it could so destabilize the Iranian economy as to threaten the clerical regime. --- repeating the failed US interventionist policy is insanity.
On Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 7:41:28 AM UTC-6, Travis wrote: > > > > > > Muzzieshits always lie. > > > > > http://humanevents.com/2015/03/02/the-fatal-flaw-in-the-iran-deal/?utm_source=hedaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl > > > > The fatal flaw in the Iran deal > > Charles Krauthammer <http://humanevents.com/author/charles-krauthammer/> > | *Monday Mar 2, 2015 10:29 AM* > > [image: The fatal flaw in the Iran deal] > > WASHINGTON — A sunset clause? > > The news from the nuclear talks with Iran was already troubling. Iran was > being granted the “right to enrich.” It would be allowed to retain and spin > thousands of centrifuges. It could continue construction of the Arak > plutonium reactor. Yet so thoroughly was Iran stonewalling International > Atomic Energy Agency inspectors that just last Thursday the IAEA reported > its concern “about the possible existence in Iran of undisclosed … > development of a nuclear payload for a missile.” > > Bad enough. Then it got worse: News leaked Monday of the “sunset clause.” > President Obama had accepted the Iranian demand that any restrictions on > its program be time-limited. After which, the mullahs can crank up their > nuclear program at will and produce as much enriched uranium as they want. > > Sanctions lifted. Restrictions gone. Nuclear development legitimized. Iran > would re-enter the international community, as Obama suggested in an > interview last December, as “a very successful regional power.” A few years > — probably around 10 — of good behavior and Iran would be home free. > > The agreement thus would provide a predictable path to an Iranian bomb. > Indeed, a flourishing path, with trade resumed, oil pumping and foreign > investment pouring into a restored economy. > > Meanwhile, Iran’s intercontinental ballistic missile program is subject to > no restrictions at all. It’s not even part of these negotiations. > > Why is Iran building them? You don’t build ICBMs in order to deliver > sticks of dynamite. Their only purpose is to carry nuclear warheads. Nor > does Iran need an ICBM to hit Riyadh or Tel Aviv. Intercontinental missiles > are for reaching, well, other continents. North America, for example. > > Such an agreement also means the end of nonproliferation. When a rogue > state defies the world, continues illegal enrichment and then gets the > world to bless an eventual unrestricted industrial-level enrichment > program, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is dead. And regional > hyperproliferation becomes inevitable as Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and > others seek shelter in going nuclear themselves. > > Wasn’t Obama’s great international cause a nuclear-free world? Within > months of his swearing-in, he went to Prague to so declare. He then led a > 50-party Nuclear Security Summit, one of whose proclaimed achievements was > having Canada give up some enriched uranium. > > Having disarmed the Canadian threat, Obama turned to Iran. The deal now on > offer to the ayatollah would confer legitimacy on the nuclearization of the > most rogue of rogue regimes: radically anti-American, deeply jihadist, > purveyor of terrorism from Argentina to Bulgaria, puppeteer of a Syrian > regime that specializes in dropping barrel bombs on civilians. In fact, the > Iranian regime just this week, at the apex of these nuclear talks, staged a > spectacular attack on a replica U.S. carrier near the Strait of Hormuz. > > Well, say the administration apologists, what’s your alternative? Do you > want war? > > It’s Obama’s usual, subtle false-choice maneuver: It’s either appeasement > or war. > > It’s not. True, there are no good choices, but Obama’s prospective deal is > the worst possible. Not only does Iran get a clear path to the bomb but it > gets sanctions lifted, all pressure removed and international legitimacy. > > There is a third choice. If you are not stopping Iran’s program, don’t > give away the store. Keep the pressure, keep the sanctions. Indeed, > increase them. After all, previous sanctions brought Iran to its knees and > to the negotiating table in the first place. And that was before the > collapse of oil prices, which would now vastly magnify the economic effect > of heightened sanctions. > > Congress is proposing precisely that. Combined with cheap oil, it could so > destabilize the Iranian economy as to threaten the clerical regime. That’s > the opening. Then offer to renew negotiations for sanctions relief but from > a very different starting point — no enrichment. Or, if you like, with a > few token centrifuges for face-saving purposes. > > And no sunset. > > That’s the carrot. As for the stick, make it quietly known that the U.S. > will not stand in the way of any threatened nation that takes things into > its own hands. We leave the regional threat to the regional powers, say, > Israeli bombers overflying Saudi Arabia. > > Consider where we began: six U.N. Security Council resolutions demanding > an end to Iranian enrichment. Consider what we are now offering: an interim > arrangement ending with a sunset clause that allows the mullahs a robust, > industrial-strength, internationally sanctioned nuclear program. > > Such a deal makes the Cuba normalization look good and the Ukrainian > cease-fires positively brilliant. We are on the cusp of an epic > capitulation. History will not be kind. > > > > > __._,_.___ > ------------------------------ > Posted by: "beowulf" <[email protected] <javascript:>> > ------------------------------ > > > Visit Your Group > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmZzdrN3B1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0MjUzMzMwNzY-> > > > - New Members > > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/members/all;_ylc=X3oDMTJnM3QyMzdzBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2bWJycwRzdGltZQMxNDI1MzMzMDc2> > > 1 > > [image: Yahoo! Groups] > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlbDNvdWJqBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQyNTMzMzA3Ng--> > > • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • > Unsubscribe <javascript:> • Terms of Use > <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> > > __,_._,___ > > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
