Thursday, August 6, 2015

A PRESIDENT IN DISTRESS- PRESIDENT OBAMA AND KERRY - “SELLING A FANTASY….. ……THAT WE’RE NOT BUYING”! – PART # 1

A PRESIDENT IN DISTRESS- PRESIDENT OBAMA AND KERRY - “SELLING A FANTASY….. ……THAT WE’RE NOT BUYING”! – PART # 1

I AM SO VERY OPPOSED TO THE IDEA OF ANY IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL- for me, its give up your “nuclear ambitions” or else!.... as they themselves have on numerous occasions in the past defied the IAEA and international laws and standards that were given to them to adhere to, and yet the Democrats and the Obama Administration seems to think they will abide by the treaty in which Obama has set forth. As I sat and watched the live speech which was held at the American University on August 5th 2016, President Obama trying to “sell” the ideas and the positive aspects of the Unconstitutional Nuclear deal [treaty] with Iran. To be honest, it was the “first” time that I could agree with a few major points of President Obama….. [IF] in the past Iran has not defied any and all standards that were set forth, but they have whenever they had the chance to do so, and Iran has proven that time and time again, and not to mention they are the largest state sponsor of terrorism. I do however understand the president’s position that he faces, but I strongly believe he has taken the wrongful approach in trying to accomplish that goal.

THE NEWEST OF SUCH AN ARGUMENT THAT I HAVE IS THIS-  The newest Classified satellite images obtained by US government sources show that Iran has now dispatched bulldozers and heavy machinery to its Parchin nuclear complex, that the U.S. has pictures of from 2012, strongly suggesting it is cleaning up the site prior to inspections by the IAEA  International Atomic Energy Agency this fall! Congress has not set forth its pen to allow the treaty to pass or to be declined and yet Iran is already “cleaning up” areas! What will they do with the Nuclear junk they are trying to clean?? Do you Kerry and Obama really believe they will trash it all?? Or- position it in a new area unknown by the U.S. or the IAEA! Who are we trying to fool here is the question that I have.

The evidence, which was obtained in July, was presented to US lawmakers last week, and on Monday the Office of the Director of National Intelligence met with politicians to explain its significance, Bloomberg News reported Wednesday. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr said the evidence posed challenges to upcoming IAEA inspections of the Parchin military complex, a site suspected of being used for experiments related to weaponization of Iran’s nuclear technology.

Details of inspections of the site were reportedly specified in an IAEA-Iran agreement to which the US was not privy, but the head of Iran’s atomic agency “denied the existence” of such an agreement last month.
US government officials were split on the significance of the evidence, according to the Bloomberg report; some saw it as a possible breach of the nuclear deal reached last month, while others said it would not interfere with inspections.

“I think it’s up to the administration to draw their conclusions. Hopefully this is something they will speak on, since it is in many ways verified by commercial imagery. And their actions seem to be against the grain of the agreement,” Burr told Bloomberg News.

Burr added that the evidence could mean that inspectors would not see the site as it had existed prior to the suspected cleanups, calling it “a huge concern.”

A senior intelligence official said that while he was aware of Iran’s “sanitized efforts” since the Vienna deal was signed, he believed the IAEA team would still be able to properly inspect the site and detect past nuclear work.

Another administration official added that the October 15 inspection deadline did not leave enough time for Iran to clean up all traces of enriched uranium, if that was indeed the work being done there.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker said that although he found the evidence disconcerting, it may not constitute a violation of the nuclear deal.

“The intelligence briefing was troubling to me … some of the things that are happening, especially happening in such a blatant way,” he said. “Iran is going to know that we know.”

David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, said that the activity may be “Iran’s last-ditch effort to eradicate evidence there.”

“The day is coming when they are going to have to let the IAEA into Parchin, so they may be desperate to finish sanitizing the site,” he added.

