Category Archives: foreign policy

State’s Cynical Distortion

Posted on by
Reply

The State Department accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of taking congressional testimony by Secretary of State John Kerry out of context in Netanyahu’s address to a joint meeting of Congress Tuesday.

What Kerry said in Congressional testimony:

[I]f you have a civilian power plant that’s producing power legitimately and not a threat to proliferation, you could have as many as 190,000 or more centrifuges[.]

What Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said:

He [Iran’s Supreme Leader] says, Iran plans to have 190,000 centrifuges, not 6,000 or even the 19,000 that Iran has today, but 10 times that amount—190,000 centrifuges enriching uranium. With this massive capacity, Iran could make the fuel for an entire nuclear arsenal and this in a matter of weeks, once it makes that decision.
My long-time friend, John Kerry, Secretary of State, confirmed last week that Iran could legitimately possess that massive centrifuge capacity when the deal expires.
Now I want you to think about that. The foremost sponsor of global terrorism could be weeks away from having enough enriched uranium for an entire arsenal of nuclear weapons and this with full international legitimacy.

Out of context? Not so much, FactCheck.org notwithstanding (their statement, Kerry wasn’t saying that “Iran could legitimately possess” 190,000 centrifuges. He was saying that “a civilian power plant that’s producing power legitimately” could have 190,000 or more centrifuges, simply restates what Netanyahu said Kerry said—that Iran could possess as many as 190,000 centrifuges under the Kerry/Obama deal). The Obama/Kerry deal on offer to Iran would allow Iran to have “peaceful,” “civilian” nuclear power plants “producing power legitimately.”

What’s key here is this. Those centrifuges, busily spinning away to produce fuel-grade uranium for peaceful nuclear power plants, could just as easily be spinning away through additional purification cycles to produce weapons-grade uranium. Netanyahu understands that.

John Kerry and Barack Obama just as clearly understand that; their cynicism and crocodile ire over Netanyahu’s speech aside.

See the centrifuges spin. Spin, Centrifuges, spin.

The Mosul Campaign

Posted on by
Reply

A couple of things.

Regarding the well-publicized upcoming Mosul, Iraq, campaign (remember the ability of WWI allied general staffs to predict German army movements by reading Berlin newspaper society pages? President Barack Obama plainly does not), a carefully unnamed “military official” had this to say:

When we feel that the Iraqi forces are ready to go and win decisively, we will go and advise the Iraqis to begin the operation.

Hmm….

Keep some things in mind for a broader context of this official’s remark. These are the same Iraqi forces that failed so miserably against the Iranian army. These are the same Iraqi forces that failed so miserably against the American military, twice. These are the same Iraqi forces that failed so miserably when the Daesh ran all over them just a few months ago. These are Iraqi forces.

Update: As prelude to the upcoming Mosul campaign (and from which all the publicity may have been intended to distract as well as to show “initiative”) a 30,000-strong mixed Iraqi, Kurdish, militia, and Iranian force began an assault on Tikrit, which some 1,500-2,000 Daesh terrorists are holding, over last weekend.

This force is made up of Peshmerga, Sunni and Shia militia units, and units from Iran’s Quds forces.  Some Iraqi army units are along, too, to lend a government imprimatur to the operation.

As happened the last time the Iraqi army tried to take Tikrit, the offensive has stalled short of the city’s suburbs, having run into mines on the roads and other key approaches: Daesh emplaced IEDs.  The move now is to attempt to surround the city; Quds leadership is guiding the eastern part of the operation.

Mending Fences

Posted on by
1

President Barack Obama‘s national security adviser castigated Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saying the Israeli leader’s plan to address a joint session of Congress next week has been “destructive” to the relationship between the two countries.

Most administrations would take advantage of the visit of a major ally’s head of state to work out programs, resolve differences (at least down to a dull roar), even to mend fences.

Not President Barack Obama and his administration.

This is fence mending ego-ridden style. Obama just can’t stand to have grown adults not saying, “Mother, may I?” to him.

His minions in the Senate are illustrative of how widespread Obama’s poison has become. Some Senate Democrats had “invited” Netanyahu to a private audience with them: Senate Minority Whip Richard Durbin (D, IL) and Senator Dianne Feinstein (D, CA) among others. Netanyahu declined the secretive meeting, noting (accurately, it turns out)

I believe that doing so at this time could compound the misperception of partisanship regarding my upcoming visit[.]

Durbin was displeased:

His refusal to meet is disappointing to those of us who have stood by Israel for decades[.]

No, Dick. If you were serious, you wouldn’t demand a secret meeting; you would attend the public joint session.

On Terrorist Wannabes

Posted on by
Reply

Would-be ISIS terrorists are taking more roundabout routes to Syria in an effort to make European authorities’ attempts to catch them more difficult.

And

At least 3,400 European fighters are believed to have joined the ISIS army….

European authorities are concerned about that, looking for ways to stop the wannabes’ outbound travel. The authorities have this backward. They should let these folks go; Europe is better off without them. The authorities should, instead, focus their efforts on not letting the survivors back in.

Arabs’ Thoughts on Obama’s Iran Deal

Posted on by
Reply

Arabia is worried, and with good reason.

The Obama administration initially said its policy was to completely dismantle Tehran’s nuclear infrastructure as a means to protect Washington’s Mideast allies.

Now, however, US officials say it is no longer plausible to eliminate all of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, suggesting that any final deal would leave some nuclear capability in place. Iran denies that it is seeking to build a nuclear bomb, but a final deal providing for nuclear enrichment capacity could prompt a competition.

Indeed.

Arab officials have increasingly spoken about a possible nuclear arms race in the Mideast as the negotiations have continued for 18 months, having been extended twice.

Thus,

“At this stage, we prefer a collapse of the diplomatic process to a bad deal,” said an Arab official who has discussed Iran with the Obama administration and Saudi Arabia in recent weeks.

This is confidence our Arab allies and erstwhile allies have in the negotiating skills of the guys who sit in the President’s and the Secretary of State’s chairs. They’re not unduly pessimistic.