No Deal Is Better Than A Bad Deal

Editorialby Gregory J. Welborn

President Obama was so disdainful of Benjamin Netanyahu that he publicly commented he hadn’t even bothered to watch the Prime Minister’s address to Congress, viagra 40mg and then obfuscated about its text not offering any “viable alternative”. From that statement alone, medicine we can deduce that the President really didn’t even bother to read the text of the speech or Obama would have realized that Netanyahu actually articulated a much better alternative to the bad deal Obama seems willing to sign.

prime.minister.Netanyahu

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

Interestingly, sale despite Obama’s public slap at Netanyahu, the Prime Minister was gracious enough to offer Obama a face saving overture by praising Obama for “all he has done for Israel”. Netanyahu is to be complimented for that gesture. He knew his speech would anger Obama, but he also knew he had to give the speech because the stakes are so high in this negotiation with Iran. Obama is committed to getting a deal – any deal – for the sake of his legacy, but the result of this approach is likely to be deadly for Israel, the U.S. and the west.

The Prime Minister didn’t pull any punches in discrediting the details of what the Obama administration is about to accept. The very heart of Netanyahu’s criticism is the nature of the Iranian regime. A deal is only as good as the deal’s participants, and here is the critical flaw of Obama’s approach. Netanyahu pointed out in painstaking specificity the evidence which shows Iran continues to be a sponsor of terrorism, fanatically committed to the “annihilation of Israel” and determined to dominate its neighbors. The historical record is not pretty, including internal repression and mass killings, continued military support of Assad’s regime, destabilization of other countries’ governments and the on-going arming of Hezbollah, Hamas, and Shiite militias.

The bottom line is that Iran cannot be allowed a nuclear bomb. In stark contrast to Obama’s assertion that Iran would join as a responsible member the family of nations, Iran would actually conquer, dominate and intimidate other nations. The key evidence of Iran’s intention in this regard is Iran’s continued development of intercontinental ballistic missiles. Nobody develops ICBMs to deliver anything except nuclear warheads to countries far afield. ICBMs are designed to deliver these payloads to other continents – say Europe and America.

The critical issue is something called “breakout time” – the time it takes to go from a peaceful nuclear program to actually putting together a bomb. If you have all the components ready to go, just needing assembly, your breakout time is short. If you don’t have those components – the primary one being enriched uranium – then your breakout time is long.

The Obama deal guarantees that Iran will get a nuclear bomb either by keeping the deal or by violating the deal. The deal allows Iran to enrich as much uranium as it wants after 10 years, but the deal doesn’t require the dismantling of any enrichment facilities. This means Iran could easily enrich uranium in secret. As Netanyahu pointed out, “inspectors document violations; they don’t stop them.” This was echoed by the International Atomic Energy Agency in its most recent report which expressed its concerns “about the possible existence in Iran of undisclosed development of nuclear payloads for missiles.”

The only way to stop Iran is to force Iran to dismantle as many of its existing facilities as we can find. The only way to force the dismantling is to maintain existing economic sanctions and to impose even tougher ones if Iran does not agree to dismantling their facilities.

As Netanyahu pointed out, the economic sanctions are working. They’re forcing Iran to the negotiating table. This isn’t the time to reduce that pressure. This is also why Saudi Arabia continues to pump oil at capacity in the face of falling oil prices. Economically, Saudi Arabia should cut back in hopes of raising the price of oil. But Saudi Arabia knows that Iran is a threat and knows that Iran needs a $136/barrel oil price to meet its cashflow demands. Iran, for all its bluster and all the trouble it causes in the Middle East, is still a weak country hurting economically. If we let them off the economic hook, they will only become more dangerous to their neighbors and the west.

Obama wants a deal for the deal’s sake so that his legacy will be “peace in his time”. Unfortunately, this leads him to accepting terms which will only guarantee that the next president’s crisis will be nuclear proliferation. If Iran gets the bomb, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and others will not be far behind.

obama_cham

Peace in our time? Chamberlain and Obama

 

Obama claims to be a man of peace. Well the best way to get peace and keep that peace is to make sure it is a just peace for all concerned. Iran must be shown, in no uncertain terms that its current actions must stop and its nuclear capabilities dismantled. The best way to do that is to reject the deal, increase sanctions and let it be known that the U.S. will not stand in the way of any other regional power taking steps to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities.

==================================================

About the author: Gregory J. Welborn is a freelance writer and has spoken to several civic and religious organizations on cultural and moral issues. He lives in the Los Angeles area with his wife and 3 children and is active in the community. He can be reached [email protected]/5l.com

Get Citizensjournal.us Headlines free  SUBSCRIPTION. Keep us publishing – DONATE

*Scroll down to post a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *