Skip to comments.Ukraine traded for Iran
Posted on 07/16/2015 9:47:00 PM PDT by annalex
by Rabbi Avraham Shmulevich.
For the suppression of the revolution in Ukraine, Putin was ready to pay any price, and Obama offered it to him.
For 13 years, negotiations were held on Iran's nuclear program. Although Iran has never said directly about the desire to have a nuclear bomb, he began a program of nuclear power and the amount of plutonium, centrifuges and equipment that have been made is many times greater than the needs of the peaceful atom. This is clearly a military program. And most importantly - in parallel Iran has created ballistic missiles that can reach any European capital, whether Kiev, London, Berlin or Moscow.
But the problem is that Iran is an extremely aggressive state, where is written in its Constitution, that they must spread Islam throughout the world. Iran supports various terrorist organizations - terror against Israel and terror against the West. This is a state that exists in the ideology of the apocalypse, that is, belief in a doomsday and the final battle between the forces of good and evil. This statement is in many religions, but unlike, for example, Orthodoxy or Catholicism, for the Iranians is a very real thing: Islam is to make war with the world, and the sooner this war happens, the sooner the end of the world will come, followed by the eternal paradise.
If such an aggressive regime were to acquire nuclear weapons, that would be an extremely dangerous situation. For example, Iran has repeatedly stated that it wants to destroy Israel physically. And no one really can vouch for what will happen if they get it in their heads that they have a real opportunity to destroy the world. They are really religious fanatics.
But Obama has signed the agreement, which, according to many experts, not only does not deter the nuclear appetites of Iran, on the contrary, it opens up many opportunities for the production of deadly weapons.
In a few years the embargo on arms supplies to Iran should be lifted, but it is unknown how they will take advantage of these concessions. At the same time, Iran is already getting 100 to 150 billion dollars, which were frozen after the Islamic Revolution. This is a huge amount of money. Where will this lead?
Now we have a Shiite-Sunni war in Iraq. Let me remind you that Iran is Shia, and most of the Muslim world - Sunni, and between them there is mortal enmity. Before the Islamic State came on stage, it was Iranian-Saudi war. Now Iran, thanks to the money, will enhance the ability of its military to participate in this war. Military operations in Iraq will intensify. This will lead to most countries in the region, namely Turkey and Saudi Arabia,-- which have very strained relationship with Iran,-- will also begin a program of nuclear weapons. That will entail an arms race in the Middle East and the surge of terrorism.
Why does Obama need this program?
On the eve of the elections Obama needs a foreign policy victory. Previously, he said that the main challenges are Ebola, Russian aggression against Ukraine and the ISIS.
Ebola is a natural phenomenon can not be beat, at least for that you need to change health habits of the entire African population, at least teach them to wash their hands before eating.
A confrontation with Russia over Ukraine Obama clearly does not want.
The ISIS remains. But Obama does not want to deploy the military, because it is contrary to the logic of his campaign rhetoric, when he promised to withdraw US troops from Iraq. Apparently, Obama decided to fight ISIS with Iran's hands. The fact that this upsets the balance of forces in the Middle East, is somethibng he does not care enough.
In order for the deal with Iran could take place, Obama needed the support of the Russian Federation because the controlling stake in putting pressure on Iran is in Russia's hands. Russia was their only ally and main trading partner.
At first glance, it seems that Russia is getting a very bad deal out of it, because it will lead to lower oil prices. The question arises - why did Russia go for it. We received the answer yesterday when Poroshenko submitted to the Supreme Rada a draft law on changes to the constitution, which practically secured the Russian occupation of Donbass and today, when the Rada voted for it.
These changes are putting an end to the Ukrainian revolution.
Putin's project "New Russia" failed, but the most important goal of Putin is the neutralization of the Maidan. If Ukraine starts to implement reforms, if it turns out the first post-Soviet country that has been able to build a normal society, if Russian citizens see that they can live like human beings - it will be a death sentence to the Putin regime.
Therefore, the suppression of Ukrainian revolution is for Putin a matter of life and death. In an extreme case, he agreed to return Ukraine to the state it was in before the revolution, the corrupt "Kuchma" model of society, which can not serve as an example to the Russians. Rights and freedoms in Ukraine should be less, the economic situation should be worse, the standard of living lower. That kind of Ukraine suits him.
The inclusion of the Donbass in Ukraine, with its militants and their right to veto any change in the foreign policy course of Ukraine is a direct way to achieve these goals of Putin.
For this, he apparently was ready to pay any price, and Obama offered it to him - Putin agreed to reduce the price of oil and endorse the deal with Iran.
If you want to be on this right wing, monarchy, paleolibertarianism and nationalism ping list, but are not, please let me know. If you are on it and want to be off, also let me know. This ping list is not used for Catholic-Protestant debates.
This is interesting and I want to read it more carefully later.
Obama has been a disaster in every way.
this writer sounds intelligent but somehow i can’t quite follow what he is saying
anyway, the IslamoNazi world empire is expanding so O is doing a good job in carrying out his agenda
I believe the writer’s scenario is overly complicated, and that the truth is much simpler. We are in no position to counter Russia in Ukraine, and Russia looks like a winner in the Iranian bargain. Iran will be a major buyer of Russian military and missile technology and will therefore be more closely tied to Moscow — good news for Syria and very bad news for Saudi Arabia. Observers are still hunting for signs of genius in Obama’s strategy, still refusing to believe that he is purposefully grinding America down.
Nully posts this regularly; it fits here:
EVERYTHING obama does either:
a) Weakens America/Americans
b) Distances America’s allies
c) Strengthens America’s enemies
d) Serves Islam
e) Harms Israel
Or some combination of the above.
There are NO counter examples.
It’s hard to argue with that . . .
We are in a position to lower the price of oil, which is Russia's only source of revenue. We also are in a position to deploy troops in Poland and Balt republics, and supply Ukrainian military. This would repeat the story of the Cold War: the USSR did not lose an armed conflict but it ran out of resources competing in the arms race.
Yet we see that the West is yielding on Putin's red-line demand: that Donbass separatists remain in Ukraine and hold a veto over Ukraine's foreign policy, thus ensuring Ukraine's economic failure. This is at the time when Putin seemed ready to give up on Donbass altogether and hope to hold on only to the Crimea.
At the same time Russia could become a major, and virtually only Iranian partner if Iran remained under Western sanctions. Being a nuclear power, Russia was Iran's lifeline on the road to gain nuclear weapons; with that lifeline Iran could continue its intransigence over the talks with the West. Now that Iran can sell its oil in the West and gets its assets freed, Russia loses.
So Russia wins in Ukraine and loses in Iran. The West loses in Ukraine and wins in Iran (I mean, loses and wins in terms of policies objectives). In each case, the wins and losses represent a reversal of the existing trend. That, Shmulevich speculates, can only be if a deal was cut.
This whole premise is preposterous on its face. Russia will, and has, won in BOTH places.
Agree completely that there is PLENTY we could do to Russia, but we aren’t.
What is weird is who we are leaving out in the cold - the Saudis.
As for Israel, this admin could give a fig about them.
What I had to go to Drudge to see this morning, and that’s after watching Varney, is that Egypt’s navy got hit by ISIS this AM using a guided missile. Direct hit too.
Russia loses its partnership with Iran now that the sanctions are lifted. Iran would much rather deal with the West and have access to Western technologies.
I am not entirely convinced by Shmulevich’s reasoning, but it is plausible.
The reason I am not convinced is that I think he overestimates Russia’s leverage over Iran. I think that Iran always wanted the deal and knew it can get it on its terms with Obama.
This is a state that exists in the ideology of the apocalypse
This reminds me of this, posted two years ago:
During my stay in the holy Shi'ite city of Qom in conversation with Ayatollah Hamedani I noticed the term that he used - "culture of expectations, farhangi intizor. The idea was that the spiritual sense of the religious Iran consists in waiting for the Mahdi, the final Savior of the world, who will put an end to oppression, capitalism, the rule of the West and, and the worldwide injustice. Ayatollah Hamedani also talked about how it brings the Shiites closer to the Orthodox, who are also awaiting the moment of the Second Coming, and that according to the hadith of the Prophet, in the final battle, Muslims and Christians are on the same side of the barricades against the hordes Daddzhala-Antichrist (Atlanticism, United States, globalization) . And that everything will be decided in Damascus, where in the Umayyad Mosque the eschatological mystery is destined to happen. This "culture of expectation" unites our peoples and our societies who see the purpose of life not in material comfort, but in the realization of the great goal - the triumph of truth, goodness and justice. Our struggle is for a better future, against the worst-case, in which we find ourselves today.
It’s an interesting point, but I think geography is important here (logistics and supply).
If Iran needs tanks, they can get them in 24 hours. Whatever they need (S-300 missiles, for example0, they can get it fast. In time-zone training and technical support for anything they buy. They can bus military people over the border to be trained if they want.
Obola has conceded both the Ukraine and Iran. The Ukraine is one thing - we missed our opportunity to arm the Ukrainians to the teeth when we had it. Georgians too.
Iran? I think the idea here is to support the strongest Islamic state in the region and let them roll south. I’m more convinced that perhaps Obola and the Russians talked and said, “Everyone wants Israel dead, and between you, us, and the Iranians there is enough oil in the world for everyone. Let’s let Iran be the regional superpower for a change and we can solve multiple problems all at once (Saudi, Egypt, Israel - plus Syria)”
I have zero to support this, but why give them all that money, assent to letting them build the bomb, and all but take them off the terrorism watch list?
It wouldn’t surprise me if very suddenly all this stuff ISIS is doing stops suddenly. Iran got what it wanted. They will concentrate on taking over its neighbors (especially a dramatically weakened Iraq) and there will be one power in the Middle East.
If they start talking about bringing home the tank division we have in SA, then you’ll know this is what’s going down. I think the 6th tank division is there now. An entire division. If we go the repatriation route with SA, then this is where it is going.
Totally spiffballing here, but I don’t see another logical explanation. I think the US thinks Iran isn’t a legitimate continental military threat to us, and if the Russians are for it, why not - especially if it takes out Israel - which is a political thorn in the side of Democrats.
This would be the mother of all troop pullouts - bring home the tank division and naval assets from Dubai and Qatar and then start cutting military divisions. Use the money to lock in a permanent socialist state here at home. Butter over guns, forever.
This isn’t far from what Rand Paul’s advocating either. It will get support from the moron wing of the libertarian party too. The only service Paul digs is the USCG. I’m surprised he doesn’t have a bong at his desk.
I surely agree that Obama administration wanted the Iran deal more than the Iranians themselves.
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.