Ah, I love it when the bodies of my enemy float serenely by on the river as I sit on its bank, have a leisurely lunch, and admire the view. Pass the potato water.
Schadenfreude.
All of the years of Obama’s nefarious, biased, corrupt, America-hating policies are and will be exposed, one amoral, venal and shocking incident at a time. It is the tip of the proverbial Obama Iceberg. There is oh-so-much-more-buttery Obama corruption yet to be revealed. Bank on it.
Report: Obama ‘Derailed’ DEA Probe into Hezbollah in Latin America to Save Iran Deal
by Edwin Mora
Former U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration “derailed” a DEA operation targeting Hezbollah’s multi-million-dollar drug trafficking activities in Latin America to secure approval of the controversial Iran nuclear deal, reports Politico.
Iran’s narco-terrorist proxy Hezbollah is involved in a plethora of criminal activities in Latin America, ranging from money laundering to massive drug trafficking.
Wait. What?
For years, the U.S. military has been sounding the alarm on the threat against the United States posed by the presence of Iran and Hezbollah in America’s backyard — Latin America.
The secret backstory of how Obama let Hezbollah off the hook
by Josh Meyer
An ambitious U.S. task force targeting Hezbollah’s billion-dollar criminal enterprise ran headlong into the White House’s desire for a nuclear deal with Iran.
In its determination to secure a nuclear deal with Iran, the Obama administration derailed an ambitious law enforcement campaign targeting drug trafficking by the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah, even as it was funneling cocaine into the United States, according to a POLITICO investigation.
So, wait. Did Americans perchance expire but upon drug overdoses that Mr Obama could have stemmed had he been motivated to do so? Likely deaths and overdoses in the minority communities most seriously impacted by drugs?
The campaign, dubbed Project Cassandra, was launched in 2008 after the Drug Enforcement Administration amassed evidence that Hezbollah had transformed itself from a Middle East-focused military and political organization into an international crime syndicate that some investigators believed was collecting $1 billion a year from drug and weapons trafficking, money laundering and other criminal activities.
Hezbollah dealing drugs in Mexico and shipping said product into the US? And anyone would possibly want to stop our fight against this because. . . ?
Over the next eight years, agents working out of a top-secret DEA facility in Chantilly, Virginia, used wiretaps, undercover operations and informants to map Hezbollah’s illicit networks, with the help of 30 U.S. and foreign security agencies.
Sounds like a serious, detailed and extensive, expensive op to me.
They followed cocaine shipments, some from Latin America to West Africa and on to Europe and the Middle East, and others through Venezuela and Mexico to the United States. They tracked the river of dirty cash as it was laundered by, among other tactics, buying American used cars and shipping them to Africa. And with the help of some key cooperating witnesses, the agents traced the conspiracy, they believed, to the innermost circle of Hezbollah and its state sponsors in Iran.
Doing their job. Their DEA job. The job they trained for at Quantico, along with the FBI — the only two federal agencies that train at Quantico.
But as Project Cassandra reached higher into the hierarchy of the conspiracy, Obama administration officials threw an increasingly insurmountable series of roadblocks in its way, according to interviews with dozens of participants who in many cases spoke for the first time about events shrouded in secrecy, and a review of government documents and court records. When Project Cassandra leaders sought approval for some significant investigations, prosecutions, arrests and financial sanctions, officials at the Justice and Treasury departments delayed, hindered or rejected their requests.
Thank God. For a moment.there I was afraid real transparency and justice might have emerged during the Obama administration.
The Justice Department declined requests by Project Cassandra and other authorities to file criminal charges against major players such as Hezbollah’s high-profile envoy to Iran, a Lebanese bank that allegedly laundered billions in alleged drug profits, and a central player in a U.S.-based cell of the Iranian paramilitary Quds force. And the State Department rejected requests to lure high-value targets to countries where they could be arrested.
After all, national security clearly took a back seat to Obama’s “legacy” and how he was to be perceived by the public.
You doubt that? Read this:
“This was a policy decision, it was a systematic decision,” said David AsherDavid AsherVeteran U.S. illicit finance expert sent from Pentagon to Project Cassandra to attack the alleged Hezbollah criminal enterprise., who helped establish and oversee Project Cassandra as a Defense Department illicit finance analyst. “They serially ripped apart this entire effort that was very well supported and resourced, and it was done from the top down.”
Let’s be serious. Hezbollah isn’t really that dangerous anyway. Right?
A confidential DEA assessment from that period concluded that Hezbollah’s business affairs entity “has leveraged relationships with corrupt foreign government officials and transnational criminal actors … creating a network that can be utilized to move metric ton quantities of cocaine, launder drug proceeds on a global scale, and procure weapons and precursors for explosives.”
Some top U.S. military officials shared those concerns, including the four-star generals heading U.S. Special Operations and Southern commands, who warned Congress that Hezbollah’s criminal operations and growing beachhead in Latin America posed an urgent threat to U.S. security, according to transcripts of the hearings.
National security vs Obama’s agenda of “looking cool”? I know which of those wins, hands down. Check this out:
“The FBI and other parts of the USG [U.S. government] provide a little or no assistance during our investigations,” (DEA Agent John) Kelly wrote in an email. “The USG lack of action on this issue has allowed [Hezbollah] to become one of the biggest transnational organized crime groups in the world.”
Then:
As a result, “We were making concessions (to Iran) that had never been made before, which is outrageous to anyone in the agency,” the former intelligence officer said, adding that the orders from Washington especially infuriated CIA officers in the field who knew that Hezbollah “was still doing assassinations and other terrorist activities.”
As expected, the administration’s final report, which remains classified, significantly downplayed Hezbollah’s operational links to drug trafficking, which in turn further marginalized the DEA’s role in fighting it, according to a former Justice Department official and others familiar with the report.
Once the Obama administration left office, in January 2017, the logjam of task force cases appeared to break, and several task force members said it wasn’t a coincidence.
And that is how your loving Barack Hussein Obama ran the US government. It, as ever, was only about one thing: Obama himself.
Turf battles, especially the institutional conflict between law enforcement and intelligence agencies, contributed to the demise of Project Cassandra, Maltz said. But many Project Cassandra agents insist the main reason was a political choice to prioritize the Iranian nuclear agreement over efforts to crack down on Hezbollah.
There will be more revelations about what actually occurred during the Obama regime. This is just the tip of the Obama Iceberg.
U.S. Launches Missiles at Syrian Base Over Chemical Weapons Attack
by Kourtney Kube, Alex Johnson, Hallie Jackson, Alexander Smith
The United States fired 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at Syria overnight in response to what it believes was a chemical weapons attack that killed more than 100 people.
At least six people were killed, Syria claimed, but the Pentagon said civilians were not targeted and the strike was aimed at a military airfield in Homs.
All but one of the missiles hit their intended target, one U.S. military official told NBC News. The other missile failed.
The strike completed a policy reversal for President Donald Trump — who once warned America to stay out of the conflict — and drew angry responses from Damascus and its main ally, Russia.
Half truth. Again the American Media Maggots are either purposely misleading you, or are ignorant, or both. Syria has two very important allies: Iran and Russia.
The missiles were launched from the USS Ross and the USS Porter in the Mediterranean Sea toward Shayrat Airfield. American officials believe it was used by the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad to carry out a strike on Tuesday involving chemical weapons that resulted in the deaths of more than 100 people.
“We have a very high level of confidence that the attacks were carried out by aircraft under the direction of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, and we also have very high confidence that the attacks involved the use of sarin nerve gas,” Tillerson said.
This is not an uncomplicated situation and the players are many and ever-changing.
The truth is this: we didn’t necessarily target the airfield; we instead targeted aircraft, their hardened shelters and fueling stations. A point. One Tomahawk malfunctioned and spent itself into the sea. Funny thing: the US Navy wants to stop buying Tomahawks in the next few years (to the tune of $1.4 million dollars each). The USN, by the way, has 4,000 Tomahawk missiles, built by Raytheon.
The confusing aspect of President Trump’s action is its reaction from the Republicans, the Demorats, Trump voters and military analysts. It’s all over the map. Many reactions are not what one would nominally expect.
