No one, and I mean no one, has been a bigger supporter of the hardliners in Iran than Obama

By 20 Comments 2,389 views

iran nuclear deal

 

The Barack Obama career tree is decorated with ornaments of failure. Most notable among the early disasters is Grove Parc. Grove Parc was a housing project in Obama’s district in Chicago. Obama used it as a springboard for his political ambitions. He enmeshed himself with the slumlords Valerie Jarrett and Tony Rezko and subsequently Obama got campaign funding while Jarrett and Rezko got wealthy. The residents suffered for it.

Back in 2012 I said this would be the blueprint for the Obama Presidency:

Grove Parc was the blueprint for the Obama Presidency. It’s a shame that no one in the MSM would have a look at it.

One activist had this to say:

“I hope there is not much predictive value in his history and in his involvement with that community.”

Prophetic.

In Grove Parc Obama built a house of cards that appeared impressive long enough for him to benefit. Once he seized what he needed from it he ignored it as it failed and fell into squalor. It is what he is doing as President. Much like Warren Palmer, who shot Cecil and wanted mount his head on the wall as a trophy, Obama is now the hunter shooting game. Unfortunately, his weapons are trained on the US. He shoved Obamacare down the throat of America and put off the biggest problems until after his tenure ends. He’s even furiously trying to suppress the rate hikes for 2016.

Now let me remind you of something Obama once said:

“As long as I am President of the United States Iran will not get a nuclear weapon.”

As I wrote then- the key is “As long as I am President….”

This condition allows him to give away the farm and still look pretty. Who in the media will remember what he said? Who will hold him accountable for his words? They won’t confront his bald faced lies now as it is. Obama’s plan is to delay the time when Iran creates a bomb. Nothing more. It simply won’t happen on his watch.

John Hinderaker writes that Obama came perilously close to accusing the GOP of treason.

It’s those hardliners chanting “Death to America” who have been most opposed to the deal. They’re making common cause with the Republican caucus.

No. No. No. No. No.

Barack Obama has been the biggest ally of the Iranian hardliners. No one on Earth has done more to support them.

The most obvious proof of that is his utter capitulation to Iranian negotiators. Obama has given up everything he claimed was non-negotiable.

“All of this has been said by Obama himself,” Dershowitz explains. “When Obama first set out the red lines, he specified 24/7 inspections—we didn’t get that. He set out that Iran would never have nuclear weapons—we didn’t get that. He set out to end the nuclear facility at Fordow—we didn’t get that. He has crossed his own red lines at least three times.”

Obama has the chance to act against the Iranian hardliners. Instead, he demonstrated his support through inaction.

Remember Nedā Āghā-Soltān?

 

Soltan was shot and killed in the Iranian Arab Spring, also known as the Persian Awakening. There was unrest on a large scale in Iran and conditions were ripe for revolution. While he supported the “Arab Spring” in Egypt and Libya, what did Obama do for Iran?

Nothing. Not a damned thing.

In 2009, demonstrators filled the streets of Iran, denouncing the regime and crying out for freedom. It was a glorious opportunity for the leader of the free world to demonstrate his support for free people everywhere and strike a decisive blow against the bloody regime that had considered itself at war with the United States for three decades.

But Barack Obama didn’t help them. Quite the contrary. The leader of the free world was too busy extending his hand to those same mullahs.

It was monstrous when Obama stood by and did nothing during the abortive Iranian revolution; instead, he bought ice cream and posed for photo ops on the golf course while the only revolution against Islamic rule in a Muslim country was taking flight in Iran.

And why?

“I’ve made it clear that the United States respects the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and is not interfering with Iran’s affairs.”

Obama did not have the same respect for the sovereignty of the more secular nations of Egypt and Libya but he professed profound respect for the harsh Iranian Islamic theocracy.

The Iranian dissidents were the best chance for change in Iran and Obama blew them off. And worse.

On the human-rights side, administration policy has been marked by indifference. When the people of Iran flooded the streets to protest the theft of their presidential election in June 2009, President Obama was silent for 11 days. This was an early sign that “engagement” was to be with regimes and rulers, not populations — not even, as it turned out, with Muslim populations, and not even with Muslim populations rising up in protest.

So desperate for the wall trophy is Obama that in the process of capitulating to Iran the Obama regime has largely ignored Iran’s human rights atrocities and made little effort to protect Iranian dissidents.

The Iranian dissidents themselves assert that Barack Obama’s kowtowing to the Iranian hardliners legitimizes and strengthens the Khamenei government.

Days before a major Iranian dissident rally in France, the head of the host organization says the “circumstances are ripe for regime change” in Tehran, but Washington and other Western governments are standing in the way by legitimizing the regime of Supreme Leader Sayyid Ali Khamenei through the pursuit of a nuclear deal.

“Through their policy of appeasement and giving concessions to the regime, Western governments have served as an obstacle to the regime’s overthrow,” said Maryam Rajavi, the leader of the National Council of Resistance of Iran. “In the absence of Western assistance, this regime would have fallen by now.”

Russian dissident Natan Sharansky once met with Obama and was told by Obama that “it would be very important to him to continue this tradition where American presidents help dissidents.”

Right up to the election.

The case of the thwarted revolution in Iran was “the saddest” instance of Obama’s misguided human rights stance, said Sharansky in a wide-ranging interview with The Times of Israel. “Everything starts from the fact that in 2009, when Iranians were ready for the revolution, when millions of double thinkers were going to cross this line,” said Sharansky, “they hear the message from the American president: Engagement with the government of Iran is more important than [its] replacement.”

The president’s stance, he said, “took all the energy out of this [movement]. And if it had succeeded then,” he added, “the whole Arab Spring could have been a very different story.”

Indeed. Sharansky got a snootfull of Geraghty’s Axiom.

Obama did not support the Iranian dissidents. To the contrary, he wouldn’t even demand release of four Americans held hostage by Iran as part of his Chamberlainesque agreement. Obama has steadfastly supported the hardline regime in Iran. No one has been a better friend to them than Barack Obama. Obama yearns for this miserable accord as a trophy to hang in his study but it is the Iranian hardliners who will display Obama’s head on their walls.

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

20 Responses to “No one, and I mean no one, has been a bigger supporter of the hardliners in Iran than Obama”

  1. 1

    Nanny G

    Obama tried to do a guilt-by-association between Republicans and Iran’s hardliners in that, as an end point, both oppose ”the deal.”
    But in fact Obama is far more in line with the mullahs in that both Obama and the mullahs know that Iran gets the bomb either if they follow the agreement or if they break the agreement.
    As proof the IAEA is already complaining that Iran is scrubbing military facilities ahead of IAEA’s inspections.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/11787810/Satellite-pictures-show-Iran-may-be-trying-to-destroy-nuclear-evidence.html
    Iran is potentially trying to get rid of any evidence of past experiments.
    The new photographs of Parchin will only fuel fears in Congress that the Iranian government is intent on outmaneuvering the IAEA inspectors and concealing evidence.
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/iran-refuses-u-n-inspectors-access-to-scientists-and-military-officers-complicating-nuclear-deal-1438813826?tesla=y
    http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-08-05/iran-already-sanitizing-parchin-nuclear-site-intel-warns

    Daniel Greenfield writes:

    Iran is determined to cheat. If Iran is determined to cheat, and has little risk of being punished, then statistically the odds are that it will eventually get away with it.

    He’s right.
    Obama knows this.
    He’s on their side.

  2. 2

    another vet

    All of this coming from the mouth of someone who, along with his party and supporters, sounded like clones of Baghdad Bob. Add in what he is doing and has done to our military along with how he allowed AQ and ISIS to greatly expand their Operational Environment (OE) on his watch and we have one delusional person.

  3. 3

    Greg

    President Obama’s speech yesterday made a very strong case in favor of the nuclear arms deal with Iran . A video and full transcript can be found here. The United States has much to gain from a deal that in reality puts very little at risk.

    Given that the agreement would result in a highly significant and verifiable roll-back of Iran’s nuclear program, and that its opponents have nothing whatsoever to offer in the in the way of rational alternatives themselves, failure to support it would be flat-out stupid.

    The unstated alternatives to the deal are an extraordinarily risky war or an acceleration of the Iranian nuclear program. Who thinks either of those options is a good idea?

  4. 5

    Skookum

    Yes, America will be financing terror and we are expected to provide security for Iran’s nuclear aspirations. How could a deal be any better?

    Maybe they will send our Americans they hold in their prisons as a sign of good faith, but don’t hold your breath.

    I am wondering if we will be expected to provide security for terror conducted in North America? Could that be in one of those side deals that no one is expected to see?

  5. 6

    Nanny G

    Iran’s Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani just visited Moscow to meet with senior Russian leaders, according to two Western intelligence sources, despite a travel ban and U.N. Security Council resolutions barring him from leaving Iran.

