November 25, 2013

Surrender Monkeys

Saturday, November 23, 2013 is a day that will likely live in infamy. It was the day that the United States of America struck a deal with the world's #1 sponsor of terrorism, Iran.

On the foolishness of the deal, you can read below. But we’d like to point out some historic similarities, for it looks like 1938 all over again. 

That was the year the Munich Agreement was signed at a conference between world powers and Hitler’s Nazi Germany. This was the agreement that offered up Czechoslovakia (who, btw, was not invited to take part in the conference) as sacrificial lamb to Hitler's war machine. Following the conference and upon his return home, then British PM Neville Chamberlain waved the agreement in front of cheering crowds, and declared “peace in our time!”

Well, we all know how that worked out. And yet it was only two days ago that the President of the United States and his Secretary of State (the man who once called Syria’s genocidal ruler, Bashar Assad, a great “reformer”), along with other world powers, struck a deal with the genocidal Mullahs of Iran, proudly flaunting their success throughout the media.

The useful idiots of the west (i.e., those in the West who, in 1938 aided and abetted the enemy with their ignorance) or rather today’s version of them, stayed true to form. Like in 1938, they included several American Jewish leaders, who were more than willing to visit the White House when summoned, er, invited, just prior to the beginning of negotiations (invitees included heads of the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, and AIPAC). Needless to say, and much to their consternation, these leaders were subsequently used as pawns by White House spinmeisters to tout the upcoming negotiations.

So what will Israel and/or America do now? Who knows, but one thing is for sure and that is Iran will continue full speed ahead with its nuclear program, and enjoy the relaxation of sanctions and unfreezing of billions of its dollars. To add insult to injury, on Saturday Iran publicly announced  the upcoming construction of two new nuclear plants. All while Mr. Kerry was going around claiming that “no daylight” existed between the US and Israel with respect to keeping Iran from attaining a nuclear weapon.

Really, Mr. Kerry? And what about Iran’s continued sponsorship of terrorism throughout the world? Also, did you happen to mention during negotiations the case of American pastor Saeed Abedini, currently being held and tortured in a notorious Iranian jail, and denied medical treatment, all because he is an "unclean Christian”?

It appears not. So now we can add Pastor Abedini, along with the Israelis and American people, to the list of people betrayed by President Obama and his Secretary of State John Kerry.

The Wall Street Journal  |  November 24, 2013

Iran's Nuclear Triumph
Tehran can continue to enrich uranium at 10,000 working centrifuges.

Iran deal.jpg
Iran nuclear talks at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, Sunday, Nov. 24, 2013. Associated Press

President Obama is hailing a weekend accord that he says has "halted the progress of the Iranian nuclear program," and we devoutly wish this were true. The reality is that the agreement in Geneva with five Western nations takes Iran a giant step closer to becoming a de facto nuclear power.

Start with the fact that this "interim" accord fails to meet the terms of several United Nations resolutions, which specify no sanctions relief until Iran suspends all uranium enrichment. Under this deal Iran gets sanctions relief, but it does not have to give up its centrifuges that enrich uranium, does not have to stop enriching, does not have to transfer control of its enrichment stockpiles, and does not have to shut down its plutonium reactor at Arak.

Mr. Obama's weekend statement glossed over these canyon-sized holes. He said Iran "cannot install or start up new centrifuges," but it already has about 10,000 operational centrifuges that it can continue to spin for at least another six months. Why does Tehran need so many centrifuges if not to make a bomb at the time it pleases?

The President also said that "Iran has committed to halting certain levels of enrichment and neutralizing part of its stockpiles." He is referring to an Iranian pledge to oxidize its 20% enriched uranium stockpile. But this too is less than reassuring because the process can be reversed and Iran retains a capability to enrich to 5%, which used to be a threshold we didn't accept because it can easily be reconverted to 20%.

Mr. Obama said "Iran will halt work at its plutonium reactor," but Iran has only promised not to fuel the reactor even as it can continue other work at the site. That is far from dismantling what is nothing more than a bomb factory. North Korea made similar promises in a similar deal with Condoleezza Rice during the final Bush years, but it quickly returned to bomb-making.

As for inspections, Mr. Obama hailed "extensive access" that will "allow the international community to verify whether Iran is keeping its commitments." One problem is that Iran hasn't ratified the additional protocol to its International Atomic Energy Agency agreement that would allow inspections on demand at such sites as Parchin, which remain off limits. Iran can also oust U.N. inspectors at any time, much as North Korea did.

Then there is the sanctions relief, which Mr. Obama says is only "modest" but which reverses years of U.S. diplomacy to tighten and enforce them. The message is that the sanctions era is over. The loosening of the oil regime is especially pernicious, inviting China, India and Germany to get back to business with Iran.

We are told that all of these issues will be negotiated as part of a "final" accord in the next six months, but that is not how arms control works. It is far more likely that this accord will set a precedent for a series of temporary deals in which the West will gradually ease more sanctions in return for fewer Iranian concessions.

Iran will threaten to walk away from the talks without new concessions, and Mr. Obama will not want to acknowledge that his diplomatic achievement wasn't real. The history of arms control is that once it is underway the process dominates over substance, and a Western leader who calls a halt is denounced for risking war. The negotiating advantage lies with the dictatorship that can ignore domestic opinion.

Mr. Obama all but admitted this himself by noting that "only diplomacy can bring about a durable solution to the challenge posed by Iran's nuclear program." He added that "I have a profound responsibility to try to resolve our differences peacefully, rather than rush towards conflict." Rush to conflict? Iran's covert nuclear program was uncovered a decade ago, and the West has been desperately trying to avoid military action.

The best that can be said is that the weekend deal slows for a few weeks Iran's rapid progress to a nuclear breakout. But the price is that at best it sets a standard that will allow Iran to become a nuclear-capable regime that stops just short of exploding a bomb. At worst, it will allow Iran to continue to cheat and explode a bomb whenever it is strategically convenient to serve its goal of dominating the Middle East.

This seems to be the conclusion in Tehran, where Foreign Minister Javad Zarif boasted that the deal recognizes Iran's right to enrich uranium while taking the threat of Western military action off the table. Grand Ayatollah Ali Khameini also vouchsafed his approval, only days after he denounced the U.S. and called Jews "rabid dogs."

Israel has a different view of the deal, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calling it a "historic mistake." He and his cabinet will now have to make their own calculations about the risks of unilateral military action. Far from having Israel's back, as Mr. Obama likes to say, the U.S. and Europe are moving to a strategy of trying to contain Israel rather than containing Iran. The French also fell into line as we feared they would under U.S. and media pressure.


Mr. Obama seems determined to press ahead with an Iran deal regardless of the details or damage. He views it as a legacy project. A President has enormous leeway on foreign policy, but Congress can signal its bipartisan unhappiness by moving ahead as soon as possible to strengthen sanctions. Mr. Obama warned Congress not to do so in his weekend remarks, but it is the only way now to stop the President from accommodating a nuclear Iran.

 Original article here.


[Comment Rules]
We welcome your comments, but please comply with our Comment Rules. You must be registered and logged in to leave a comment. Comments will display your Username and location.

Log In »

Not a member? Register here!