Some people feel betrayal because President Trump has said he is not the “president of the world.” On the heels of that statement he has intervened in Syria; his first military response.
Not anticipated by me was the response by the American Media Maggots. Many outlets praised the attack.
But wait. Aren’t these the same American Media Maggots who have been screeching from the tallest towers that President Trump was a stooge for Russia and Vladimir Putin? It doesn’t seem to me that Moscow would be pleased with the attack and, of course, it wasn’t. Wait; doesn’t Moscow = Putin?
The AMM said this about those who opposed it:
Politico.com called those opposed to the attack “Trump’s troll army” and “racists” and “conspiracy mongers”;
The New York Times called oppo members a “small but influential white nationalist movement”;
The Washington Post said the attack’s critics hold “racist, anti-Semitic and sexist” views;
Again, I can sum up those articles best by quoting Monty Python: “you’re a loon.”
Speaking of which, as I mentioned, there were those who continued to insist on making the linkage between President Trump and Russia despite the total lack of evidence and subsequent denial from US intelligence agencies. Our good “you’re a loon” buddy Lawrence O’Donnell weighs in with a Moonbat Theory: what if Vladimir Putin planned the Syrian gas attack in order to assist his great friend, President Donald Trump?
Fear not, for we not only have a civilian Trump/Russia conspiracist, but an elected government official as a Trump/Russia conspiracist, Representative Seth Moulton (6th District, Massachusetts) spoke with Tucker Carlson Monday night.
An elected representative saying something like this is akin to Rep Hank Johnson saying that Guam could capsize because of extra weight.
There are those, however, who believe the attack was illegal as no declaration of war was made by Congress. This is patently false. I remind folks of the fact that Obama operated that way for, literally, all eight years of his regime and was never told he required Congressional approval for the drone and missile strikes he ordered. Even Left-leaning PolitiFact stated that Trump had the authority to conduct his strike under Article 2 of the US Constitution.
Since the last time Congress declared war, at the beginning of World War II, presidents have generally initiated military activities using their constitutionally granted powers as commander in chief without having an official declaration of war in support of their actions.
Even under the War Powers Resolution, the president can send in forces without approval from Congress.
Lower courts have ruled in favor of the White House in the use of force, and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal on that po
Some said President Trump should have come before Congress and made his case in public. One thing we do know about Trump is this: he doesn’t much care to advertise coming actions. Logically so, in terms of military strategy.
These are the same people, interestingly enough, who said President Bush’s movement into Iraq was fallacious and that Saddam Hussein was not in possession of WMD materials despite the fact that an article in the New York Times indicated the opposite. An article in PowerLine also supported the conclusion of the Times.
Further, some said that Saddam Hussein moved his WMD materials prior to the invasion and had them transported to Syria. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz believed so in 2003. Somehow I think people now more clearly understand that nexus.
But wait; wasn’t it Susan Rice and John Kerry who unequivocally declared that because of the tireless work they did to eliminate all chemical weapons from Syria under Barack Hussein Obama, “the entirety of the declared stockpile was removed.”
Hmm. It would appear Susan Rice lied about Benghazi. She lied about Bowe Bergdahl, that he had served with “honor and distinction.” She lied about the unmasking of names. And apparently she lied about the chemical stockpile in Syria. Here she is in an NPR interview, January 16th.
I’m of the mindset that if Susan Rice stated the sun would rise in the east tomorrow morning, I’d be suspicious.
Many people consistently bleat that political solutions and diplomatic negotiations must occur when potential conflicts arise. Like the prior administration and its occupants and sycophants. The problem with that theory is that none of it can exist absent military credibility.
The US needed to re-establish military credibility in the Middle East, lost as it was under the previous eight years under Barack Hussein Obama, and Trump demonstrated that credibility with that Syrian strike. He also set forth the doctrine that the words of a US president now have consequences.
