Regardless, no we're not tearing up the deal or bombing Iran. That kind of quagmire, the G(od) - E(mperor) hates, and the GOP has a very intense deathly fear of Middle Eastern quagmires. Bombing would just plunge the Middle East into chaos, forcing us to intervene (again) down the road.
The GE will bluster and bellow, but someone from NSC or the nearest remotely sane foreign policy hand will take him aside and in very slow monosyllables explain the consequences of tearing up the deal and refusing to engage Iran further.
At which point GE will simply shift to another topic to angrily tweet about. Maybe we'll insult Mozambique next. That would probably be the least offensive and most safest thing he could do at this point that he is capable of doing.
Right. Quickly issuing statements that they view the JCPOA as separate and as something that needs to be upheld is the tell.
New sanctions would not surprise me though
Assuming I follow you right ...
Yeah essentially. The Iranians will roll their eyes. The Obama strategy was the only logical and geopolitical wise rational strategy possible, really. Start up with sanctions, get them to the table, negotiate, and have this kind of deal as a result. Corker knows it too, which is why he didn't sign the Iran letter in 2015, among other things.
Our allies are not interested in engaging Iran militarily either. That's why the JCPOA is probably in effect. There will be bluster and chest beating but anything beyond that would provoke a military conflict that would end up possibly endangering the GOP so yeah. That's the tell, I agree.
Bibi will be deeply disappointed but the United States simply can't afford to get involved with bombs and the U.S. military.
