Volume 6, Issue 19
A reality check suggests a different conclusion.
Iran was close to producing a nuclear weapon at the time of the signing of the accords. They had acquired the technology and assembled the necessary elements for the production of a nuclear bomb. This has been confirmed as recently as yesterday when former CIA experts stated that, in their opinion, Iran could begin tomorrow with the enriched plutonium in hand and construct a bomb within nine months. The major flaw in the agreement is that all provisions sunset in seven years. Iran never agreed to abandon nuclear weapons, just to delay them for a certain period of time. President Obama, in defense of the deal, stated that, within ten years at the time, hopefully, a greater peace treaty could be achieved.
This has always been the fundamental hope of progressives.
In a recent interview with CBS’s Norah O’Donnell, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, compared Ayatollah Ali Khamenei with Adolph Hitler. When asked why, he responded,
“Because he wants to expand. He wants to create his own project in the Middle East very much like Hitler who wanted to expand at the time. Many countries around the world and in Europe did not realize how dangerous Hitler was until what happened, happened. I don't want to see the same events happening in the Middle East.”
Nazism was death’s merchant.
Iran is not restricted in developing a state-of-the art missile system. They have increased military spending by 40% partially using the withheld funds that were released upon their signing of the compact. They have the ability to produce a nuclear bomb. What they lack is the missile system to deliver the nuclear warhead. Whether Iran had signed the nuclear deal or not, they needed ten years to perfect their military infrastructure. Like Germany, a temporary peace accord actually fits into the strategy.
Again, the critical flaw in the Iranian deal was that, by structure, it lapsed and became null and void in short period of time. What indication is there that Crown Prince Salman is not correct? Iran supports and finances terrorism throughout the region. They are one of the major backers of Hezbollah whose mission statement is to overthrow Israel. Further, they have given no indication that they are willing to live peacefully as Shias with their Sunni brothers in a peaceful Islam.
Why then are the Establishment leaders of the United States, as well as many of our allies overseas, determined to trust Iran to change their ways against all evidence of their intentions and purposes? Could it be because they have no answer other than the maintenance of business as usual? Putting off the ultimate inevitable negative consequence in a euphoric belief that the current system will always cure itself will be the positive result. No commitment for the total defense of principle and liberty is critical.
The evidence of history would indicate otherwise.
Like Germany in 1939, why allow Iran in 2018 to prepare for and wage war by other means? If Iran develops a missile delivery system and perfects it in the next seven years, they will possess the tools for war and terror that North Korea possesses today. They will have achieved critical mass of nuclear capability.
Further criticism of President Trump’s decision is to ask how he will negotiate a nuclear deal with North Korea’s Kim Jong-un if it appears the U.S. will not keep its word on such agreements. Perhaps Kim understands that business as usual has changed in international negotiations. The United States does not want war by any means and will not allow a rogue nation to wage it.
It is incredible to waste time worrying about whether subversives trust the United States. We are not promoting terror and we are not starving our own people.
In his recent book, The Soul of America, Jon Meacham refers to five defenders of liberty that, at one time or another, have sustained the United States throughout its history: the Presidency, Congress, the Courts, the Press, and the People. Currently, the credibility of all of these is under challenge except for the people. Only the people can now stand at the barricades in defense of the principles of freedom.
Senator John McCain, who is very ill with cancer, recently sent this audio message to his colleagues in Washington, DC:
I don’t know how much longer I will be here…I’d like to see us recover our sense that we are more alike than different. We’re citizens of a republic made of shared ideals, forged in a new world to replace the tribal enmities that tormented the old one.
Even in times of political turmoil such as these, we share that awesome heritage and the responsibility to embrace it.
In his and his country’s darkest hour, Churchill turned to the last great defense, the spiritual commitment of the people. It was the people who rose up and provided the backbone for the leadership and who were unanimous in their resolve to never give up. Even if it meant hand-to-hand combat with the Germans in the streets of London, no matter what it took, no matter what it cost, never give up. And most importantly, never compromise on the principles of liberty and freedom.
When common sense exposes the dubious course of a plan or an agreement, such revelation produces an estranged reality check, for it challenges business as usual, the purview of the Establishment.
Devotion and protection of freedom and liberty in America has always rested with the people whether it was independence, religious freedom, abolition, civil rights, women’s suffrage, due process, free enterprise, or protection of human rights worldwide.
The United States is the guardian of liberty because its people have never failed “the responsibility to embrace it.”
My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe.
What do you believe?