Does A Country Have The Right To Protect Itself From Annihilation?

Yesterday One America News posted an article about a recent action by Israel regarding Iran’s nuclear program. There is little doubt that as soon as Iran has a reliable nuclear weapon with a reliable delivery system it will strike Israel. That would fit in perfectly with the religious leaders’ idea that they need to create chaos in order to hasten the return of ‘the mshdi,’ their Messianic figure.

The article reports:

Commemorating Israel’s independence day on Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu highlighted the fight against Iran’s nuclearization. This came after reports suggested Israeli hackers caused a blackout on Iran’s main nuclear enrichment facility.

Iranian officials called the blackout an act of “nuclear terror.”

However, Netanyahu called Israel’s nuclear disarmament efforts a matter of national security and regional stability.

“The fight against Iran’s nuclearization and its proxies is a massive task. The situation that exists today doesn’t mean it will be the same situation tomorrow,” Netanyahu stated. “It is very difficult to explain what we have done here, in this transition from nothingness to being the world power, yes, world power which we’ve built here.”

Creating obstacles to Iran’s nuclear program is probably the only way Israel can hope to survive as a nation. They understand that they will be the first target. A successful strike on Israel will then become Iran’s ticket to blackmailing the rest of the world with the threat of another nuclear strike.

Unfortunately, This Is Not Surprising

On Saturday, The New York Post posted an article about recent developments in the talks between America and Iran. Unfortunately the news is not good.

The article reports:

Even before the “indirect” US-Iran talks in Vienna had finished up, Team Biden caved, with the State Department saying it’s ready to lift sanctions on the rogue regime to rejoin the nuclear deal — giving away all leverage without getting a thing in return.

Spokesman Ned Price said Washington is “prepared” to lift all sanctions “that are inconsistent with” the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. He wouldn’t offer details: “I am not in a position here to give you chapter and verse on what those might be.”

And Price refused in repeated questioning to rule out even dropping separate sanctions put on Tehran for its terrorism, human-rights violations and ballistic-missile program.

That cave came after just two days of indirect talks — with reps from China, Russia, Germany, France and Britain as intermediaries — that Iranian President Hassan Rouhani crowed were already a “success.”

The Europeans tried to get Team Biden to lift some sanctions his first days in office, but the president said Tehran would have to move first, coming back into compliance with the deal by ending its enrichment of uranium at 20 percent and stopping its production of uranium metal — which even the Europeans have condemned, as it has no civilian use.

In order to put this in context, you need to understand that trade with Iran is very lucrative for Europe. The sanctions interfere with that trade. Aside from the fact that the Biden administration’s foreign policy at first glance seems to be anti-Israel and pro-Iran, there is a lot of money that can be made by lifting sanctions.

The article concludes:

The Europeans, in consultation with Team Biden, offered to release $1 billion in frozen oil revenue in exchange for Iran freezing its production of 20 percent enriched uranium. Tehran rejected that — and asked that America release all of its frozen export revenue, estimated at over $30 billion, in exchange for a one-month pause in production. Washington rejected that laughable idea and counter-proposed a release of some frozen funds and some oil-export waivers in return for Iran stopping 20 percent production and its work on advanced centrifuges. Again, Iran rejected the idea.

Why on earth would Team Biden respond by giving away the farm? There’s no reason to rush: The nuclear deal’s sunset provisions let Iran start going nuclear within a decade anyway. It’s Tehran that needs to hurry, as it can only do business with tyrannies such as China and Venezuela until America lifts its sanctions.

And the regime’s evildoing isn’t restricted to its pursuit of nuclear weapons or even its terrorism in the Middle East. In February, a Belgian court convicted an Iranian diplomat of plotting to bomb a dissident rally near Paris in 2018 — and Tehran planned and approved the scheme.

Now Biden is set to give Iran’s rulers more billions to play with — all for the sake of preserving his old boss’ “legacy.” But the only legacy of legitimizing these monsters will be more murder.

Iran understands that they are dealing with a weak American President, and they may have a better understanding than Americans as to who is pulling President Biden’s strings.

More Good News From The Middle East

Yesterday Don Surber posted an article on his blog about the killing of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, 59, the Head of Iran’s nuclear program.