John Kerry and Susan Rice under Obama became absolutely convinced that Assad had surrendered all of his chemical weapons which, clearly, he hadn’t. Even PolitiFact has revised and retracted its insistence that the US removed “100%” of Syria’s chemical weapons. The meme then was:
“We struck a deal where we got 100 percent of the chemical weapons out,” then-Secretary of State John Kerry said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” in July 2014. Kerry was referring to a deal the U.S. and Russia struck in September 2013 in which the Russians agreed to help confiscate and then destroy Syria’s entire chemical weapons stockpile.
Some people are insisting it was a false flag event. Like VA Senator Richard Black.
Will President Bashar Al-Assad gas his people again? We know he could, as he clearly has access to chemical agents despite the claim that more than 1,300 to 1,400 tons of it had been eliminated. We also know that Al-Assad’s Syrian military is hurting. He hasn’t much of an air force remaining to speak of, his army pretty much doesn’t exist, and that accounts for his need for mercenaries and conscripts from Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq — primarily because Syrians won’t fight for him.
Let’s not forget, however, that Al-Assad does have Iran working for him. He has the support of the Quds force, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards corps, Hezbollah and Russia, who stepped into Syria two years ago under the guise of fighting ISIS.
DefenseOne.com had any number of interesting articles on the Syrian missile strike. One of them was “Seven Disturbing Implications of Trump’s Syria Strike” by David Frum of The Atlantic. Ahem. A Left-leaning journal.
Trump’s Words Mean Nothing
Trump Does Not Give Reasons
Trump Does Not Care About Legality
Trump Disregards Government Processes
Trump Has No Allies
Trump Envisions No End State
Trump Is Lucky in His Opponents
Concurrently, a contrasting article from The Atlantic by Tom Malinowski stated:
America Should Have Hit Assad Four Years Ago
When dealing with mass killing, deterrence is more effective than disarmament.
Donald Trump is president; he now bears full responsibility for addressing the tragedy in Syria, and for the consequences of the response he has chosen. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t reflect on America’s response to the Assad regime’s previous chemical weapons attacks—for how we interpret the difficult and debatable choice the Obama administration (in which I served) made not to use military force when Assad last used nerve gas against his people will shape our thinking about this and similar crises for a long time to come. The lesson I would draw from that experience is that when dealing with mass killing by unconventional or conventional means, deterrence is more effective than disarmament.
An earth-shaking conclusion from a Leftist.
Now let’s get into the weeds. The weeds that need to be examined, and the weeds that western media and the American Media Maggots refuse to appraise.
That of the involvement of the Middle Eastern version of Islam itself. You cannot understand Islam until you understand the two most fundamental divisions in Islam. And why this Islamic quote is accurate:
Me against my brother. Me and my brother against my cousin. Me and my brother and my cousin against the tribe. Me and my brother and my cousin and my tribe against the outsider.
Let’s state the obvious:
Islam breaks itself down into two distinct camps: Sunni vs Shite.
What are the fundamental yet apparently unrecoverable differences between the two camps?
As clearly explained as I could make. Yet it’s all worth dying for.
Books I continue to highly recommend regarding the Middle Eastern version of Islam, are
One must read what one proclaims to not understand, until there is a grasp of what is extant. Surprises frequently hide in plain sight. So it is with Islam. Weeds, meet reality.
Let me break things down for you in the Middle East, so you can easily understand.
Sunni Islam (ISIS) hates Iranians (Shia);
Sunni Arabs were responsible for 9/11;
Iran = Shia, the largest number of Shiites in the world;
Saudi Arabia = mostly Sunni; Shiites are a minority;
Syria = mostly Sunni;
ISIS = ISIL = Daesh = Sunni = Wahabbist;
Iran is predominantly helping and funding Syria. Iran = Shia and ISIS = Sunni.
It’s ISIS vs Assad.
And the US is fighting both. We are also arming a third force — a “rebel force” — which has ties to al Qaeda.
Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad is a puppet of Iran. And Russia.
Saudi Arabia will not accept giving Damascus (Syria) over to Iran.
As long as Assad is in power neither ISIS nor al Qaeda can be destroyed.
Assad is backed by Iran and Russia.
Russia provides military equipment to Iran. Including missile sites.
I ask again: is the US fighting a proxy war? And for whom? Iran? Saudi Arabia?
Why not simply let Iran (Shiite) and ISIS (Sunni) battle it out?
