It’s amazing that today in America, land of self-governance and respect for the rule of law, the question still remains regarding what nation to trust in the Middle East.

On the one hand there’s Israel, that region’s only democracy.

On the other hand, there’s Iran, the global leader in exportation of terrorism.

Israel (democracy) is a nuclear power; Iran (terror-state) wants to be as well.

In a sane world, how is it we’re seeing a scenario play out where America’s leader admits to making a deal with the global exporter of terrorism… to go nuclear?

How is it an American president claims Congress has no right to get involved with negotiations, when negating Congress-invoked sanctions is part of the deal?

The most radical, raging anti-Semite among us must worry about a nuclear Iran.

Invoke the flaws of Israel if you must, but isn’t a flawed democracy preferable to a ‘trail-of-lies’ psychopathic terror-state given a path to nuclear capabilities?

Finally, left facing Obama’s ‘deal’ and the back of his hand, as Iran declares Israel’s destruction as non-negotiable, Israel’s choice is conventional preemption now…

…or nuclear deterrence in the very near future.

What possible logic refutes these bottom-line concepts?