Petraeus Puts the Icing on Bibi’s Iran Cake

Posted on by ( 2 comments already! )
        

Loading

Larry Kudlow:

Don’t just rely on Benjamin Netanyahu’s passionate advice to Congress on his way to reelection that Iran is our arch enemy. Now we have the counsel of retired general David Petraeus, who gave a remarkable interview this week to the Washington Post. Petraeus agrees with Netanyahu: Iran, not ISIS, is the real enemy.

His message: “I would argue that the foremost threat to Iraq’s long-term stability and the broader regional equilibrium is not the Islamic State; rather, it is Shiite militias, many backed by — and some guided by — Iran.”

The general adds, “Longer-term, Iranian-backed Shia militia could emerge as the preeminent power in the country, one that is outside the control of the government and instead answerable to Tehran.” (Italics mine.)

Netanyahu is arguing against a bad U.S.-Iran deal that might end the economic sanctions and permit Iranian nuclear development after ten years. (Of course, nobody believes Iran will wait for, or permit, true verification.) But the thrust of the Petraeus interview is that unless U.S. military strategy completely changes, Iran is going to take over Iraq.

Petraeus gives ample evidence of this: These Shiite militias are being run by Iran’s top military man, General Qasem Soleimani. He’s the head of the Quds Force of the Revolutionary Guard. He has been spotted and filmed on the ground in Iraq. And he has been making battlefield tours the way Petraeus did during the surge.

In the Post interview, Petraeus relates a remarkable story: In the midst of the surge, the general got a note from Soleimani: “General Petraeus, you should be aware that I, Qasem Soleimani, control Iran’s policy for Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, and Afghanistan.” (Italics mine.) Petraeus told the intermediary he could tell Soleimani to “pound sand.”

Overall, Petraeus makes it very clear that the current Iranian regime “is not our ally in the Middle East,” is part of the problem, not the solution, and is “deeply hostile to us and our friends.” Without ever mentioning Obama’s name, it’s clear that Petraeus is splitting from administration policy.

And isn’t all this what Bibi Netanyahu told the U.S. Congress? Didn’t he say Iran’s goal is to control the whole area, and of course attempt at some point to blast Israel off the face of the Earth?

So why are President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry trying to do business with Iran? If we know who the militias really are and know that Iran wants to take over Iraq and control the whole region, why is the United States talking about lifting economic sanctions and negotiating some sort of accommodationist deal with our arch enemy?

And why is the U.S. doing this with oil down 50 percent and Iran a high-cost producer? The economic table is set for a catastrophic fiscal blow to Iran — our enemy.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
2 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

the fool is a mulim terrorist, when you all comprehend that than you should come to some sort of reality

0
Reply

I’m thinking OUR enemy is different from Obama’s enemy.
There’s even a chance that Obama thinks dhimmitude is the true way to peace along side a 1.3 billion strong Islam
PS, AYAAN HIRSI ALI wrote an EXCELLENT essay explaining the three different forms of Islam here:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-reformation-for-islam-1426859626

I believe that we can distinguish three different groups of Muslims.

The first group I call Medina Muslims, in that they see the forcible imposition of Shariah as their religious duty. They aim not just to obey Muhammad’s teaching but also to emulate his warlike conduct after his move to Medina. Even if they do not themselves engage in violence, they do not hesitate to condone it.

It is Medina Muslims who call Jews and Christians “pigs and monkeys.” It is Medina Muslims who prescribe death for the crime of apostasy, death by stoning for adultery and hanging for homosexuality. It is Medina Muslims who put women in burqas and beat them if they leave their homes alone or if they are improperly veiled.

The second group—and the clear majority throughout the Muslim world—I call them Mecca Muslims. Like devout Christians or Jews who attend religious services every day and abide by religious rules in what they eat and wear, Mecca Muslims focus on religious observance. These Muslims are loyal to the core creed and worship devoutly but are not inclined to practice violence.

The third group are the Muslim dissidents. A few of us have been forced by experience to conclude that we could not continue to be believers; yet we remain deeply engaged in the debate about Islam’s future. The majority of dissidents are reforming believers—among them clerics who have come to realize that their religion must change if its followers are not to be condemned to an interminable cycle of political violence.

Obama sees Medina Muslims as the ”strong horse,” and is highly attracted to them.
He grew up surrounded by Mecca Muslims in Indonesia.
He looks at reformers of Islam, like Egypt’s president Sisi and Jordan’s King and AYAAN HIRSI ALI all as bad guys.

0
Reply