A deal with the devil: US considers reducing nuke demands on Iran

Getty Images

Back a few decades ago when Iran was holding Americans hostage — some 400 days — they were released after the election of one fella named Ronald Wilson Reagan. You see, the Iranians knew Reagan represented strength — not the weakness of Jimmy Carter. It was also the same Reagan who stood before the Brandenburg Gate and delivered the simple message, “Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall” — and so it happened.

Now fast forward to today, where B. Hussein Obama leans over to then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and confides that Putin needs to be told “after my reelection I will have more flexibility” — yep, we now know how that statement was taken.

But something else has kinda evaded the news radars – on purpose by the mainstream fawning Obama media. We reported here about the joint naval exercises being conducted between Iraq and China. Now there’s something even worse.

Advertisement - story continues below

As reported by Fox News, “the United States is considering softening demands that Iran gut its uranium enrichment program, instead floating a new proposal that would allow Tehran to keep almost half of the program intact, diplomats say. The initiative, reported last week Thursday by The Associated Press, comes as Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has sought to leverage the crisis in the Middle East to ease sanctions on his country as part of nuclear talks, suggesting in a United Nations address that security cooperation between Iran and other countries could only occur if they struck a favorable nuclear deal.”

Perhaps the Obama administration is seeking Iranian “boots on the ground” to fight against ISIS and in return is willing to enable Iran — the number one state sponsor of Islamic terrorism — to develop a nuclear weapon capability? We’ve reported here that the Obama administration is already providing intelligence aid to Iran’s proxy terrorist army Hezbollah in the hopes it will fight against ISIS — all the while Hezbollah is aiding Bashar al-Assad who is propped up by Iran. Could it be Obama is playing his typical game of politics to get ISIS under control without any American combat commitment — outsourcing it out instead to Iran, in effect making the deal with the devil?

Fox says, “while focusing in large part on Islamic extremists in the region, Rouhani made clear Iran’s cooperation in addressing these threats hinges on the outcome of ongoing nuclear talks – as he once again urged other nations to drop what he described as “excessive demands.” Iran insists it be allowed to run at least the present 9,400 machines. The tentative new U.S. offer attempts to meet the Iranians close to half way on numbers, diplomats told The Associated Press. They said it envisages letting Iran keep up to 4,500 centrifuges but would reduce the stock of uranium gas fed into the machines to the point where it would take more than a year of enriching to create enough material for a nuclear warhead.”

The shrewd Rouhani is seeking to present ISIS as a more clear and present threat — rather than the activities of his Islamo-fascist regime — that by the way, still holds an American pastor, Saeed Abedini hostage. American officials are furious with Iran for detaining Jason Rezarian, a Washington Post journalist who has both American and Iranian citizenship, as well as his wife. However, Rouhani said a deal could mark the “beginning of multilateral cooperation” and allow for “greater focus on some very important regional issues such as combating violence and extremism.”

Fox says “Obama fears that failure to seal a deal could see a return to confrontation, including U.S. and Israeli threats of military means as a last resort to slow Iran’s nuclear program. “My message to Iran’s leaders and people is simple: Do not let this opportunity pass,” President Obama said last Wednesday in his own address to world leaders at the UN General Assembly.”

That’s certainly not a message of strength, but rather one of conciliation. Obama is willing to do almost anything to rid himself of this national security debacle in the Middle East because it’s politically troublesome, and he apparently has no practical understanding of foreign policy and strategic decision-making — unless he thinks a new caliphate is actually a great idea. He wants his legacy to be his domestic agenda — which is also failing.

Keep an eye on what happens with the Iranian nuclear negotiations — it will indicate the direction things will head with ISIS, especially in Syria.

What would I do? As I’ve said before, the best bulwark against Sunni or Shia Islamo-fascism in the Middle East is an independent Kurdish state — one that extends from Northern Iran-Iraq-Syria and becomes a trusted American ally along with Israel. And then we can strengthen our relationships with Egypt, Jordan, and the UAE — three Arab states. America then cuts bait with Qatar, Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia (all major state sponsors of Islamo-fascism and jihadism) — game, set, match. Sykes-Picot has failed, so it’s time to be practical in aligning pro-Western alliances in the Middle East.
J.K. Rowling mocks "refugee terrorism" -- THEN reality hits hard

J.K. Rowling mocks "refugee terrorism" -- THEN reality hits hard

Once again, John McCain does the INDEFENSIBLE

Once again, John McCain does the INDEFENSIBLE