Yes, but aside from the fact that imperial powers like the USA will use any pretext to start a war that it wants to start, this is different.
You see Iran, for a series of reasons, opposes the Israeli ethnic cleansing/nation building project. For that reason, Iran cannot be America's friend.
Iran reminds us that Israel has a regional monopoly on nuclear weapons and the American commitment to non-proliferation is not credible.
Iranian troops could easily dislodge Dae'sh from Iraq but that is not consistent with American goals of settling the West Bank and Jerusalem.
As far as this incident reminding us that the USA has spent billions upon billions of dollars protecting the flow of oil out of the Strait of Hormuz, it should also remind us that American voters have always rejected the easy, ecologically responsible solution to energy security: charge high excise taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel like the Nordic countries do.
The Nordic countries are interesting because they typically have higher per capita incomes and a better quality of life than the USA.
The USA charges the lowest excise taxes on dirty petroleum products among the rich-OECD countries.
It is interesting and rather alarming to what extent American conservatives, liberals and self-styled progressives are wed to the cheap energy entitlement — even if it means killing innocent civilians.
Early results in Iran’s hard-fought elections are showing strong gains for supporters of President Hassan Rouhani that could help promote greater opening to the west and limited political advances at home – and secure him a second term in office.
Friday’s polls for the parliament and the assembly of experts – its role is to choose the Islamic republic’s clerical supreme leader – were extended by nearly six hours due to a high turnout that was seen as likely to favour the reformist-moderate camp.
In one highly significant result, the former president, Ayatollah Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani – a key Rouhani ally – was leading the race for membership of the assembly in Tehran, the official IRNA news agency reported on Saturday.
The interior ministry said it had counted 33 million of 55 million votes by Saturday afternoon, though a final national tally is still unlikely to be known before Monday. The preliminary turnout figure was 60%, it said, less than the 70% that had been predicted.
Early returns showed that none of the competing factions would win a majority in the 290-seat majlis (parliament), but reformists and moderates appeared on track to win their strongest presence since 2004 at the expense of conservative “principalists”. Broader support in parliament would strengthen Rouhani’s hand – though under Iran’s hybrid political system key decisions still rest with the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Reports from the semi-official Fars and Mehr news agencies and a count conducted by the Associated Press showed the hardliners were the main losers of the vote. (...)
The result in Tehran – where, including the surrounding province, there are 36 majlis seats – will be closely watched because of its political importance. Nearly 5,000 candidates, including about 500 women, were competing.
I have actually changed my opinion on this so called deal, I support it. Now, this has nothing to do with the deal itself, it is a joke as I said before we cannot stop Iran from eventually getting the bomb short of all out war and most sane people do not want that (unfortunately many of the insane are in positions of power). The reason I support it is that the Iraninan people support it because contrary to neocons and the Murica Toby Keith crowd, the Persians actually like our culture and long to reconcile our differences even some in the hardline government. I have heard reports from Iran that the deal is all they want to talk about and are excited and more importantly emboldened to criticize their own hard line government now that they think we are trying to meet them half way. This is far more valuable than centrifuges and inspections. We are missing a golden opportunity to give the people of Iran hope which will hopefully light a fire under the resistance changing the government from within to something that is at least workable for a true relationship between our two countries. All those arguing for or against the deal based on the premise that Iran should never have nuclear weapons is completely missing the point imo.
That is a given and quite frankly irrelevant to stating this particular treaty has to be signed or we automatically have to capitulate to the neocons demands. Have we really disintigrated that much that we have no choice anymore? Sounds like the so called "progressives" are taking the same you are either with us or agin' us tone as the right wing neo cons and the with us is stopping Iran's nuclear weapon capability through treaties which is quite frankly not doable at this time. US needs to change it's policy and behavior in regards to the Middle East as a whole, not push faux meaningless treaties for political points that change absolutely nothing regarding Iranian overall behaviour in opposing evertyhing the US stands for. Until this is addressed, it is nothing but political posturing as Rome continues to burn.......
