(CNN) – Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, offered skepticism Monday of the interim deal reached over Iran's nuclear program.
"What will this deal accomplish in terms of the end game? The end game is to dismantle the plutonium reactor," he said on CNN's "New Day." "The end game to stop enrichment. This allows 18,000 centrifuges to stay in place and it basically suspends construction of the plutonium reactor. We're so far away what the end game should look like. I'm very worried."
20 things to know about the deal
He called for a new round of sanctions that can only be relieved if Iran dismantles–not suspends construction on–its plutonium reactor.
"Once you get them to the table you let them know what the final deal will look like and say take this or else," he continued. "We're dealing with people who are not only untrustworthy, this is a murderous regime that murders their own people, creates chaos and mayhem throughout the whole world, the largest sponsor of terrorism. And we're treating them out of sync with who they are. That's what bothers me so much. This deal doesn't represent the fact we're dealing with the most thuggish people in the whole world."
Graham's translation: "the GOP is so nearly irrelevant that we have have to try to turn peace into another controversy otherwise what is left of our party is toast".
Well what's YOUR solution Lindsey Lohan Graham? Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran?
Aw heck Lindsey, let's just bomb them and get it over with. Why take time to work through it with diplomacy when we can just start another war.
"Even the longest journey must start w/the first step"-Confucius. P.S.-Why can Israel have over 100 Nuclear BOMBS but Iran can't come too close to making one ? Just asking.
"What will this deal accomplish in terms of the end game? The end game is to dismantle the plutonium reactor," he said on CNN's "New Day."
How dishonest of Graham? The deal was announced as an interim deal, with no intent on being the end all, to end all. What the deal does is that it puts weapons inspectors on the ground in Iran.
"Once you get them to the table you let them know what the final deal will look like and say take this or else," he continued.
I couldn't have drawn it up any better myeself. That quote illustrates the whole problem when it comes to negotiating with the right wing. "My way, or the highway." "Do what we want, or you will be destroyed." After decades of that sort of foreign policy stance, do you really have to wonder why so many people around the world have such a deep rooted hatred for the U.S.?
Ok.. now lets wait for the rest of the GOP's DC mouthpieces to spout.. Isss, King and McCain... yawn.
I agree with some of what Graham has said. I would like all of the locations that have any remote relationship to the nuclear weapons... I mean nuclear generation program inspected by the IAEA multiple times. My personal view is that there should be constant inspection and supervision of all of Iran's nuclear locations. I just don't have enough faith in these people to follow the rules.
It is the right time to see Middle-East is stabilized. Grab it. Do not doubt. Dot not let Israel play politics here. Israel is a rogue nation.
@ The REAL TRUTH...
I love your handle. The real truth, that is. There is very little "real truth" circulating in the media these days.
All Obama is hoping to do is to dump the Iran nuclear potato into the hands of the next president. He showed in Syria he was not up to the tough challenges and always looks for the cut and run option. By then it'll be too late and Irran will have nuclear weapons. Of course, Israel will have a say in that. Saudi Arabia may be their best ally!
Get a grip, Lindsey. If Iran fails to live up to any new agreements, then we can consider new sanctions.
Meantime, it would be nice if we tried some diplomacy first. A somewhat agreeable Iran would make the whole region safer. Pro tip for neocons: we can't just go to war with Iran. Our allies won't support that, and the entire Muslim world will declare war on us.
There are a billion Muslims in the world, BTW.
@ "I just don't have enough faith in these people to follow the rules" writes S.B. Stein. But "these people" feels the same way about we the people. You betcha!
CNN and Fox will conduct a poll showing that the majority of Americans prefer a war with Iraq over any peaceful solution.
so is obama stil stating that iran will nlot be allowed to have nuclear weapons and that all options were on the table to ensure that did not happen? haven't heard him say that lately. i doubt all of our allies in the middle east are feeling to good this morning as the underside of the bus is clearly in view.
@ Tampa Tim
I agree. But first, CNN and Fox will conduct one anti-Obama message after another anti-Obama message. It is AFTER this that the anti-Obama polling begins.
It is the media's (Corporate America) method of pushing its "I told you so" message.
Senator Graham face it you are toast come 2014 just for once can you be honest with the American people, and tell it like you see it sir, you are not a wingnut you cannot be one don't matter how you try sir you are a moderate so can you stop the BS.
All Obama is hoping to do is to dump the Iran nuclear potato into the hands of the next president. He showed in Syria he was not up to the tough challenges and always looks for the cut and run option.
Obviously, you're totally unfamiliar with the agreement that the Bush administration signed with Iran in 2003. The Iranians agreed to all sorts of stuff, and then proceeded to break every promise they signed on to while the Bush administration did absolutely nothing. Nothing, despite having the American war machine running at full tilt in Iraq, the Bush administration did absolutely nothing while Iran built their first centrifuges.
Am I blaming Bush for the current state of Iran's nuclear program? Of course, I am. The last thing that Saddam Hussein wanted to see his neighboring rival do was to create a nuclear program. Saddam conducted regular bombing runs and raids to keep the Iranians at bay. Once the U.S. took out Saddam, the chack and balance on an Iranian nuclear program was removed. The Bush administration must have figured that they could conduct bombing raids into Iran, just like Saddam. The problem was, they couldn't do it without turning the entire region into war, which would have crippled the world's oil supplies.
War isn't the answer.
so is obama stil stating that iran will nlot be allowed to have nuclear weapons and that all options were on the table to ensure that did not happen? haven't heard him say that lately. i doubt all of our allies in the middle east are feeling to good this morning as the underside of the bus is clearly in view
The administration never once made that claim. That is simply a right wing, false talking point. Kerry was asked if the agreement contained language that dismantled the centrifuge program, and he replied by saying that there was no specific language to that effect in the interim agreement.
Kerry added that the current agreement contains a commitment by Iran to include language for curbing the centrifuge program in the next agreement. In other words, they have supposedly agreed to the idea in principle have accepted the fact that curbing their centrifuge program will be on the table to stay during the negotiations over the next six months.
Have to agree with Rudy. Bush destabilized the middle east by going to war, unnecessarily, with Iraq. I cannot blame Bush though, because he was so far in over his head, he only did what Cheney told him to.
Lindsay has to be the number one cheerleader for the right wing war machine.
According to the right wing war machine being upset that we are not in another war, I would ask, "Would the RWNJs feel better if Obama had started another unnecessary war with Iran?" If he did, Little Lindsay would be the first to come out and condemn the president.
Obviously, you're totally unfamiliar with the agreement that the Bush administration signed with Iran in 2003. The Iranians agreed to all sorts of stuff,
Of course nobody is familiar with it Rudy because it never happened! 2003 was the lead up to the Iraq war. There were no agreements with Iran concerning their nuclear program. Where do you get these lies? Time to put that bottle down.
Saddam conducted regular bombing runs and raids to keep the Iranians at bay. Once the U.S. took out Saddam, the chack and balance on an Iranian nuclear program was removed.
More total lies Rudy. Iran and Iraq fought in the 80's but there never were bombing runs against Iran nuclear facilities as nobody even knew they existed at the time (and probably did not exist!). Honestly Rudy, how much stuff can you lie about in one post?