Red Lines and Agreements


Obama is challenged by red lines. We all know about the red line in Syria and, as we learned later, Obama, claimed he never set a red line, the world did. We were told to believe what we are told and not what we see and hear. Like lapdogs the mainstream media agreed, and glossed over the fact that once again Obama lied to the American people.

In the deal made with Iran numerous red lines were set or at least that is what Americans were told. When the negotiations began, we were told that Iran would be forced to stop enriching uranium or there would be consequences. What those consequences were to be, no one knew, and the American people now know that those consequences are indeed moot.

Iran, according to this agreement, will continue to enrich uranium, continue research and development, and the nuclear infrastructure will remain in tact. No nuclear facilities will be removed or shut down, and although cutting the number of centrifuges is part of the deal, 6,000 will still be in service.

Obama and his administration are allowing Iran the ability to restart its nuclear program and to be free of economic sanctions. These are only some of the red lines Obama has crossed.

In 2012, National Security Council (NSC) Spokesman Tommy Vietor stated, “Our position is clear. Iran must live up to its international obligations, including full suspension of uranium enrichment as required by the UN Security Council resolutions.”

By December 2013 Bernadette Meehan, spokeswoman for the NSC, changed that to “We are prepared to negotiate a strictly limited enrichment program only because the Iranians have indicated they are prepared to accept monitoring and limits on level, scope, capacity and stockpiles.”

This administration has gone from shutting down the nuclear capability of Iran to conceding to the Iranian’s demands.

Sanctions have dealt a severe blow to the Iranian society with indications that things were getting worse and there was general discontent. The administration has underestimated just how much those resolutions were harming Iran. Money was diverted to the society in general rather than being sent to terrorist operations or to buying arms. The arms embargo was limiting what Iran could launch in areas it wanted to control and share with its terrorist operations partners.

On June 1st of this year, the New York Times reported that Iran had increased its stockpile by 20% over 18 months, an increase in stockpiles that this administration stated could not happen. When asked about this increase, Marie Harf, a State Department spokeswoman stated that the Iranian stockpile was allowed to fluctuate and declared that a 20% increase in the stockpile was nothing to be concerned about.

This is a direct contradiction of White House statements that any increase in Iranian nuclear fuel stockpiles goes against the interim agreement.

Iran has violated the sanctions many times in the past, up to and including the period of negotiations. The administration has basically ignored these violations rather than confront Iran.

This year, Iran used forged documents to try and obtain compressors that would be used in centrifuge cascades. The process of Iran using UF6 fed into IR5 centrifuges was a clear violation of the interim agreements and was reported by the IAEA with no response of note. Iran said it’s normal.

In December 2014, Iran purchased equipment to be used in the reactor at ARAK.The plutonium in the ARAK reactor can be used to make weapons-grade plutonium. All these breaches were ignored by the Obama administration, the mullahs of Iran were not held accountable, and the negotiations continued, with the Obama administration explaining away these Iranian covert operations.

Obama has ignored or try to explain away these and many more violations, and with help from the media, has kept a great many of these violations from the public, citing national security as the reason.

He had ignored the Iranian Intercontinental Ballistics Missile (ICBM) program until the last minute. They can use ballistic missiles without violating the deal.

Obama has overlooked conflicts in Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Gaza where Iran, the largest state sponsor of terror in the world, is the major protagonist in order to build what he feels will be his legacy. He allows Iran to continue as a rogue state with regional and global conflicts being operated by Iran and its proxies. This will continue with a mass infusion of monies to be spent on arms.

This administration has been releasing $400 million dollars a month to Iran with no idea of where this money is going.

This agreement, worse than no deal at all, is about Obama’s legacy. While France has a more cautious approach to the agreement, Western sources have accused the U.S. administration of bullying those who require a more factual and realistic approach to this agreement.

Media reports indicate that there have been “very harsh expressions of displeasure by the Americans against the French.” It appears the French had substantial questions about the key elements that the White House and State Department are willing to give away. The United States is willing to concede a great deal more than the allies and acted as Iran’s agent.

Obama turned his back on Israel, Saudi Arabia, Europe and our allies in the Gulf for the sole purpose of gaining a legacy that will be detrimental to all our allies in the area.

The inspections under this agreement require a 24-day waiting period between IAEA requests and when they will be able to inspect. It’s a farce.

The media is doing their part. The New York Daily News declared the Republicans that oppose this agreement are traitors. The administration’s Twitter account has started a twitter handle of #47Traitors to try and intimidate Congress into voting for this debacle.

When Bush was trying to stop Iran from getting the bomb, Joe Biden supported Iran’s growing the nuclear infrastructure and, while ridiculing Bush for his stance, Biden received $30,000 for attending a pro-Iranian fundraiser.

Republicans, who vehemently oppose this agreement and who refuse to collaborate with Iran are taunted as traitors.

Obama claimed that Republicans who refuse this agreement are playing into the hands of Iran’s hardliners. Is there anyone in Iran who is more hardline than the present regime, where hangings, stoning, and other forms of death has been imposed on the Iranians more than ever before?

This administration has a deep visceral hatred for our country, considers the United States a colonial power causing harm throughout the world.

Iran has walked over this administration and signed an agreement that gives them everything they want precisely because this administration feels that terrorists’ demands are always based on legitimate grievances against the U.S..

Further proof of this is the fact the annual report to the U.S. Senate by James Clapper, Director of National Security which removed Iran and Hizbollah from the list of terrorism sponsors. Iran was described as “having intentions to dampen sectarianism, build responsive partners and deescalate tensions with Saudi Arabia.”

Was this done to further the agreement just signed or for another reason?

Hizbollah was responsible for the bombing of the Marine Barracks in Beirut and the torture and death of Americans such as Colonel William R. Higgins, William Frances Buckley, Robert Stetham, and others.

The 47 Senators who have stood up for these men and what they stand for are not traitors but rather they are facing the reality that this situation must stop and the forces arrayed against us in the Middle East must be destroyed, a position that will not be considered by this administration.

The red lines were put forth by this administration for domestic consumption not as actual negotiation points .

In the Civil Nuclear Cooperation annex of the agreement, the Fordow complex is to be repurposed for isotope production. The six powers will assist by providing a new generation of centrifuges to help in the operation of isotope production. They can easily be upgraded for enriching uranium in a short period of time.

The position of requiring Iran to make available all nuclear work in military installations and giving access to all sites has been categorically rejected by Iran. More red lines crossed!

This has been of no concern to the Administration because Secretary of State Kerry says we already know what they have done. This is in direct conflict with the statement by Yukiya Amano of the IAEA, who has said we do not know.

Sanctions, some sanctions, were to be lifted slowly and only after Iran meets certain requirements. The sanctions for its missile program and human rights abuses were to remain. The administration changed its position on these sanctions. The AP reported that Obama intended to lift all sanctions resulting in ten of billions of dollars for Iran to strengthen its terrorism activities.

Possible reasons for this agreement come to mind. Is Obama, a President who has damaged our foreign policy for six years, rewarding Iran for its conflicts and attempting to use Iran as a counterbalance to Saudi Arabia or is he motivated by fear? Does Obama really believe if we are nice to Iran they will change their opinion of The United States? It is already clear that Obama is in over his head, and that he does support Islam over any other religion.

The question is now, will Obama allow the forces aligned against Israel to obtain victory.


by John Velisek USN (Ret.)

Twitter: sjspecialist