I repeat:
Me against my brother. Me and my brother against my cousin. Me and my brother and my cousin against the tribe. Me and my brother and my cousin and my tribe against the outsider.
One could look at it this way: ISIS = Germany and Assad = Japan. They are both Axis powers.
You see how clear and obvious things are now? How the clouds have parted for you?
Or perhaps these issues are even more muddied than before you started reading this post. Entirely possible.
Why Tehran hates Isis: how religious rifts are fueling conflict
The alliance between Iran and Syria might seem an unlikely one. As Iran is an Islamic republic, one might not expect its closest ally to be a dictatorship that grew out of the political doctrine of Baathism, a secular Arab nationalist movement that originated in the 1930s and 1940s. But politics – and perhaps especially the politics of relations between states – develops its own logic, which often has little to do with ideology. Baathism advocated Arab unity but two of its founding fathers, Michel Aflaq and Zaki al-Arsuzi, both Syrians, disliked each other and would not be members of the same party.
Projects to fuse Syria and Egypt and, later, Syria and Iraq foundered, creating in the latter case a personal bitterness between Bashar al-Assad’s father, Hafez, and Saddam Hussein, though both were Baathists, at least nominally. That led to the two states breaking off diplomatic relations with each other at the end of 1979. When Iraq invaded Iran the following year, Syria and Iran became allies against Iraq. Syria cut off an oil pipeline that had allowed Iraq to export its oil from a Mediterranean port and Iran supplied Syria with cheap oil.
Stop. Do you see some things more clearly?
The Middle Eastern version of Islam, as practiced, is founded in barbarity, cruelty, nomads, bedouins. They do not recognize the lines as ascribed to their countries by western civilizations. Iranians are Persians. They are not Arabs. Never confuse a Persian with an Arab. Both will slit your carotid for doing so.
Then there is another distinguishing element to be revealed.
Even within Syria there are divisions within divisions, wheels within wheels. From the ThoughtCo.com:
The Difference Between Alawites and Sunnis in Syria
by Primoz Manfreda
Why is there Sunni-Alawite tension in Syria?
The differences between Alawites and Sunnis in Syria have sharpened dangerously since the beginning of the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad, whose family is Alawite. The reason for tension is primarily political, rather than religious: top position in Assad’s army are held by Alawite officers, while most of the rebels from the Free Syrian Army come from Syria’s Sunni majority.
Sufficiently confused yet?
Geographical Presence: Alawites are a Muslim minority group that accounts for around 12% of Syria’s population, with a few small pockets in Lebanon and Turkey (though not to be confused with Alevis, a Turkish Muslim minority). Around 70% of Syrians belongs to Sunni Islam, as does almost 90% of all Muslims in the world).
Historical Alawite heartlands lie in the mountainous hinterland of Syria’s Mediterranean coast in the country’s west, next to the coastal city of Latakia. Alawites form the majority in Latakia province, although the city itself is mixed between Sunnis, Alawites and Christians. Alawites also have a sizeable presence in the central province of Homs and in the capital Damascus.
Doctrinal Differences: Alawites practice a unique but little known form of Islam that dates back to the 9th and 10th century. Its secretive nature is an outcome of centuries of isolation from the mainstream society and periodical persecution by the Sunni majority.
BAGHDAD — Whether a person is a Shiite or a Sunni Muslim in Iraq can now be, quite literally, a matter of life and death.
As the militant group the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, or ISIS, has seized vast territories in western and northern Iraq, there have been frequent accounts of fighters’ capturing groups of people and releasing the Sunnis while the Shiites are singled out for execution.
ISIS believes that the Shiites are apostates and must die in order to forge a pure form of Islam. The two main branches of Islam diverge in their beliefs over who is the true inheritor of the mantle of the Prophet Muhammad. The Shiites believe that Islam was transmitted through the household of the Prophet Muhammad. Sunnis believe that it comes down through followers of the Prophet Muhammad who, they say, are his chosen people.
This isn’t a matter of the “big picture” like the previous administration. Things now get down to very specific details.
