Jan. 1, 2014 original publish date
Nov. 24, 2014 Edit, format change and Update: BO Admin extends nuke agreement after Iran offers no agreement
Did Iran Punk The Obama Administration?
original article written by NetAdvisor™
TEHRAN, Iran. In 2009, we published, Are Your Smarter than a Terrorist?, that included information on Iran and their nuclear intent. In 2012, we published, Are You Smarter Than a Terrorist? Part II (Iran). In 2013 we discussed how the U.S. has been wrong on Iran’s intent. To bring in the new-year, we asked, did Iran punk the Obama Administration over a new nuclear agreement?
The only action that the U.S. has taken against Iran has been tough talk. The Obama Administration’s tries to paint the picture that U.S. ‘sanctions’ are working in against Iran. Sanctions have not worked against Iran since 2003.
[1] Iran: Al-Qaeda’s Bank and Training Partner
We knew back in 2004 that Iran has been supporting terror groups fighting U.S. troops in Iraq. So to say Iran wasn’t fighting U.S. troops in Iraq is like saying there is no sand in the desert. Both President Bush and President Obama maintained a hands-off policy on Iran.
On May 30, 2013, CBS News discussed a U.S. State Department report that found Iran not only expanded their support of terror groups in 2012, but this was also the biggest terror organization expansion in more than 20 years.
“Iran and Hezbollah’s terrorist activity has reached a tempo unseen since the 1990s, with attacks plotted in Southeast Asia, Europe, and Africa…”
The article did not include Iran’s supporting pro-Assad groups in Syria; which by the way, the United States is supplying weapons to anti-Assad “rebels” (which include Al-Qaeda terrorists the U.S. is fighting around the globe). Not only does the Obama Administration negotiate with terrorists, we also give them weapons.
[2] REPORT: Syria Allegedly Gave Chemical Weapons to Terrorists
One month before Syria agreed to give up their chemical weapons, a Lebanese Parliament member said that Iran had developed underground bunkers in Lebanon to store long-range missiles that could carry chemical warheads that Hezbollah got from Syria.
“Lebanese Member of Parliament Khaled Daher told the newspaper Iran’s Revolutionary Guards constructed underground bunkers and storerooms in Lebanon to house long-range missiles capable of carrying chemical warheads that Hezbollah received from Syria.”
— Source: UPI, Oct. 9, 2013
The report is a little vague. It suggests on one hand that the bunkers could hold long-range missiles that could carry chemical weapons; but then it says Hezbollah received (chemical weapons) from Syria.
The Obama Administration permitted Russia to take charge of Syria’s chemical weapons. That’s right, the U.S. is trusting communist Russia to take charge of chemical weapons in Syria.
[3] UN: Iran Expanding Nuclear Program Despite any Agreement
Back in 2009, Iran promised to scale back its nuclear ambitions.
“Iran has tentatively agreed to a draft proposal aimed at easing concerns over its nuclear program…The draft deal, reached in Vienna, would strip Tehran of three-quarters of the radioactive fuel it would need to make a nuclear weapon.”
As of late 2013, the United Nations determined that Iran has been expanding its nuclear program.
[4] Obama Helping Iran Get Missiles?
The Obama Administration allowed Russia to sell anti-aircraft missiles to Iran [Report]. So in case the Obama Administration catches on to Iran’s true nuclear game (bet the national debt BO won’t), we will all be reminded who helped Iran get missiles to shoot at anyone who tries to take out those nukes.
Israel had enough about President Obama’s lack of foreign policy foresight. In early 2013, Israel launched airstrikes in Syria targeting what they believed to be anti-aircraft missiles for Iran’s Hezbollah.
“U.S. officials said Israel launched the airstrike inside Syria on Wednesday, targeting a convoy believed to be carrying anti-aircraft weapons bound for Hezbollah, the powerful Lebanese militant group allied with Syria and Iran.”
— Source: Fox News, 01-31-2013
[5] The New Deal
The latest Nuclear Agreement with the West and Iran does not prevent Iran from continuing to develop its nuclear capabilities that could eventually be militarized. The agreement also does not seem consistent with the language of Iranian leaders who have vowed to keep their nuclear ambition no matter what.
If anyone has studied the language used by Iranian leaders and the Obama Administration, Iran does not use vague language such as “comprehensive solution(s);” which was used 10 times in the seven-page U.S.-Iran nuclear agreement. Phrases such as “comprehensive solution(s),” are big vague terms with little substance in reality. The proposed U.S. Iran-nuclear agreement is only good for SIX months.
So if Iran signed Obama’s nuclear agreement, Iran would only have to keep their promise for six months. After six months, Iran can resume any nuclear ambition (which does not preclude militarization of nukes), assuming they even will keep their promise in the first place.
[6] Semantics
The nuclear agreement seems to be a lot like how the Obama Administration’s views deficit spending. If we intend to spend $2 trillion, but only spend $1 trillion, then the (incorrect) analogy is we ‘cut deficit spending in half.’
- Related Report: Obama Math: Borrowing Less is Saving?
We’ll, Iran ran up their nuclear program before the nuclear agreement. So if Iran signed the nuclear agreement, Iran can say they scaled it back. The point is, Iran will still have capability of developing militarized nukes. Iran is bent on going nuclear and they will develop their nukes for military purposes, and only a fool would think otherwise.
[7] How BO Admin Helps Iran Expand Terrorism
Under the terms of the new nuclear agreement, President Obama will allow the release of $4.2 Billion of Iranian assets back to Iran (lifting some sanctions). This money can help Iran expend their nuclear program and or support funding for terrorist activities against the U.S. and its allies.
The Obama Administration may not see it like this, but Iran is not going to take the money and develop wind power, provide welfare or jobs to the people the Iranian government is repressing. Iran plans to get a nuke as fast as possible and make the U.S. live in their fantasy paper-agreement.
So what if Iran breaks the agreement or strings-out the Obama Administration long enough to develop a nuke? Like what is Obama going to do about it? Nothing. Iran sees U.S. leadership as weak, and wants the world to know who is in charge.
Iran responded to the deal in a twitter post written in English (clearly intended for Americans):
There has been no confirmation that Iran has stopped enriching higher-grade uranium. Iran previously stated last June 2013 that it might be more transparent, but they will not give up their nuclear enrichment program.
The Hopeless Relationship
UPDATE: Nov. 24, 2014
After the second time in 2014, and after 12 years of effort, Iran still has not offered any intent to slow or stop their nuclear ambition. How many people would keep trying to make a one-sided relationship work, when the one side is committed to never changing?
The Obama Admin continues this relationship fantasy that Iran will come to terms of their wishes. The U.S. is giving Iran another seven months (until June 30, 2015) to come to terms of a nuclear agreement. There are no penalties if Iran does not comply.
We continue to predict that Iran will not stop their nuclear program, that Iran will develop nukes for military purposes, and the U.S. thinks giving Iran more time to see things how Obama sees things, will somehow make Iran change their mind.
original article content, Copyright © 2014 NetAdvisor.org® All Rights Reserved.
NetAdvisor.org® is a non-profit organization providing public education and analysis primarily on the U.S. financial markets, personal finance and analysis with a transparent look into U.S. public policy. We also perform and report on financial investigations to help protect the public interest. Read More.
