Americans have been facing the reality of "If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan, period" claim touted by Obama with the roll out of Obamacare. Anyone who has watched the news, read the papers or received cancellation notices knows this was a lie. Lies abounded surrounding Obamacare, from being no more costly than a phone bill to keeping your plan and doctor to covering millions who were uninsured under the previous system.
What Americans (and the rest of the world) should learn from all of this is simple: This administration, and this man sitting in the Oval Office, lies!
So, if this administration would lie about a domestic policy as important as Obamacare, would it not stand to reason this administration would lie about a foreign policy as important as the Iran deal?
Now that the United States along with five other world powers and Iran struck a deal on the Iranian nuclear program, Obama would have American and the rest of the world believe that these "negotiated limitations, "simply put, they cut of Iran's most likely paths to a bomb."
In his statement, Obama outlined the negotiated terms of the deal:
- limits Iran's existing stockpile of enriched uranium (these could be developed into the nuclear core of a bomb);
- limits the number and capabilities of Iran's existing centrifuges used to enrich and produce "weapons-grade plutonium" from a reactor that is in advanced stages of construction;
- provides international monitoring and "transparency" of the Iranian nuclear program.
Obama said of the deal, "While today's announcement is a first step, it achieves a great deal. For the first time in nearly a decade, we have halted the progress of the Iranian nuclear program, and key parts of the program will be rolled back."
Everyone knows this is like closing the barn door after the horses have gotten loose. And someone please tell me how you "roll back" technology and stop the use of a uranium-enriching, weapons-grade plutonium developing facility already in the advance stages of construction. "If you build it, they will come."
Since when has any 'international monitoring" resulted in any "transparency" of anything? Iran could refuse to allow any international monitoring group admission to the country or better yet, only give them access to facilities that are known to the international community.
And, Iran has committed to "neutralize" some of its stockpiles of uranium to a concentration that is not far off from being weapons grade. The world can now feel all "warm and fuzzy."
"Taken together, these first step measures will help prevent Iran from using the cover of negotiations to continue advancing its nuclear program as we seek to negotiate a long-term, comprehensive solution that addresses all of the international community's concerns," Obama said in his statement.
I wonder if this "long-term, comprehensive solution" will be anything like Obamacare, but on a world scale.
Obama would have us believe that the "tough" sanctions levied against Iran have had a tremendous impact in bringing Iran to the negotiation table. He would also have us believe that Iran's economic stability has been compromised because of this. So, Iran spends millions of dollars on a nuclear program that could be spent elsewhere while being isolated from the international community via sanctions. Just at this particular moment in time, after decades of sanctions, Iran is ready to negotiate relief. It is interesting all this has occurred shortly over one year since Obama stole his second term in office.
Of interesting note is the P5 plus 1 group involved: United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, China and the European Union. I think this pretty much speaks for itself.
Iran is inherently ruled by Islam. Even the United States has cited Iran as supporting terrorism and being perpetrators of human rights violations: both signatures of Islam. Islam is not concerned with an economy or being a part of an international community. Islam is concerned with establishing an Islamic caliphate, being the only "religion" in the world, and killing those who are not Muslim in the name of Islam. Differing factions of Islam kill each other in the belief of their own faction or sect being superior over the others. Islam condones the practice of taqiyyah. So, let's all jump on the bandwagon to believe that Iran has every intention of abiding by an agreement made with infidels.
Obama has made the "promise" that the limited sanction relief will be revoked and new penalties assessed against Iran should Iran violate or fail to meet the agreed to commitments. This rings of the "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor, period." Obama's domestic policies have been failures along with all of his previous foreign policies. Obama wants America and the world to believe this time his foreign policy with Iran will be different.
While Obama spouts the claim that Iran's most likely paths to a bomb have been curtailed, what about the paths that aren't as likely or still attainable. After all, where there is a will, there is a way.
And let's be honest here, who called who when it was reported Obama was speaking with the new Iranian president? The Obama administration made the call after hearing the new Iranian president would like to speak with Obama, according to Susan Rice, National Security Adviser or "National Falsehood Propaganda Officer," as I like to call her. If Iran were truly interested in coming to the negotiating table, Iran would have made the call.
Whether this is good or bad will only be known as time goes on. However, with Obama's history of deception, lies and obfuscations, it is difficult to believe or trust anything that comes out of the man's mouth. Add to Obama's transgressions, the UK, France, and Germany bowing to the demands of Islam and their growing Muslim populations to the detriment of their own citizens, the European Union giving semblance of a one European government stifling nationalism, the involvement of Russia and China in this "negotiated" agreement, and an Islamic nation where taqiyyah is not only taught but practiced, and, what you have is a recipe for potential disaster.
Do I think Iran should have any type of nuclear capability, much less a nuclear bomb? Of course not. But neither do I believe that any of this is going to make a difference. Iran, while under significant sanctions, proceeded in their development of technology which would allow them access to nuclear armaments. At the point Iran became close in achieving its goal, Iran chose to negotiate the limitation of that goal in exchange for a lifting of sanctions. Something is not right here. If significant sanctions didn't prevent this, how is lifting those sanctions along with the agreement to "transparency and international monitoring" going to halt a technology already close to fruition?
As I said before, it's like closing the barn door after the horses have gotten out.
Since the advent of the nuclear bomb, every country on earth aspires to be part of the nuclear club regardless of its theocracy. The attainment of nuclear armaments is equated with a government's power and status in the international community: it's become the big stick every country wants to walk softly with. The problem with nuclear armaments is not just the armaments themselves, but who controls them, if they are willing to use them, and under what circumstances. As the world witnessed in 1945, the US used its newly created nuclear armament to end the war in the Pacific theater; then, used its possession of these weapons to deter any further aggression against our nation. Other nations followed and attained nuclear weapons thereby creating an atmosphere of potential destruction of the world through the use of the atomic bomb.
China boasts its nuclear capability can now reach into the United States. Russia has had that same capability for years. North Korea has joined in the party and we all watched when India celebrated its creation of the "Brahma" weapon.
We can thank Nazi Germany scientists under Operation Paper Clip coupled with the US military industrial complex and our government for this magnanimous technological breakthrough that brought the real threat of worldwide destruction through the push of a button to society.
There was always the threat that some "radical" group would gain possession of some of the world's destructive nuclear capability and have no conscience about using those weapons for attainment of their ideological goals: whether termed trivial or not in the eyes of the international community. There is no more radical ideology or radical theocracy than Islam. The world is well to be concerned over any Islamic nation that possesses a nuclear capability for whatever reason, peaceful or not. With any Islamic nation, one should rightfully question whether they intend to make good on any agreement made with other nations. However, these deal makers pat themselves on the back, engage in celebratory hugs and announce to the world it is safe from the nation of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons capability. Funny, Hitler comes to mind with regards to all the agreements made after World War I.
If all this is not enough to even be skeptical about this recent "deal," there is the fact Obama supports Islam, supports terrorists and is a Muslim himself. Obama has made no secret of his disdain for the US and its traditions, values and people. Obama has demonstrated time and time again his willingness to throw anyone and any country under the bus, particularly Israel and our own. While the P5 plus 1 group, who have "secured" these negotiations with a nation who for years cared not about sanctions from the international community and engages in terrorism and human rights violations, has made this agreement in "good faith;" it is difficult to believe this group even remotely trusts Obama and the US position much less the word of a nation steeped in Islamic rule.
I guess the old adage of "there is no honor among thieves" may take on a new meaning.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.