But how can ISIS tell whether a person is a Sunni or a Shiite? From accounts of people who survived encounters with the militants, it seems they often ask a list of questions. Here are some of them:
What is your name?
Where do you live?
How do you pray?
What kind of music do you listen to?
Back to reality. During President Trump’s first outright military action, let’s be honest. Not much occurred. Thousands didn’t perish. Hundreds didn’t perish. Dozens didn’t perish.
However, there occurred the customary posturing anticipated.
How about we try to do this: keep American boots from smacking Syrian dirt. Strike as necessary. Attempt to build a global consensus to give Syria back to Syrians. And then provide an incentive for Syrians in Europe to 1) go back home, and 2) not leave in the first place. That would include safe zones in Syria. Because the fewer Muslims in western countries, the easier it becomes to identify ISIS and its corruptive elements. And, well, because true Islam and Sharia is completely incongruent with western values.
But have we been duped into fighting a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, of Sunni vs Shiite?
This is President Trump’s first test, militarily. He has both pleased and displeased. Overall, to this point, I submit that he has not been found wanting.
All of that said, delineated and extrapolated, here is what I believe occurred with regard to President Trump and the Syrian missile attack. His daughter Ivanka pressed for this and, once Trump saw the photos and video of dead and injured civilians, women and children, he reacted. Emotionally.
What I also believe is that his generals and advisers were in congruence with this thinking because it didn’t remove President Trump from the mainstream of a limited and coordinated response. It served everyone’s purpose.
This is both assuring and disturbing, simultaneously.
Yes, the persons who continue to advocate “death to America” and, now, send Twitter messages about Obama committing suicide.
Is this not absolute insanity unbridled? Why do we negotiate with the mentally unbalanced, those persons who have not and will not hold to treaties and agreements?
With this issue and that of Planned Parenthood, I become more convinced that I am inhabiting some sort of alternate reality from my worst nightmares.
Then I wake up and read the news for another day.
BZ
P.S.
Blogging intermittent due to issues with forest fires in my area; see my prior posts for Saturday and Sunday.
And that quote is from his supporters regarding Iranian negotiations.
Imagine what his detractors are saying. Like myself and others.
This president is having his house fall all about his shoulders, but few are noticing because his water-carriers, the American Media Maggots, are shielding him continuously like the good lap doggies they promised to be at the outset. GOWPs and the AMM, have shielded and protected Obama to the point where their credulity is now mostly lost.
Even Marie Harf, the Department of State Flack, has to “explain” what Obaka really meant. From CNSNews.com:
State Dep’t Clarifies Obama’s ‘Muddled’ Words on Iran Nuclear Breakout Time
by Patrick Goodenough
(CNSNews.com) – President Obama appeared to concede this week that under a final nuclear deal, Iran — after 13 or so years — would be able to build a nuclear bomb quickly if it chooses to do so. But State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf insisted later that the words had been misread.
Of course. The words have been “misread.”
Harf told a daily briefing that Obama’s words “were a little mixed up” and “a little muddled,” saying they had referred to a hypothetical state of affairs in which an agreement had not been reached, rather than the situation as it will be in 13 years’ time under a negotiated agreement.
This is Marie Harf, the most ignorant glassesed bint on a current elevated government pedestal, quoting Barack Hussein Obama as “a little mixed up” and “a little muddled”? And this is support?
“Open confusion” reigned today at the State Department after spokeswoman Marie Harf tried to withdraw a quote from President Barack Obama regarding Iran’s nuclear breakout time, advocacy group The Israel Project said.
In the interview with NPR’s Steve Inskeep, the President acknowledged that, after year 13, the current deal being worked out with Iran would not provide the international community with the promised 1-year warning should Iran decide to violate the deal and go for a nuclear weapon.
Details details details. And on whom do these details fall? Who wins, who loses?
Check out this article written by Henry Kissinger and George Shultz at WSJ.com.
NewsMax.com provides the article as an alternate, because the WSJ mandates a subscription and I won’t pay for internet sources. I may provide dead links to you, but never at my own choosing. And if I find dead links, I do my best to provide alternatives. As I do now:
Kissinger, Shultz: Iran Deal Likely to Deepen US Involvement
The recently announced framework agreement on Iran’s nuclear program is more likely to increase American involvement in the Middle East rather than decrease it, former Republican Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and George P. Shultz write in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.