    United Nations sanctions monitors have said photographs taken inside Iraq appear to confirm that the head of Iran’s elite military Quds Force, one of Iran’s most powerful people, has been in the country in violation of a U.N. travel ban.

    In October 2011, the U.S. Treasury Department tied Soleimani to the failed Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States at a popular restaurant in Washington, D.C.

    Sec. State Kerry falsely claimed: “Under the United States’s initiative, Qassem Soleimani will never be relieved of any sanctions.”

    So, I guess Iran is going to get the bomb by breaking this agreement as opposed to Iran getting the bomb by keeping this agreement.

  6. 7

    Greg

    Iranian General Qasem Soleimani was the military planner behind Iraq’s successful effort to retake Tikrit from ISIL this past April.

  7. 8

    another vet

    @Common Sense: I’m sure there are Dems who are against the deal. The question is whether or not they’ll buck their master not that it makes any difference because Obama is going to do whatever the hell he wants. He has shown himself to be above the law and the Constitution and has gotten away with it so far. Why stop now?

  8. 9

    Nicolas

    Judging by the pattern of liberal actions, they just love to befriend thugs. First came russian reset, now Iran deal and diplomatic relations with Cuba. The same strategy is for domestic affairs. And each time, loads of fancy-schmancy BS to explain why it didn’t work.

  9. 10

    Greg

    The thing to keep in mind about those working to kill the nuclear deal with Iran is that they have presented no real-world alternate plan. They have no alternate plan. Given the very short time-frame for production of a nuclear weapon that would exist without removal of Iran’s existing enriched uranium stockpiles and without decommissioning two-thirds of their centrifuges—the two great benefits to be had from the nuclear deal—we’d be left with only two options:

    prompt military strikes having a questionable probability of success, which carry a high risk of pulling us into another disastrous war; or

    doing nothing but wringing our hands and pointing our fingers as the Iranians rapidly complete their nuclear weapon program.

    That’s what we’d be left with. There would be no time for more sanctions and more negotiations. We’ve already had our sanctions and negotiations. Basically, we would have deliberately wrecked our single best option, after years of effort finally got us to the point of having one.

    Nobody can tell me that wouldn’t be the height of stupidity. It’s not even politically smart. Scuttle this hard-won deal and you’ll own the consequences. Nobody will be in the mood to hear any more of your “It’s all Obama’s fault” bullshit.

  10. 15

    Nanny G

    Greg,
    Obama talks a great game of False Dilemma Fallacies (My plan or war) but, let’s say the US backs out of the plan before the Iranians can (they are breaking it.)
    Can you really imagine Obama going on TV and telling the American people that we are going to war ?
    Didn’t think so.

    Brigadier General Mohammad Ali Asudi, an adviser to the Supreme Leader and official in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), lashed out at Obama for claiming that the recently inked nuclear accord would moderate Iran and bring it closer to the United States and other Western countries.
    If Obama opens his ears he can hear the voices of millions of Iranians who shout, ‘Death to America.’ ”
    Asudi pushed back against a speech earlier this week by Obama in which he claimed that Iran’s anti-American sentiment exists solely among hardliners
    and not the entire Iranian population.
    Asudi claimed that this is simply not true.

  11. 16

    Enchanted

    @Greg:

    “Iran intends to develop intercontinental ballistic missiles to ultimately strike the United States and not Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned during a live webcast addressing the U.S. Jewish community .”

    http://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/191336-wn-netanyahu-iran-building-icbms-%E2%80%98to-hit-us%E2%80%99/

    Obama admitted that money flowing to Iran from his negotiated deal will be used by Iran to fund terrorism.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/08/07/no_longer_a_conspiracy_127692.html

  12. 17

    Smorgasbord

    A person always roots for the ones they want to win. Look at who obama is rooting for in the different situations since he was elected, and an open-minded person would have to admit that it ain’t for the USA.

  13. 18

    Greg

    @Enchanted, #16:

    “Iran intends to develop intercontinental ballistic missiles to ultimately strike the United States and not Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned during a live webcast addressing the U.S. Jewish community .”

    Yeah, right. And we could then retaliate by turning the entire nation of Iran into radioactive wasteland before their launch pads have even cooled down. That doesn’t strike me as a sequence of events Iran is likely to initiate. As Netanyahu surely knows, unless he’s losing his grip on reality.

Leave a Reply

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