Home » Surprise, surprise: Iran deal hasn’t softened the hardliners

Comments

Surprise, surprise: Iran deal hasn’t softened the hardliners — 19 Comments

  1. For not being George W. Bush.

    And as far as anyone can tell, he’s still not George W. Bush, so Mission Accomplished!

  2. “Anyone who hoped that Iran’s nuclear agreement with the United States and other powers portended a new era of openness ….”
    Hope and Change.
    Quelle surprise.
    We will likely never know what was in the Iran deal personally for Barack Hussein. But a mere 1% commission on the $100 billion plus deal is $1billion. You think BHO can’t be bought? Or Kerry? Or Hillary? Or their henchpersons, their Valeries and Humas, their minions?
    C’mon.

  3. Iran’s nuclear agreement with the United States and other powers guarantees future nuclear conflict. It makes it a certainty that such will occur. It is now not a matter of if but of when.

    Murderous fanatics push until they are rendered incapable of further aggression.

  4. “In theory” covers a lot yes, as well as it also covers very little by leaving out the “in theory” on the other side of the equation: what if the Iranian tyranny behaves exactly as one would expect a tyranny to behave, what then?

    I’ve recently listened to Ruth Wisse saying something along the line that the only one bad thing [moral wrong] done by the Jews against the Arabs was foisting Yasser Arafat upon them as their leader and arming him consequent to the Oslo Accords.

    Then the question becomes, who pays the price of this injustice? We see the Arabs pay a price, but we see the Israelis paying too. Not necessarily, not formally, those particular Israelis whose decision this was, however, not directly, not pointedly, at least.

    What of the price to be paid by those who tell us Iran will never have a nuclear weapon when some fine [awful] day not too long from now the Iranians announce that they have deliverable nuclear weapons? Yes, I’m looking at you, Barack Hussein Obama, you along with the nitwits who follow you. What price will you pay for this tale you tell? And who else will pay who never believed your tale? What becomes when that “in theory” and its missing corollaries are made manifest in deeds?

  5. As noted, this was all predictable, even an old farm boy from Iowa read those tea leaves. The only positive thing that can happen is hearing the proponents of this farce of a deal chatter and stammer when the supreme leader (not bho, the other one) announces, “Inspections, we don’t need no stinking inspections.”

    I’m sure the house of saud will soon collect a few of those nuke tipped ICBMs the Pakis owe them. But that may be the silver lining. The mutual destruction of Tehran and Riyadh is a win-win for the West.

  6. Management specialists always say that past performance is the best predictor of future performance. It’s been true for Obama and is true for the Ayatollahs. Quelle surprise.

  7. It’s been said before, but I don’t believe for a moment that Barrack thought that this “deal” would move Iran closer to what we would call civilization. The purpose was t move Iran’s nuclear program forward, strengthen its military and to weaken the U.S. ” A gradual improvement in relations was inevitable…” Inevitable. Does the writer mean sometime in the near or forseeable future? What would cause any sensible person to believe such a thing given 30 plus years of support of terrorism and a crushing control over all domestic affairs? This through the pretext of peace and cooperation is a really cruel trick to play on so many gullible souls in tv land who believe what they are told. Two hours after Supreme Court decision on gay marriage, the gayest white house in history was lit up, while in Iran homosexuals are tossed from buildings and hanged. Marie Harff (I believe) speaking for the administration told the American people that the slogan “Death to America” by Iran’s leaders was really only for domestic consumption. So, I suppose this is just Iran’s government mollifying their public, not who they themselves are. One would like to think that scatter-brained talk like that would be hooted and howled at by the tv and newspaper boys, but as the NYT excerpts show, I don’t think that has happened.

  8. ANYONE who has read Eric Hoffer’s opus: The True Believer understands the Ayatollah’s logic.

    The ONLY way to keep his mass movement rolling as a perpetual revolutionary cause is to maintain an us vs them alien boogie-man.

    Further, good times would absolutely ruin the fidelity of the faithful — souls who must reject the present — in pursuit of some glorious tomorrow. It’s a tomorrow that the Ayatollah must forever keep at bay.

    In the meantime, he’s stolen — in the most brazen manner possible — well over $150,000,000,000 in a nation that didn’t have all that much wealth to begin with.

    His pals are also richer than Aladdin. Collectively, they OWN Iran, very much in the manner of the Tsar and his Boyars.

    His control structure apes that of the Nazis and the ‘SS economic state.’