It's only irrelevant if you're willing to ignore the response of the (American) hardliners to the Iran agreement.
Uhm, it's been like that for a while... At least since 2003 (if not 2001). Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and as always the promise of the ultimate bellicose wet dream of them all, Iran.
Neocons are active in both parties. Hillary is just as hawkish.
Even Trump, the consummate bully, claims he would have gotten a better deal.
That is a given and quite frankly irrelevant to stating this particular treaty has to be signed or we automatically have to capitulate to the neocons demands. Have we really disintigrated that much that we have no choice anymore? Sounds like the so called "progressives" are taking the same you are either with us or agin' us tone as the right wing neo cons and the with us is stopping Iran's nuclear weapon capability through treaties which is quite frankly not doable at this time. US needs to change it's policy and behavior in regards to the Middle East as a whole, not push faux meaningless treaties for political points that change absolutely nothing regarding Iranian overall behaviour in opposing everything the US supports. Until this is addressed, it is nothing but political posturing as Rome continues to burn.......
The fact that the supporters of the Iran nuclear deal are stating that the only alternative to the treaty is war is alarming to say the least, these are the antiwar people?? How about this alternative; do nothing in regards to sanctions or treaties and stop our damaging, meddling Middle East policy that has been ongoing since the late 40s regarding Israel and the support of despotic dictators who have little regard for their own people? Even Bernie Sanders is pushing this ridiculous notion. This particular deal or war? That's it, huh? Who made up the rules regarding who is allowed or not allowed nuclear weapons anyway?
The fact that the supporters of the Iran nuclear deal are stating that the only alternative to the treaty is war is alarming to say the least, these are the antiwar people?? How about this alternative; do nothing in regards to sanctions or treaties and stop our damaging, meddling Middle East policy that has been ongoing since the late 40s regarding Israel and the support of despotic dictators who have little regard for their own people? Even Bernie Sanders is pushing this ridiculous notion. This particular deal or war? That's it, huh? Who made up the rules regarding who is allowed or not allowed nuclear weapons anyway?
Edit: for those who genuinely believe this deal prevents Iran from having a nuclear weapon, so sorry. Iran is laughing at us now, they got their cake (removal of sanctions) and get to eat it too (continuation of nuclear weapon development). My point is so what? MAD has worked for years and even with North Korea, do we really think that Iranians are that hell bent on Israel's destruction that they will sacrifice themselves? The whole thing is a joke.
Last week, at a crucial moment in nuclear negotiations between the U.S. and Iran, the New York Times published an op-ed by former U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton titled “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran.” As I pointed out at the time, the Times accidentally undermined him by linking one of his key claims to an explanation of why that claim was wrong. After I asked about it, the Times changed the link.
Bolton’s many other factual mistakes, detailed below, have also not been corrected — on top of which, Bolton failed to make a relevant disclosure about his paid work for a group that advocates the overthrow of the Iranian regime. It’s worth dwelling on these problems a bit given that Bolton’s perspective has a significant constituency in Congress — which could still derail the accord the White House is closing in on with the Iranians. (...)
Let's also not forget that anyone who'd dare say the same criminal nonsense about the US of A would likely end up on next Tuesday's kill list...
). The reason I support it is that the Iraninan people support it because contrary to neocons and the Murica Toby Keith crowd, the Persians actually like our culture and long to reconcile our differences even some in the hardline government. I have heard reports from Iran that the deal is all they want to talk about and are excited and more importantly emboldened to criticize their own hard line government now that they think we are trying to meet them half way. This is far more valuable than centrifuges and inspections. We are missing a golden opportunity to give the people of Iran hope which will hopefully light a fire under the resistance changing the government from within to something that is at least workable for a true relationship between our two countries. 
All those arguing for or against the deal based on the premise that Iran should never have nuclear weapons is completely missing the point imo.
