Grayson Iran support makes Senate race split clear
Thursday, September 10, 2015
With U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson's announcement Wednesday night that he will support the Iran nuclear deal, voters can see a clear split among Florida's U.S. Senate candidates between Republicans who hate the deal and Democrats who think it's the best option available.
Grayson announced that he reached his decision despite having little faith that the deal will do what the White House and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry have hypothesized. But, still, he implied in a statement he released Wednesday evening.
I wish that these negotiations had been used as a vehicle to bring peace to the region. But it’s too late for that now. The immediate question is a simple one: Is it more dangerous to have an agreement, or to have no agreement?" he stated.
"On the evidence I see, it’s more dangerous to have no agreement," he concluded. "So I will be voting in favor of the Iran nuclear agreement."
That puts him solidly in line with U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy, D-Jupiter, his Democratic foe in the primary race for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Florida. Two weeks ago Murphy outlined a different set of concerns than Grayson offered, but reached the same conclusion.
Expect the Republicans, U.S. Reps. Ron DeSantis of Ponte Vedra Beach and David Jolly of St. Petersburg; Lt. Gov. Carlos Lopez-Cantera; and Orlando businessman Todd Wilcox to attack Grayson's support as strongly as they did Murphy's. Each of them has taken staunch positions opposing the deal as something that strengthens Iran while doing virtually nothing to make the the United States or Israel safer from the threat of a nuclear-weaponized Iran.
Grayson laid out worst-case scenarios, some of which took aim at harsh Republican rhetoric. Here's the meat of his statement:
Scene 1: Congress rejects the deal. International sanctions fall apart immediately.
Scene 2: Without disabling any nuclear facilities, Iran receives the $55 billion in accounts receivable for its oil sales.
Scene 3: Iran ramps up oil production, adding another $20 billion in oil revenue per year.
Scene 4: The anti-Iran rhetoric of GOP Presidential candidates intensifies; several of them promise to bomb Iran before sundown on Inauguration Day, 2017.
Scene 5: Iran enriches uranium beyond 20%, and starts to build nuclear weapons, trying to finish just in time to celebrate the “Birth of the Prophet” (Dec. 28 this year, if you’re a Shi’ite)
Then there is a fork in the road:
Scene 6A: Iran builds several nuclear weapons, with the threat that they will be used in combat, or shared with allies like Hezbollah. A nuclear arms race breaks out in the Middle East.
Scene 6B: The United States goes to war against Iran, to try to destroy its nuclear facilities. Iran and its allies counterattack against U.S. interests, specifically including U.S. forces and “assets” in the region.
Scene 6C: Israel goes to war against Iran. The outcome is uncertain, and the possibility looms of perpetual war between two countries separated by two other countries, and a distance of 1000 miles.
For more information: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politics/os-alan-grayson-supports-iran-deal-20150910-post.html