nuke

The rabid frothing of the administration and its lackeys (if you can suppress your gag reflex, this is a sample) over a simple and direct letter by Senator Rep. Tom Cotton (R-AR) to the head extremist of Iran should tell you something. The administration does not want anyone looking very close at what it is doing.

Before reading further keep in mind that US does not have diplomatic relations with Iran and it is on the State Department's list of State Sponsors of Terror.

Not only is Obama collaborating with Iran to pave the way for it to produce a nuclear weapons... and doing it without consulting Congress, much less seeking advice and consent. What Obama is doing in these negotiations is engaging in garden variety duplicity. On the one hand he has said:

And what I have said is, is that we will not countenance Iran getting a nuclear weapon. My policy is not containment; my policy is to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon — because if they get a nuclear weapon that could trigger an arms race in the region, it would undermine our non-proliferation goals, it could potentially fall into the hands of terrorists [potentially? wtf? the state he is negotiating with is a terrorist state from its founding to the present].

But, at the same time, he has taken steps and advanced a negotiating position that ensures Iran has a guaranteed route to a) possessing a nuke and b) being rewarded by building a nuke by having sanctions removed.

No one really knows why Obama has decided to let Iran have a nuclear weapon. The only vaguely rational explanation is that the regime is unmooring itself from the long term security pacts we've had with Israel, Turkey, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia and trying to make Iran our new best friend in the region. All other explanations involved craven cowardice, hardcore anti-semitism, garden variety leftwing American hate, and outright treason. Mind you, I'm not ruling any of these out. If an administration will contrive to kill several hundred people on the US-Mexico border to build a fact-set to justify more stringent gun laws that tells you there is nothing they won't do.

The administration seems to be of the opinion that it can allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons and no one else will care. Israel won't care that a regime, other than the Obama regime, that is committed to its destruction has nukes. Neither will Turkey. And neither will Saudi Arabia.

The deal that seems to be taking shape right now does not fill me—or many others who support a diplomatic solution to this crisis—with confidence. Reports suggest that the prospective agreement will legitimate Iran’s right to enrich uranium (a “right” that doesn’t actually exist in international law); it will allow Iran to maintain many thousands of operating centrifuges; and it will lapse after 10 or 15 years, at which point Iran would theoretically be free to go nuclear. (The matter of the sunset clause worries me, but I’m more worried that the Iranians will find a way to cheat their way out of the agreement even before the sun is scheduled to set.)

...

This is a very dangerous moment for Obama and for the world. He has made many promises, and if he fails to keep them—if he inadvertently (or, God forbid, advertently) sets Iran on the path to the nuclear threshold, he will be forever remembered as the president who sparked a nuclear-arms race in the world’s most volatile region, and for breaking a decades-old promise to Israel that the United States would defend its existence and viability as the nation-state of the Jewish people.

...

If Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey respond to an Iran nuclear agreement by ramping up their own nuclear programs, we may be able to judge the deal a provisional failure.

Moreover, it doesn't seem to realize that once Iran gets the imprimatur of the negotiating group to build a nuke that it will set off a furious arms race because no one who wants a nuke is going to wait for Iran to have theirs first.

As U.S. and Iranian diplomats inched toward progress on Tehran’s nuclear program last week, Saudi Arabia quietly signed its own nuclear-cooperation agreement with South Korea.

That agreement, along with recent comments from Saudi officials and royals, is raising concerns on Capitol Hill and among U.S. allies that a deal with Iran, rather than stanching the spread of nuclear technologies, risks fueling it.

Saudi Arabia’s former intelligence chief, Prince Turki al-Faisal, a member of the royal family, has publicly warned in recent months that Riyadh will seek to match the nuclear capabilities Iran is allowed to maintain as part of any final agreement reached with world powers. This could include the ability to enrich uranium and to harvest the weapons-grade plutonium discharged in a nuclear reactor’s spent fuel.

Saudi Arabia ... who has a lot of cash and no nukes... also has a military alliance with Pakistan... who has nukes and no cash.

So here we are. On the cusp of a disastrous foreign policy failure and an official repudiation of the United States' s obligations under every nuclear non-proliferation treaty ever signed. An Obama and his fluffers are upset because Rep. Tom Cotton (R-AR) referred to the US Constitution.