Iran's deplorable record is not a reason to walk away. It is the very reason we must hammer out a iron-clad agreement to ensure Iran cannot get it's hands on a nuclear bomb.
What would I do in this circumstance? Cruising along at 34,000', checking the weather in Los Angeles, sipping on a club soda, and on the horizon, a new sun grows out of the desert, all the nearby air and dust fleeing before it? Easy. I'd freak -- the hell -- out.
It's not too late for LLNS (Bechtel and The Regents) to do the right thing by these dedicated workers. But whether or not they do, one thing's for sure. As one op -ed put it, "If ever there were a poster boy for privatization gone bad, this is it."
The Founding Fathers wrote an important role for Congress in foreign policymaking. I just wish some of them would read what their job responsibilities are, and, you know, be constitutional.
There are many questions these so-called hopefuls can be asked, but one can start with this: How can you be president if you applaud an unprecedented act interfering with the conduct of U.S. foreign policy?
The incredible spectacle of Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu's speech to Congress -- in which he appeared as much as the leader of the political opposition to the Obama administration as the head of government of an allied nation -- has come and gone but will reverberate for a long time.
As Netanyahu pointed out in Washington, the conclusion of the nuclear negotiations must be that Iran stops attacking other countries, renounces terror and ceases threatening the Jewish state of Israel with annihilation. If all three conditions are not met, there can be no deal. Because no deal is better than a bad deal.
Netanyahu has legitimate cause to sound the alarm about the threat Iran poses. His speech, however, will do little to improve the substance of any agreement. What is more injurious is his insinuation that Obama will accede to a "bad deal" even though it will be to Israel's detriment.
Nestled between apocalyptic references in Netanyahu's speech yesterday was the assertion that "the difficult road is the one less travelled." Ironically enough, in the Middle East, the road to war is well worn while diplomacy is the route everyone seems to miss.
We expect Congress to do everything in its power to avoid another war. Yet that is the path we will be on if members of Congress insist on disrupting and undermining the diplomatic process with Iran.
Mainstream society, especially on the Internet, has taken an enormous amount from the culture of espionage. We now routinely use multiple passwords, aliases, and disguises. We also employ a vast arsenal of techniques for both identification and deception
President Barack Obama made some progress on his agenda in his passage to India. But events in the Middle East and Washington demonstrated again how hamstrung his administration continues to be.
On Jan. 22, 2015 the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, in consultation with 17 Nobel Prize laureates adjusted the Doomsday Clock to three minutes to midnight.
A quarter century after the end of the Cold War and decades after the signing of landmark nuclear arms control and disarmament agreements, are the U.S. and Russian governments once more engaged in a potentially disastrous nuclear arms race with one another?
While "a New Cold War" has not yet been adopted as an official framework for US foreign and military policy, there are among foreign and military policy-makers many who will be tempted by its appeal. We should be circumspect about following them down this path.
Speaker Boehner is now using the policy debate on Iran as a crass political attack on the constitutional authority of the president of the United States. In the process, he does great damage to our national institutions, our efforts to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and the U.S.-Israeli alliance.