    Rarely recounted, the SS had direct and indirect economic assets far, far, beyond their ‘arrangement’ with Oskar Schindler.

    So too, does the Islamic Republican Guards. You’d swear that they’ve ditto’d the General SS.

    Because of countless Hollywood productions — the average Joe only knows of the Waffen SS — the militarized SS. It originated years after the foundation of the SS, as the tyrant’s personal bodyguard.

    They were in the original SS, the General SS.

    This massive organization was directed internally, never at the battle front. (The camp killers were transferred from the General SS to the Waffen SS during the war. This was strictly a paperwork move with uniforms swapped. When the front arrived — most immediately ran away. )

    The IRGC has aped Himmler’s minions in every way.

    So what we’re dealing with are Nazis that are wary of making Adolf’s blunders. Like Saddam — they want to bob and weave their way to atomics and ICBMs.

    Our brainiac President gave them carte blanche and a hefty door prize, to boot.

    So we’re dealing with robed Nazis that are fatalistic// fanatics — and they believe that a wondrous Heaven awaits them when they commit mass suicide-jihad.

    What could go wrong ?

  9. Frog:
    “We will likely never know what was in the Iran deal personally for Barack Hussein.”

    Hm. An Iranian version of the Oil for Food scandal?

    Indeed, Saddam’s advocates who opposed the US-led enforcement of the “governing standard of Iraqi compliance” (UNSCR 1441) for disarmament mandated by UNSCR 687 (1991), such as Russia, China, and France, were complicit in the Oil for Food scandal.

    Iraq successfully bought allies to defy the Gulf War ceasefire mandates. It makes sense that Iran would try a similar tactic with the same players.

    Democrats adopted anti-American propaganda in order to oppose President Bush despite that the Clinton administration had fended off the same propaganda against their enforcement of the Gulf War ceasefire mandates.

    Since they subsequently adopted anti-American propaganda on the Iraq intervention, is it outlandish to suspect the Democrats also bought into a subsequent Iranian version of the Oil for Food scandal?

    GRA:
    “Why did Obama win the Nobel Peace Prize?”

    Eric J.:
    “For not being George W. Bush.”

    Ironically, President Obama advanced the justifications for the Iraq intervention in his 2009 Nobel speech.

    However, because the actual law and policy, fact basis for the Iraq intervention has been widely misrepresented, pundits claimed Obama rebuked Bush when Obama’s Nobel speech actually endorsed the grounds for OIF.

    More along GRA and Eric J.’s point about Obama presenting as anti-Bush, as I’ve said here often, the false narrative of Operation Iraqi Freedom made prevalent in the zeitgeist is patient zero for current events.

    That manifests particularly with Obama’s Iran deal, which is characterized by a conspicuous contrast with the Gulf War ceasefire mandates and their enforcement, which set the gold standard for disarmament.

    Obama’s Iran deal seemingly incorporates many, if not all the changes that Saddam’s advocates called for to replace the strict “governing standard of Iraqi compliance” (UNSCR 1441) that the US enforced from 1991 onward. Along with Neo’s post about Iran rejecting sanctions in other areas, the “governing standard of Iraqi compliance” included terrorism mandates (UNSCR 687) and humanitarian mandates (UNSCR 688) as well as disarmament mandates (UNSCR 687).

    In other words, on the premise level, if Presidents HW Bush, Clinton, and Bush were wrong to “bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations” (Public Law 105-235, 1998), then President Obama’s Iran deal is right.

    But if HW Bush, Clinton, and Bush were right on Iraq, then Obama is wrong on Iran.

    As such, discrediting Obama and his international course requires first laying the foundation by correcting the false narrative of OIF at the premise level and setting the record straight on the Iraq intervention in the American cultural and political zeitgeist.

  10. Ali Khamenei was KBG trained in Moscow as was Abbas. We should be surprised that Putin, a former KGB officer, is supplying Iran and has formed an alliance in their joint Syrian adventure? If you dig through the back and forth at this left wing “fact checker” you will find that Khamenei is hard core revolutionary communist trained at Patrice Lumumba University in Moscow under Yuri Andropov and that he is also connected to Chinese communist leaders.
    http://www.drudge.com/news/192236/ben-carson-tells-bizarre-lie

    The only thing we should not be surprised by is Obama’s acquiescence, given HIS background.

  11. @The Other Chuck

    There was no problem with Putin until Obama pushed EU towards Ukraine.

    Right now, Russia should be a natural ally of western countries, since there’s complementary interests: Russia benefits from a market for its natural resources, western countries need resources to keep industry working.