The article reports:

“According to Iran Front Page News, Fakhrizadeh was killed by shooting, but before the shootout, his car has been stopped with an explosion at Mostafa Khomeini Blvd. Several others are also reportedly killed in the incident, but haven’t been identified yet.”

In the past, we could have credited Mossad with another fine job well done, but now I do not know about that this time.

Arab nations are normalizing relations with Israel after a decade or so of casual and unofficial cooperation among Israel and Saudi Arabia. Obama siding with Iran — giving the rogue state $170 billion to blow on building nukes and terrorizing Israel — sealed the deal.

Maybe Mossad had a little help.

Israel and its Arab nations share two things in common. They cannot allow Iran to beef up, and they cannot trust the United States to help them. President Donald John Trump may be the last friend they ever have in the White House.

They also know Red China is an ultimate threat.

The New York Times described the incident as “A brazen killing takes place in a drive-by attack.”

The article notes The New York Times comments:

“The killing is bound to provoke sharp reaction in Iran.

“Mr. Fakhrizadeh’s killing, whoever was responsible, could have broad implications for the incoming Biden administration. It is bound to set off a sharp reaction in Iran, as did the American attack on Jan. 3 that killed Qassim Suleimani, the Iranian major general who ran the elite Quds force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.

“The killing of Mr. Fakhrizadeh could complicate the effort by President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. to revive the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal, as he has pledged to do, if the Iranians agree to return to the limits detailed in the accord.

“Israel has long opposed the deal, and if its agents were responsible for the killing of a man considered a national hero — in Iran, they will almost certainly be accused of being behind it — there could be political pressure in Iran to move forward with its current effort to gradually rebuild the stockpile of nuclear fuel that it gave up in 2015.

“American officials would not comment on the assassination on Friday morning, saying they were seeking information.”

The article at Don Surber’s blog concludes:

If the Supreme Court allows Democrats to steal the election, the new administration will quickly throw away President Trump’s gift of peace in the Middle East and side with Iran once again.

Follow the money. Red China owns Democrats now, and Red China supports Iran.

Israel and her Arab neighbors are on their own. Pray that they are strong enough to withstand the maelstrom Chairman Xi and his marionettes in Washington want to unleash.

Today, the allies showed they may be able to. They do not seem to have a choice.

Stay tuned.

I Don’t Think This Was The Way The Agreement Was Supposed To Work

Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article about a recent statement by Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokesman for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran.

The article reports:

Behrouz Kamalvandi warned the US and other world powers that Tehran can return its nuclear program to conditions before the July deal much faster than estimated by them.

“Since the beginning, we have foreseen measures for return scenarios and if needed, we are ready to create conditions rapidly that will certainly surprise the other side,” Kamalvandi said on Thursday.

“If we decide to return to the past conditions for the other side’s non-compliance to the nuclear deal, naturally, we can have highly good conditions rapidly using advanced centrifuges,” he added.

Why in the world did we give them all that money if they obviously have no intentions of actually living up to their end of the bargain?

Cutting Congress Out Of The Iran Deal

The Washington Free Beacon posted an article today about the ongoing negotiations with Iran. The Washington Free Beacon has obtained the audio of a talk to progressive activists last January by Deputy National Security Adviser and MFA in creative writing Ben Rhodes. Mr. Rhodes told the group that a deal with Iran is very important to President Obama as he attempts to establish some sort of positive legacy. Unfortunately, as is usual with this administration, President Obama is willing to take some shortcuts.

The article reports:

“Bottom line is, this is the best opportunity we’ve had to resolve the Iranian issue diplomatically, certainly since President Obama came to office, and probably since the beginning of the Iraq war,” Rhodes said. “So no small opportunity, it’s a big deal. This is probably the biggest thing President Obama will do in his second term on foreign policy. This is healthcare for us, just to put it in context.”

Rhodes made the comparison as the White House was reeling from the botched rollout of the $2 billion Healthcare.gov. Polls continue to show that the health law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, remains unpopular.

Rhodes also said the White House wants to avoid congressional scrutiny of any deal.

“We’re already kind of thinking through, how do we structure a deal so we don’t necessarily require legislative action right away,” Rhodes said. “And there are ways to do that.”

That is similar to what an unnamed senior administration official told David Sanger of the New York Times last week for a piece headlined “Obama Sees an Iran Deal That Could Avoid Congress”: “We wouldn’t seek congressional legislation in any comprehensive agreement for years.”

