Doesn't Matter If Iran Deal Goes to UN Before It Goes to Congress
Much ado about nothing
Criticism of presidential treaties with adversarial governments goes back a long way.
The good that will come out of this agreement cannot be overstated. But the agreement has a significant downside too.
Those are the options, the president says, anything else is posturing
Mindless anti-libertarianism
Hawks have nothing better to propose except more huffing and puffing
What did she know and when did she know it? More important: WTF were we doing in Libya to begin with?
Pentagon confirms merchant ship was boarded but says no American sailors were on board.
Still appears unaware of his role in helping bring ISIS to life
Iran is not the only threat here. Our own hubris is equally dangerous.
The Obama administration is assisting Saudi Arabia in creating a humanitarian catastrophe in the Middle East's poorest country.
President Obama will be able to veto Congressional rejection.
The hawks have no better alternatives for stopping Iran's march toward a nuclear bomb
Congress rejecting a deal could have the benefit of extricating the U.S. from a role as world policeman it shouldn't be in anyway.
The two Tea Party senators-turned presidential aspirants present clashing visions of American power
Diplomacy is the only remotely effective option for curbing Iran's nuclear program
The party elites may hate the agreement, but rank-and-file Republicans aren't sure.
Iran has never attacked another country, while Israel has attacked Arab neighbors several times.
From pretending only Republicans oppose a deal to pretending the U.S.' reputation is in jeopardy, the stupid on Iran is reaching new highs.
The question is not whether the agreement works miracles to soften the hearts of the Iranian rulers.
Because we operate in the real world, not a fantasy one
President hails framework for a deal, says nothing's been agreed to until everything's been agreed to.
Negotiators working out how much to tell the public
We would be safer from terrorism without the U.S. government.
John Bolton makes bid to lead the growing pre-emptive war caucus
Hawkish senator disputes characterization of his interventionist views toward Iran
If anything can persuade Iran's rulers to go for a nuke, it's these hardliners' lust for war.
Freshman Sen. Tom Cotton wants to invade Iran and Syria, jail journalists and whistleblowers, eavesdrop on Americans, and keep the 'savages' locked up in Gitmo.
To show Iranians there are hardliners in an effort to squeeze a better deal.
Back in 1986, the then-senator led the charge against Ronald Reagan's treatment of South Africa
Iran's foreign minister dismissed the Republican letter explaining the Constitution as a "propaganda ploy" and pointed out a deal wouldn't be bilateral.
The U.S. is now on a path that will enable a force that openly threatens Jews to become far more powerful and dangerous.
Arms control tends to bring out unwarranted panic and fury, and Netanyahu is squarely in that tradition.
Netanyahu's narrative is a fabric of lies and omissions.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10