Hikind On Iran Deal: This Is Chamberlain 1938 — Naive And Dangerous; A Total Capitulation


hikNew York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind (D-Brooklyn) voiced his vehement opposition to today’s signed agreement with Iran. “The agreement announced today with Iran, the world’s number one state sponsor of terrorism, is extraordinarily naive and dangerous. Based on initial reports, this is a total capitulation. The only winner is Iran. The deal essentially paves Iran’s path to a nuclear weapon,” said Hikind.

“This deal is about one thing only: President Obama’s legacy. The Middle East is in shambles. From Syria, Yemen, Egypt, Iraq, to the spread of ISIS, every one of this administration’s foreign policies has been an utter failure. Iran supports Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and other terror proxies globally, and continues to prop up the Assad regime in Syria. Just this past Friday, on Iran’s Al-Quds Day, we saw once again a mob burning American flags and chanting “Death to Israel, Death to America.” And who was participating in this vitriol display of hate? The “moderate” president of Iran, Hassan Rouhani. This is what Iran says before an agreement—can you imagine what will happen now that Iran stands to receive billions of dollars in frozen assets? Even more disturbing, the agreement removes sanctions on Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps chief Qasem Soleimani, who has the blood of Americans on his hands.”

Hikind added, “This is a repeat of Chamberlain’s 1938. You can tell a lot about this deal by who supports it: Putin and Assad. I call upon my colleagues in Congress to block this deal. Any agreement that empowers terrorism is a disaster. Iran will be laughing all the way to the bank, continuing to fund its terror activities, sowing instability in the Middle East, and harming U.S. national security interests around the world. We will be watching for a strong response from our representatives.”

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)


  1. This is very unfair to Chamberlain. He may have been justified in stalling since he saw war as inevitable and wanted more time to build up his military. His intelligence was faulty (Germany was more unprepared than Britain, and has Chamberlain called Hitler’s bluff it might have triggered a putsch that would have ended the Third Reich in 1938) – remember Britain didn’t break the German codes until 1940.

    In addition, Chamberlain was gambling with his own country, whereas Obama is gambling not with American lives (Iran is no threat to the US) but with the lives of both Israel and America’s Arab allies – all of whom are objecting.

    Comparing Obama to Chamberlain is very wrong – Obama is worse.

  2. So I guess Mr. Hikind will vote to void this Iran agreement. Oh, wait, he is a State Assemblyman, has nothing to do Iran or US foreign policy. But at least his pandering is in the right place.

  3. #3- Are you seriously belittling him and his concerns because he is not a member of the US Senate? Is no one but a US Senator allowed an opinion on these matters? The Israeli government and military and the great majority of the Orthodox Jews in the US and in Israel share these concerns.

  4. NfgGurnushtMitGurnisht,

    Your shtick dreq while state senator for Illinois had opinions too. Too bad they were all “present” and nothing substantial.

    Other than late term abortion, that he was for.

    Like i says, shtick dreq.

  5. time for the machers to put a full court press on all the jewish democrats including Chucky Shumer and the other liberals who will bend at the first bit of Obama pressure. no vote no money. where are the demonstrations by us yidden. we should have a 2 million man march to washington. lets get the pressure going.no time to waste.

  6. The point of #3 is that Mr. Hikind is not the voice of Torah Jewery.
    He may be a concerned nice guy, but not a Rabbi, or voice of a Religious Jewish entity. He is elected to voice the opinion of the residents of Boro Park in the city council of NYC, not to be the ambasader of Torah Jewery to the World.
    This does not meen to say I disagree or agree with his views on this matter.

  7. Correction
    Mr. Hikind is a state assymbllyman of NYS Senate.

    Does he still have ties with jdl, meir kahane, and extreme right wingers?

  8. akuperma: Valid point, except the Iran is a threat to the U.S. It is working on Ballistic missiles, it has submarines and ships that can shoot missiles and dirty bombs.

    Don’t think the U.S. is safe from harm. It is not and considering recent laws and Obama’s harming Israel, it is far more in danger than you want to believe.

  9. other than spending time with feel good comments on Yeshiva world how many of us are going to contact our elected representatives to pressure them to reject?

  10. Re comment no. 4: I am not belittling Mr. Hikind’s concerns about the Iran deal. I am belittling him and those of his supporters who fail to recognize that as a New York State Assemblyman, he has no jurisdiction over US foreign policy. There are serious problems in Brooklyn which Mr. Hikind should address, but for some reason, he prefers to address issues over which he has no authority, and his supporters think he is wise to do so. Portions of the electorate outside Boro Park, including one very small portion, i.e., me, consider it laughable that foreign affairs loom so large in strictly local political contests. What has Mr. Hikind done to make housing more affordable for his constituents? What has he done to keep their streets clean, and their hospitals? Maybe he has done plenty, but he campaigns like he is running for Secretary of State.

  11. nfgo3:

    You just haven’t gotten over the fact, that Caller was handily beaten by Hikind. You’ve got to move on. To criticize him for his outspoken support of Israel, where others have failed, is absurd. You are just a blind supporter & walk in lockstep of everything the Kenyan says or does.

  12. Re comment no. 12: First of all, I have no idea who “Caller” is, or what he/she does or does not stand for. What is wrong with my criticism of Mr. Hikind and his supporters for his focus on matters over which he has no authority. My point is, Mr. Hikind should focus on what he can do for his constituents, and his constituents should do likewise.