Those in the Obama Administration need to remember that we do have a Constitution. The U.S. Constitution has very definite rules on Congressional approval of treaties.

The article concludes:

According to Rhodes’ logic, any move by the Americans that strengthens the hardliners at the expense of the other two groups decreases the chances of a deal. Our foreign policy is left hamstrung, in a vain and counterproductive and quite likely futile attempt to put Obama in the history books as the man who reestablished ties between the United States and Iran.

A Republican Congress would not only find itself ignored by the White House. It would find itself powerless to stop détente. The Democratic Congress voted repeatedly for timelines for withdrawal from Iraq. Bush vetoed them. Obama would do the same.

But there is one x-factor: Supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei, whose anti-Americanism is as deep as his Shiite radicalism. He has thwarted the ambitions of past American presidents who hoped to reconcile our two nations. There is no reason to assume he has had a change of heart. He is as aware as anyone of the president’s waning political fortunes.

Repudiated, isolated, ineffective, stymied, Obama cannot persuade the Iranians of the strength of the American position. So he will move as far as he can in the direction of the Iranian one. Unable to make Iran pro-American, he will settle for making America pro-Iranian. It is part of his dismal, pathetic, ill considered, shortsighted, and injurious “legacy.”

For the sake of America, I hope Congress will have the intestinal fortitude to stand up to any attempt to allow Iran to go forward with its nuclear program.

When Was The American Media Going To Tell Us This ?

English: Animated atomic bomb explosion. Polsk...

Image via Wikipedia

On March 5, DEBKAfile posted an article confirming an article in the German Der Spiegel and Welt am Sonntag that Western intelligence had known for eleven months that at least one of North Korea’s covert nuclear tests in 2010 was carried out on an Iranian radioactive bomb or nuclear warhead.

The article lists five facts that we are sure of:

1. In April and May North Korea conducted two covert underground nuclear explosions equivalent to 50- 200 tonnes of TNT.

2. The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization (CTBOTO) monitoring stations in South Korea, Japan and Russia detected highly lethal heavy hydrogen isotopes, deuterium and tritium.

The third fact according to the article:

3. The presence of tritium in one of the tests led several intelligence agencies watching North Korea’s nuclear program and its longstanding links with Iran and Syria to examine the possibility that Pyongyang had tested the internal mechanism of a nuclear warhead on Iran’s behalf.  This strongly indicated to German and Japanese intelligence that Iran had already developed the nuclear warhead’s outer shell and attained its weaponization.

4. There was also a possibility that North Korea had tested a ‘dirty bomb.’

5. There were three events that lead to the conclusion that this was testing of an Iranian device.

a. A group of Iranian nuclear scientists arrived in Pyongyang shortly after the first test in April, seemingly to be involved in setting up the second test.

b. Near the end of April Tehran shipped to Pyongyang a large quantity of uranium enriched to 20+ percent, apparently for the second test.

c. Right after the test in May Central Bank of Iran transferred $55 million to the account of the North Korean Atomic Energy Commission.

The article concludes:

It is not by chance that this incriminating disclosure about Iran’s nuclear achievements sees the light Monday, just hours before US Barack Obama receives Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in the White house for an argument over an expeditious military action to stop Iran going all the way to a nuclear weapon.
The disclosure invalidates the main point the US President made in his speech Sunday to the pro-Israeli lobby AIPAC convention in Washington that there was still time for diplomatic pressure and sanctions to bring Iran’s leaders to a decision to halt their nuclear momentum before military action was called for, whether by the US or Israel.

It now appears that Western intelligence has known about the North Korean tests for Iran for eleven months. Therefore, it is too late for him to try and persuade the Israeli prime minister that there is still time to spare for cutting short a nuclear Iran.

It was announced in Washington Monday that no joint American-Israeli communiqué would be issued at the end of their talks, meaning they will have agreed to disagree: Obama, to stand by his opposition to military action against Iran; Netanyahu, to decide what Israel must do in the interests of its security.
There is no doubt he would have preferred an American initiative for – or partnership in – an operation for curtailing the Iranian nuclear threat. But that is not part of Obama’s policy.  

When was the American Media going to get around to mentioning this? It does seem rather important.

Enhanced by Zemanta