A Capitulation to Iran

You know there’s a problem with the Iran nuclear agreement when The White House releases a fact sheet to the press outlining the agreement, and Iran issues a statement claiming the fact sheet is false… within 15 minutes.

Rick Jensen

Oops.

White House: “Iran has committed to halt enrichment above 5 percent and dismantle the technical connections required to enrich above 5 percent… Iran has committed to halt progress on its enrichment capacity”

Iran’s official government press reported that the agreement allowed for Iran to continue enriching uranium, noting, “In the framework of the agreement, none of Iran’s nuclear facilities as well as the previous activities will be stopped, shut down or suspended and Iran’s nuclear activities in all its nuclear facilities including Natanz, Fordow, Isfahan and Arak will continue.”

White House: Iran has committed to: “Not commission the Arak reactor, not fuel the Arak reactor, and halt the production of fuel for the Arak reactor.”

Iran: “…none of Iran’s nuclear facilities as well as the previous activities will be stopped, shut down or suspended and Iran’s nuclear activities in all its nuclear facilities including… Arak will continue.”

Obama: “It’s a deal that meets our core objectives.”

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif: “There is no agreement; and so no commitments.”

Perhaps there was a misplaced semicolon in the Iranian copy of the agreement?

So, one of the two parties is lying. Which one? Well, does either one have a history of lying to their own people? Okay, maybe that’s not fair when one of the two has been awarded the “lie of the year” and the other smirks through pretenses of denying funding of terrorists.

Presuming President Obama is indeed telling the truth, the meaning of Iran’s statements can be summed up as indicating how honestly they’ll abide by any agreement.

After all, this is Iran’s game: Lie, obfuscate and build nuclear weapons. Which is why it’s such a bad idea to allow a regime that supports suicide bombers targeting women and children to develop nuclear capability.

Iran’s defenders complain that Israel has had nuclear weapons for decades.

That’s one reason Israel still has a place on the map.

The international reaction to the agreement’s framework may give us a better idea of what to expect from any final document. Debkafile reports that the French are demanding changes:

– Iran can’t be allowed to retain all the 6,500 centrifuges (for enriching uranium) conceded by the Americans.

– The stocks of enriched uranium accepted by the U.S. to remain in Iranian hands are too large.

– A longer period of restrictions on Iran’s nuclear work is needed (25 years rather than the 15 years offered by the Obama administration) before sanctions are eased.

– An insistence that UN sanctions stay in place until Iran fully explains the evidence that has raised suspicions of past development work on a nuclear warhead design.

Obama has reportedly given in to Iran’s demands because Iran’s negotiators successfully whined that they were going to leave if they didn’t get what they want. Obama acquiesced like a weak parent giving in to a child’s temper tantrum.

Ibrahim Al-Amin, board chair of the pro-Hezbollah Lebanese daily “Al-Skhbar,” responded to the news stating, “The West has capitulated!”

The Israelis asked for a little comfort in having the Obama administration add a codicil that specifically states Iran recognizes Israel’s right to exist. Knowing Iran would never sign such an antithetical statement, Obama refused.

Iran’s ayatollah now says there will be no inspections of their military sites, evoking memories of the failed Bill Clinton- Jimmy Carter agreement with North Korea.

President Obama may have promised Israel “we’ve got your backs” if Iran attacks, but how much of Israel will still exist by the time U.S. fighter jets respond?

Also see,

Political Pandering over Religious Freedom Bill

Leave a Comment

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend