Posted on 03/19/2015 11:44:50 AM PDT by Kaslin
Apologies for quoting myself, but here's what I wrote within hours of Benjamin Netanyahu's dramatic victory Tuesday night -- then repeated here on Wednesday morning:
Parting thought: Given Obama's knee-jerk rejection of electoral thumpings, Tehran should consider adding some big demands to their list. Who knows what O might be willing to agree to, out of spite for Israeli voters, Bibi and the Cotton 47? Gulp.
Totally predictable. O petulant and spiteful, not reflective, after losses MT @thegoldfarb: pic.twitter.com/xVkP8V8smX— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) March 19, 2015
In the wake of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahus decisive reelection, the Obama administration is revisiting longtime assumptions about Americas role as a shield for Israel against international pressure. Angered by Netanyahus hard-line platform toward the Palestinians, top Obama officials would not rule out the possibility of a change in American posture at the United Nations, where the U.S. has historically fended off resolutions hostile to Israel.
A draft nuclear accord now being negotiated between the United States and Iran would force Iran to cut hardware it could use to make an atomic bomb by about 40 percent for at least a decade, while offering the Iranians immediate relief from sanctions that have crippled their economy, officials told The Associated Press on Thursday. As an added enticement, elements of a U.N. arms embargo against Iran could be rolled back...Officials said the tentative deal imposes new limits on the number of centrifuges Iran can operate to enrich uranium, a process that can lead to nuclear weapons-grade material. The sides are zeroing in on a cap of 6,000 centrifuges, officials said, down from the 6,500 they spoke of in recent weeks. That's also less than the 10,000 such machines Tehran now runs, yet substantially more than the 500 to 1,500 that Washington originally wanted as a ceiling. Only a year ago, U.S. officials floated 4,000 as a possible compromise...Washington believes it can extend the time Tehran would need to produce a nuclear weapon to at least a year for the 10 years it is under the moratorium. Right now, Iran would require only two to three months to amass enough material if it covertly seeks to "break out" toward the bomb. The one-year breakout time has become a point the Obama administration is reluctant to cross in the set of highly technical talks, and that bare minimum would be maintained for 10 years as part of the draft deal. After that, the restrictions would be slowly eased...Any March framework agreement is unlikely to constrain Iran's missile program, which the United States believes may ultimately be aimed at creating delivery systems for nuclear warheads. Diplomats say that as the talks move to deadline, the Iranians continue to insist that missile curbs are not up for discussion.
When nuclear monitors said Iran had started testing a single advanced centrifuge last year, some U.S. politicians and analysts jumped on the report as proof the Islamic Republic cant be trusted. To U.S. officials negotiating with Iran, it was probably just a mistake -- one that shows the pitfalls in the highly technical accord being discussed. Describing the incident in detail for the first time, U.S. officials, who asked not to be identified following diplomatic rules, said the testing was probably done by a low-level employee on Irans nuclear program who didnt understand the limits placed on his experimentation.
Literally making excuses for our enemies... http://t.co/U2BEBTZyns And seeking to punish our allies. http://t.co/ckTPdWvx4j— Stephen Hayes (@stephenfhayes) March 19, 2015
If youd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
Related threads
State warns: 'Iran sanctions absolutely must not happen'
Spite toward Bibi hardened Obamas resolve to do Iran nuke deal (9pm Bibi interview on FOX)
It’s all about me.
It’s always about me.
Iran will have nukes.
And Bibi’s a puke.
It’s all about me.
Since 2011 I’ve created a blog devoted to Obama outrages. Enjoy. http://obamaclarifier.blogspot.com
When grilled on what Obama is doing, he never speaks negatively only facts and truth....he never gets riled up and he has every right to do so.
I am taken aback by his demeanour, reminds me of same in Ronald Reagan.
History Repeats Itself. I am saddened that America never fights to win. Until we change this, these wars will go on and on and kill our best.
He’s a vicious, petty, anti-Jew, pro-Islam, dope smoking, bi-sexual, incompetent, illegal alien, American hating, psychopathic, racist spoiled brat with Napoleonic delusions of grandeur.
And if he had been honest in 2008 he would not have been elected. What a waste of the opportunity for the first Black president. That is now ruined for all of time.
They will do the same with the first woman president whose time has come but not MISSUS Clinton. Another nightmare.
Absolutely right!
I used to think about the good a patriotic, competent, non-racist black President and First Lady could do. They could speak honestly to blacks and be listened to as no white ever could.
In the six years wasted by the Obamas the entire course of America could have been changed for the better. He could have been re-elected with a history setting landslide and been revered in history as one of our greatest presidents..
They could have ended the Gangsta' / Ho culture, brought back the two-parent black family, made real education something black kids respected instead of disdained as "white", replaced handouts with work, jobs and self respect....
. And so much more.
Instead,both of them have spent their time sowing the seeds of envy and distrust, inculcating racial hate, and driving Americans further apart.
.
After 1970?
bookmark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.