-gives-a-speech-about-the-iran-nuclear-deal/

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/08/obama-and-the-iran-deal/400535/

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-08-05/obama-reruns-specter-of-iraq-invasion-to-make-case-for-iran-deal

Obama rode to the White House in 2008 on his early, vocal and mostly lonely opposition to the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. More than a decade later, he says the fight over the Iran deal is with the same group of neoconservative politicians and commentators who beat the drum for war over diplomacy to meet what turned out to be a non-existent threat in Iraq.
Listening to them again on Iran, he argued in a speech Wednesday in Washington, would be another historic mistake.
"More than a decade later we still live with the consequences of the invasion of Iraq," Obama said at American University, the same venue where in 1963 President John F. Kennedy called for a recalibration in the Cold War with the Soviet Union. "I raise this history because now more than ever we need clear-thinking in our foreign policy."Obama and his aides have invoked some of the most prominent proponents of going to war in Iraq: former Vice President Dick Cheney to former UN Ambassador John Bolton and Bill Kristol, founder of The Weekly Standard.Kristol, for one, is unapologetic either for his support for the Iraq invasion or his opposition to the deal with Iran.

Failing the Test

"Obama's free to re-litigate Iraq," Kristol said Wednesday before the president spoke. "But he's losing the argument over Iran.""Obama said Iran couldn't be permitted a nuclear weapons infrastructure," Kristol said in an e-mail. "Obama condemned Iranian terrorism. Obama denounced Iran for killing Americans in Iraq. Obama signed the sanctions legislation. Obama said he had Israel's back. The deal fails all these tests."Another backer of the 2003 Iraq invasion, Arizona Republican Senator John McCain, dismissed Obama's arguments in a statement Wednesday opening his Armed Services Committee hearing on the Iran agreement.The administration, he said, "suggests that any criticism of this deal is tantamount to a call to war. Such scare tactics are to be expected from this administration, but they have no place in a debate of this magnitude."Obama said in his address today that his critics were repeatedly wrong in assessing threats from Iraq and Iran. Rejecting the Iran deal would unravel economic sanctions that forced the Islamic Republic to negotiate, accelerate its nuclear program and hurt U.S. credibility in the world, he said.

Easy Choice

"I've had to make a lot of tough calls as president, but whether or not this deal is good for American security is not one of those calls," he said. "It's not even close."In anticipation of a vote in the Republican-led Congress to disapprove the accord next month, Obama and his allies are girding against a well-funded campaign to influence lawmakers by groups including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. They also face adamant opposition by the Israeli government.The agreement announced last month in Vienna between Iran, the U.S. and five other world powers eases sanctions in return for verifiable limits on the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.Obama has vowed to veto a resolution of disapproval if Congress passes one at the end of a 60-day review period that ends in mid-September.He is counting on Democrats to prevent the Republican-led opposition from overriding his veto. He'd need at least 44 House Democrats and 13 Senate Democrats to stand with him.

'Selling a Fantasy'

In his speech, Obama said a rejection of the agreement by Congress would leave the U.S. standing alone and Iran in a stronger position."Those who say we can just walk away from this deal and maintain sanctions are selling a fantasy," he said.AIPAC on Wednesday distributed a memo citing polls that suggest Americans are increasingly skeptical of the deal.Just over half of Americans believe the Iraq war was a mistake, according to a Gallup poll conducted in June. Polls on the Iran deal have shown varying levels of support, depending on how the question is framed.A CBS News poll released Tuesday found that almost half of Americans don't know enough about the deal to form an opinion. Among those with an opinion, opponents outnumber supporters 33 percent to 20 percent.

Consequential Choice

The Iran agreement "is historically consequential for the national security of the United States," Hardin Lang, a former diplomat and researcher at the Center for American Progress, a Washington group which backs the agreement, said in a telephone interview. "I spent a couple of years in Iraq, and I think people need to understand the gravity of the choice before us."Obama explicitly drew a parallel with Kennedy's 1963 address, which urged Americans to support a nuclear test-ban treaty with the Soviets despite deep suspicion and animosity." We do not want a war," Kennedy said. "This generation of Americans has already had enough - - more than enough - - of war and hate and oppression."Obama said the standoff with the Soviet Union was much more dangerous than what the world faces today. Kennedy, he said, rejected the idea of "security with perpetual war footing" for "a practical and attainable peace."The Iran agreement "builds on this tradition of strong, principled policy diplomacy," Obama said.