Obama to Throw Israel Under the Bus for an Alliance with Iran


In his continuing clinical narcissistic quest for legacy, Obama wants to be remembered as the one President who reinvented the middle East.

Ultimately, this means he wants to do a Nixon/China pivot with Iran.

When discussing Iran, we should remember to separate the Iranian people from their leaders. The people are entrepreneurial, family minded and religious. They are big fans of American goods and entertainment. They deserve a government that is open, free and tolerant.

Unfortunately, that won’t happen anytime soon.

Prime Minister Netanyahu is invited by John Boehner to speak to the U.S. Congress, which was reported as a ‘dis’ to Obama. Obama’s party sycophants and the media were more concerned about appearances and bruised egos than the real reasons this speech needs to occur.

Netanyahu is deeply concerned. He knows that America is deliberately lowering it’s profile in the 5+1 negotiations with Iran. He doesn’t believe this President has his back. Israel is but a small sliver of land surrounded by those that seek it’s demise.

334512_Netanyahu

Netanyahu has legitimate reasons to be fearful. We only need to listen to the Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei who called for the destruction of Israel, stating that the “barbaric” Jewish state “has no cure but to be annihilated.

Iran supreme leader touts 9-point plan to destroy Israel

Just last month, Former U.S. Secretary of State George Schultz, testifying before the U.S. Senate Committee on Armed Services, said about Iranian nuclear ambitions:

“They’re trying to develop nuclear weapons. There is no sensible explanation for the extent, the money, the talent they’ve devoted to their nuclear thing, other than that they want a nuclear weapon. It can’t be explained any other way.”

“They give every indication, Mr. Chairman, that they don’t want a nuclear weapon for deterrence, they want a nuclear weapon to use it on Israel. So it’s a very threatening situation.”

According to the Council on Foreign Relations the U.S. State Department considers Iran the world’s “most active state sponsor of terrorism.” U.S. officials say Iran provides funding, weapons, training, and sanctuary to numerous terrorist groups–most notably in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Lebanon–posing a security concern to the international community.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stated “Iran has been the country that has been in many ways a kind of central banker for terrorism in important regions like Lebanon through Hezbollah in the Middle East, and {Hamas} in the Palestinian Territories.”

While Obama remains in overall control of foreign policy and defense, it has been reported that the Iranians have exploited loopholes in the interim agreement and made significant progress on all areas of their nuclear program.

Congress (bi-partisan) has threatened further sanctions. Obama has threatened to veto ANY bill that tightens sanctions against Iran.

The National Review Online states:

 “The number of nuclear weapons Iran could make from its enriched uranium has steadily risen throughout Mr. Obama’s presidency”.

Why is this President, who clearly has the same intelligence as Congress, trying to water down sanctions?

Theories:

  1. Valerie Jarrett is Iranian born (pre-revolution). Her Svengali control over this White House and President control their wide-eyed Chamberlain like policy.
  2. Obama despises Netanyahu and this is personal. How dare that “conservative” Jew question the great and powerful O(z)!
  3. Obamas Muslim roots catalyze in policy. This is already demonstrated in his exasperating inability to call Islamic Terror by it’s name.
  4. His Marshall-Davis, Ayres, Alinsky, Wright leanings dominate his world view. America needs to brought down a notch, along with it’s little cousin in the middle east, Israel.
  5. He is simply naive.

Thankfully America is still a three-branch government. Unilateral Executive decisions can be fought by Congress and the Courts.

The lawyer Alan Dershowitz is of the view that if “Congress chooses to assert its constitutional power to participate in foreign policy decisions”, Obama would not have a completely free hand in making a deal with Iran. In case of a constitutional conflict between these branches of government, the Supreme Court may resolve the conflict but it is unclear how the judges would deal with it.

Meanwhile, with ISIS monopolizing the headlines, along with domestic boondoggles such as Obamacare, upcoming debates on Net Neutrality and Obama’s ‘non-scandal’ scandals, we may not hear much about the Iranian nuclear program.

All 2016 Presidential contenders should be pressed on communicating their plans to deal with what appears to be imminent; a nuclear Khomeini whose vision is to replace Israel with a Palestinian state.


Dave

Don’t be afraid to see what you see. – Ronald Reagan

Close