IN PRESIDENT OBAMA’S SPEECH HE SAID “Between now and the congressional vote in September, you are going to hear a lot of arguments against this deal, backed by tens of millions of dollars in advertising”… but myself as well as others are not spending a dime- only our time to put out the truth and the fears that the Iran nuclear deal could make happen in reality.

Obama went on to say “if the rhetoric in these ads and the accompanying commentary sounds familiar, it should, for many of the same people who argued for the war in Iraq are now making the case against the Iran nuclear deal.” But Obama forgets what has happened In the last 35 years with Iran and even by pulling the troops out has made ISIS grow to be what they are today! By the way… speaking of ISIS, Iran only wants to fight against ISIS because they are worried that ISIS will take their territory… they don’t want that!

THE DEMOCRATIC OBAMA MENTIONED THAT THE WAR IN IRAQ as “It was a mindset characterized by a preference for military action over diplomacy, a mindset that put a premium on unilateral US action over the painstaking work of building international consensus, a mindset that exaggerated threats beyond what the intelligence supported. First of all…. The difference of Republicans Vs Democrats is just this- Democrats want always to use “Diplomacy” rather than the Military…. Whereas Republicans want to use “overwhelming military force” when need be, meaning to say… that “diplomacy doesn’t always work Obama!

AS TO DOWNPLAYING MILITARY THREATS it has been seen that even in the recent year and a half President Obama and Kerry have in fact DOWNPLAYED the actual threats against America, American assets and Americans in general anywhere in the world and by “cutting the military” would not help us to deter any threats that may come our way, if anything we need more military personnel rather than to disassemble them.

On Tuesday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee heard testimony from Amb. Robert G. Joseph Ph.D, currently Senior Scholar at the National Institute for Public Policy, formerly Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, and the person who in 2003 led the nuclear negotiations with Libya. He testified the Iran deal is a “bad agreement” with “five fatal flaws”: (1) it does not effectively detect cheating unless Iran decides to do it openly, and Iran is more likely to cheat at military bases where it has cheated in the past and has ruled out inspections in the future; (2) it leaves a large‐scale nuclear infrastructure in place that could be used to break out, or more likely “sneak‐out,” and then permits a significantly expanded program with a “virtually zero” breakout time; (3) it has “snap‐back” provisions that are illusory; (4) the purported 12-month breakout time is ineffective, since, unless Iran breaks out openly, we will not even know when the clock begins, and months will go by while the U.S. debates internally what to do; and (5) Iran is permitted to continue work on long-range ballistic missiles that have no use other than eventual deployment of nuclear weapons. His conclusion is stark:

[The deal] assumes that permitting Iran a large‐scale enrichment capability is compatible with the goal of denying Iran the ability to produce weapons‐grade fissile material; it assumes that the twelve month breakout time is meaningful; it assumes that the agreement will be effectively verifiable; and it assumes that the United States and the international community will respond to evidence of cheating before Iran can mate a nuclear weapon to a ballistic missile. None of these assumptions holds up under scrutiny. As a result, the threat to the U.S. homeland and to our NATO allies of an Iran armed with nuclear tipped ballistic missiles will increase not decrease under the anticipated agreement. [Emphasis added].

And that is even before considering the risks of proliferation in the region, the existential threat to Israel, seriously frayed relations with Arab allies, and the vastly increased resources for Iran and its allies to establish a game-changing hegemony in a vital strategic area of the world.

Amb. Joseph is not simply an independent expert but one with considerable real-world experience, not only with Libya but with the North Korean fiasco. He testified Tuesday that in 2003 the United States insisted upon and got “anytime, anywhere” inspections in Libya — to all sites, declared and undeclared. It is a shame that Secretary of State Kerry never heard of such things before he went and negotiated an extraordinarily bad deal. Any senator who reads Amb. Joseph’s written testimony or listens to his answers to the committee’s questions will have a difficult time justifying a vote in favor of what Kerry brought back.
#TakingBackAmerica #IranDeal #WakeUpAmerica #StopIranNow

No comments:

Post a Comment