    Maybe it’s not by chance that Obama administration has chosen as main enemies Israel and Russia, both with leaders that share a similar profile: white males, conservatives, military background, tough guys.

    It seems that current US international politics is driven by the lack of manliness of its president. It seems that US power is focused in settle the complex of virile inferiority of the US president.

    And right now Russia is supporting Iran and anyone that opposes US. Logically. And US is losing control of middle east. What do you expect? If you gonna fuck someone, the least you need is to have a true man (or a true woman) as a leader.

  12. While Roger Cohen prized the deal with Iran by saying :

    Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, had ruled out cooperation beyond the nuclear deal. The fact is neither Khamenei, a hard-liner, nor the reformists led by President Hassan Rouhani can ignore the other. Their respective power is in delicate equilibrium, an unusual situation in the 36-year history of the Islamic Republic and one the West must continue to probe.

    However last Friday prayer Iranian Mullahs still lead the slogans at Friday-prayer refrain of “Death to America”?
    Cohen talking the deal with Iran as an example to Israelis :

    History and narratives are dangerous things in the Holy Land. That has long been so. But Netanyahu’s outrageous suggestion that the grand mufti of Jerusalem gave Hitler the idea of annihilating European Jewry (when about a million European Jews were already dead in the Baltic states and elsewhere) represents a new low. Netanyahu has a hard time with history. He compared Yitzhak Rabin to Chamberlain and he called the Iran deal “a historic mistake.”

    According to Mr. DAVID COHEN, he is the undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence at the Treasury Department. Still there are tools in place could be used Not Easing Sanctions on Iran, Tehran will be deeper in the hole six months from now.”

  13. Yann Says:
    Right now, Russia should be a natural ally of western countries, since there’s complementary interests: Russia benefits from a market for its natural resources, western countries need resources to keep industry working.

    There were some talks about this matter far from what you pined.

    Qatar involvement and supporting Syrian war from start is to lay gas pipelines for western markets for its natural gas to western countries across Syria and Turkey,
    Don’t underestimate the new discovery of natural gas reserves at Syrian shore it’s a big promises of natural gas

  14. Eric Says:
    Indeed, Saddam’s advocates who opposed the US-led enforcement of the “governing standard of Iraqi compliance”

    Let read together Why America Invented Ahmad Chalabi

  15. Yann says:
    And right now Russia is supporting Iran…
    Russia has been selling weapons to Iran for some time, long before Ukraine. I would say Iran is almost a client state of Russia.

  16. To be fair, Obama had some basis for believing that he could get along with the Iranians, Russians, etc. Back pre-2008, it seemed that he and they shared common enemies: Republicans. I’m sure he is disappointed that they did not realize their affinity.

  17. @japan

    With regard to Netanyahu’s “new low”:

    http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Netanyahu-was-right-about-Hitler-and-the-Mufti-432055

    I have not seen these quotations in the historical record. But there is much evidence to support Netanyahu’s underlying claim that the grand mufti had a substantial (and for a non-European, unparalleled) influence on the genocide that unfolded in Nazi-occupied Europe and that was planned for the Middle East as well.

    After years of inciting violence against Jews as Jerusalem’s grand mufti (notably in 1920, 1929 and 1936), claiming “al-Aksa is in danger,” Husseini found an ally in Hitler’s Berlin during the 1930s. Husseini and many other Arabs of his day saw themselves as a defeated and humiliated people, much like the Germans after World War I. Nazi ideology therefore resonated deeply in the Arab world. In 1933, Hitler’s book, Mein Kampf, was serialized in Arab newspapers and became a best-seller. […]

    That year, Husseini called on all Muslims to rid their lands of Jews and drafted a Nazi-Islamist pact encouraging the spread of Nazi ideology, and boycotts of Jewish goods, among other provisions. In 1941, he instigated the al-Farhud pogrom in Iraq. Above all, the mufti called for the Axis powers to stop any Jewish influx into the Middle East.

    On November 28, 1941, the mufti met with Hitler and the two appeared to come to an understanding that Jews would be killed rather than deported, an option hitherto still under consideration. Although Nazi mass shootings of European Jews began soon after the June 1941 invasion of Soviet Russia, plans for their comprehensive extermination came after this first Hitler-Husseini meeting. At that time the Germans expected the Middle East to become the next theater of war and were therefore averse to disrupting their Arab-Islamist alliance by flooding the region with Jewish refugees.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>