Follow us on social

38720969890_32c56e3fc3_o-scaled

Anti-Iran deal think tank promotes poll finding Americans support it

The conspiracy-theory prone Center for Security Policy isn't doing its effort to prevent a return to the JCPOA any favors.

Reporting | Middle East

The Center for Security Policy — a controversial hawkish think tank led by conspiracy theorist Frank Gaffney — has been at the forefront of the anti-Iran nuclear deal campaign. CSP even received a $60,000 donation from an AIPAC affiliated group as part of that campaign back in 2015 to work against President Obama’s diplomatic efforts and the organization more recently has, for example, said the Biden administration should walk away from the negotiations to re-enter the JCPOA.

That’s why it’s a bit odd that CSP promoted a new poll last week finding that many of Americans support it.

A CSP article touted the poll it conducted in conjunction with TIPP as finding that “Americans overwhelmingly support a congressional review of a new Iran deal,” as the headline blared (a finding that isn’t all that significant seeing that it’s largely expected that Congress will indeed review any potential re-entry agreement).

But buried in the article, CSP noted that the same poll also found that a significant majority of those polled who said they are “closely” following news about the accord support rejoining the deal:

38% of respondents are “closely” following stories related to the Iran deal, while 53% are not. … 62% of those following the story support joining the deal, while 33% oppose it.

The reality at this point is that re-joining the Iran nuclear deal isn’t a matter of whether it will prevent Iran from building a nuclear weapon — we already know that the empirical evidence shows that it will.

The main issue now as to whether the Biden administration re-joins the JCPOA appears to be a political one, and all CSP is doing here is reminding people that Americans support doing just that.

Frank Gaffney, Founder and Executive Chairman of the Center for Security Policy (Photo: Gage Skidmore)
Reporting | Middle East
Why American war and election news coverage is so rotten
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. | Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. speaking wit… | Flickr

Why American war and election news coverage is so rotten

Media


Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.”

keep readingShow less
Peter Thiel: 'I defer to Israel'

Peter Thiel attends the annual Allen and Co. Sun Valley Media Conference in Sun Valley, Idaho, U.S., July 6, 2022. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid

Peter Thiel: 'I defer to Israel'

QiOSK

The trouble with doing business with Israel — or any foreign government — is you can't really say anything when they do terrible things with technology that you may or may not have sold to them, or hope to sell to them, or hope to sell in your own country.

Such was the case with Peter Thiel, co-founder of Palantir Technologies, in this recently surfaced video, talking to the Cambridge Union back in May. See him stumble and stutter and buy time when asked what he thought about the use of Artificial Intelligence by the Israeli military in a targeting program called "Lavender" — which we now know has been responsible for the deaths of an untold number of innocent Palestinians since Oct 7. (See investigation here).

keep readingShow less
Are budget boosters actually breaking the military?

Committee chairman Jack Reed (D-RI), left, looks on as co-chair Roger Wicker (R-MS) shakes hands with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin before a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on President Biden's proposed budget request for the Department of Defense on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., April 9, 2024. REUTERS/Amanda Andrade-Rhoades

Are budget boosters actually breaking the military?

Military Industrial Complex

Now that both political parties have seemingly settled upon their respective candidates for the 2024 presidential election, we have an opportune moment to ask a rather fundamental question about our nation’s defense spending: how much is enough?

Back in May, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, penned an op-ed in the New York Times insisting the answer was not enough at all. Wicker claimed that the nation wasn’t prepared for war — or peace, for that matter — that our ships and fighter-jet fleets were “dangerously small” and our military infrastructure “outdated.” So weak our defense establishment and so dangerous the world right now, Wicker pressed, the nation ought to “spend an additional $55 billion on the military in the 2025 fiscal year.”

keep readingShow less

Israel-Gaza Crisis

Latest

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.