In the 2,000-word piece posted on the Journal’s website on Tuesday night, Kissinger and Shultz wrote that “Rather than enabling American disengagement from the Middle East, the nuclear framework is more likely to necessitate deepening involvement there — on complex new terms.”
Meaning: in over six years, there is still no one sitting at the Adult’s Table in the Obama Administration.
Since the number of Iran’s centrifuges have jumped from 100 at the start of talks 12 years ago to almost 20,000 today, “The threat of war now constrains the West more than Iran,” the former secretaries wrote. “While Iran treated the mere fact of its willingness to negotiate as a concession, the West has felt compelled to break every deadlock with a new proposal.”
Now, Iran’s program is within two to three months of building a nuclear weapon.
“In a large country with multiple facilities and ample experience in nuclear concealment, violations will be inherently difficult to detect,” they said. “Devising theoretical models of inspection is one thing. Enforcing compliance, week after week, despite competing international crises and domestic distractions, is another.”
Damn them for daring to speak and write the truth. As Caucasoids, Kissinger and Schultz must be racists, not senior analysts.
Now, Iran’s program is within two to three months of building a nuclear weapon.
“In a large country with multiple facilities and ample experience in nuclear concealment, violations will be inherently difficult to detect,” they said. “Devising theoretical models of inspection is one thing. Enforcing compliance, week after week, despite competing international crises and domestic distractions, is another.”
And Iran has been completely forthcoming with current and past IAEA demands? Allowed inspectors in?
Uh. No. Not even remotely.
Past behavior is the best predictor of future performance or the lack thereof.
A wonderful “out”:
Another wrench thrown into the gears is the means of enforcement, “which provides Iran permanent relief from sanctions in exchange for temporary restraints on Iranian conduct,” Kissinger and Shultz said.
Further:
Kissinger and Shultz also attack the idea of a nuclear umbrella provided to Iran’s Arab neighbors by the United States.
“Are the guarantees extended against the use of nuclear weapons — or against any military attack, conventional or nuclear? Is it the domination by Iran that we oppose or the method for achieving it?” they say. “What if nuclear weapons are employed as psychological blackmail?”
The central argument and paragraph:
“If the world is to be spared even worse turmoil, the U.S. must develop a strategic doctrine for the region,” they argue. “Stability requires an active American role. For Iran to be a valuable member of the international community, the prerequisite is that it accepts restraint on its ability to destabilize the Middle East and challenge the broader international order.”
Let’s be frank: Barack Hussein Obama couldn’t negotiate himself or his loved ones out of a paper bag.
What makes anyone think BHO could make any cogent negotiation?
Iran Triumphant: Nuclear Deal Capitulates To Nearly All Iranian Demands
by John Hayward
A beaming Iranian foreign minister emerged from the meeting rooms in Switzerland to announce that all of the theocracy’s major demands had been met. According to the new provisions released on the nuclear deal, Iran will get to both keep active its centrifuges and receive sanctions relief.
That Obama, what a hard-nosed negotiator by way of John Kerry! And I’m sure the foreign minister was beaming because Iran bent the US over completely, insisting we grab our ankles and cough.
The State Department has released a “fact sheet” highlighting the various points of the deal. Sanctions against will be lifted immediately, and probably forever. Iran gets to keep a huge number of its nuclear centrifuges spinning, including a thousand of them at the previously hidden and illegal fortified bunker of Fordo, which is supposed to become a “peaceful” nuclear, physics, technology, and research center. There are sunset provisions on everything Iran has tentatively agreed to, although in his Rose Garden press conference announcing the deal, Obama claimed they would somehow be “permanently” blocked from various forms of weapons development.
If you want to have a little bit of throw-up in your mouth, finish the rest of the article.
Capitulation, thy name is Barack “Neville” Obamerlain.
Ah, I love it when the bodies of my enemy float serenely by on the river as I sit on its bank, have a leisurely lunch, and admire the view. Pass the potato water.
Was President Trump right or was he wrong?
