Wait...the US is begging and the Iran lead negotiator is shouting per a source on the Iran side of the negotiations. Where is the weakness again?
The weakness is that Obama believes diplomacy is the most effective way to deal with Iran. They thank his efforts by humiliating the US on the world stage.
This is certainly an issue worthy of a serious look. Have the New York Times, Christian Science Monitor, the Wall Street Journal, LA Times, etc. had competent, objective journalists cover this? I tend to discount/distrust stuff coming from overtly biased websites, where news and opinion get blended like a smoothie.
So the point of your OP was to show that we've "fallen" because Iran says we're "begging" them for a nuke deal. And when someone counters with "consider the source," that's basically the end of the thread.
Horn6721, It certainly seems that way. It's bizarre when someone continues to disagree with ME about what MY point is.
The point was that you were using the statements of someone you admit you don't trust to lambaste the US negotiations. I fully understand that you don't feel we should be negotiating. Leveraging the statement above, from someone you don't trust, as an example of our weakness ("sad how far we've fallen") is a little bit absurd, don't you think? If you wanted an honest dialogue on US policy towards Iran I'm not sure starting with your first post was conducive to constructive dialogue. You staked out a position to mock the US strategy then when that was discredited you pivoted.
The situation is complicated. The elected government of Iran, feeling the people's pain from the sanctions, is willing to deal. The religious gov't of Iran, which has veto power and is supported by folks including this Revolutionary Guard general, are more insulated from the suffering. As ideologues they won't compromise, even if it makes sense. Curiously enough, the sanctions we've implemented are very effective at causing economic distress for the average Iranian.