Tag Archive | iran deal

Obama, You’re Really Chatzuf

First you get involved in our elections.  Then, you get mad that all your funds, representatives, and organizational tactics didn’t work – because we managed to outvote you.

You sign a deal that carries a great deal of immediate danger for the entire Middle East, yet, you do not live here in the Middle East, and Israel and most of our neighbors are against the deal.

You then allow Kerry to threaten Israel that if Congress vetoes the deal, it will be Israel’s fault, and Israel will suffer.  How, exactly, will it be Israel’s fault, and why should we suffer?

After that, Senators are put under pressure to support your decision, regardless of what they themselves think.  MoveOn, a federal committee, cuts funding to those senators opposed to the deal.

You insist on threatening the very basis of democracy, by not allowing Congress to veto the Iran deal, and insisting, through force, on doing what you want to do – even if 6 out of 10 Americans oppose it.

You know, I thought that America was a democratic country, and a country that encouraged democracy.  May I ask why the leader of a so-called democratic country is acting in a way that is explicitly against democracy?

And then you have the chutzpa to get angry at Bibi for “interfering in American issues,” when first of all, it is not an “American affair,” but a Middle East affair first, and a global affair only second.  It is not an American affair at all; America is included with the rest of the globe.  And second, you had the audacity to interfere in our elections.

And you say we are interfering in your affairs?

Obama-rama making a speech, you have a lot of chutzpa.  I think maybe you should apologize to us, because your chatzuf actions and speeches are unacceptable, undemocratic, and unjust.

Oh, and that worry that if we don’t go through with the Iran deal, war will ensue?  We’ll have to fight a war with or without the deal . . . don’t you think it’s better to fight a non-nuclear Iran, rather than a nuclear one?

Advertisements

Some Questions for Kerry

Kerry says that Netanyahu’s comments on Iran are over the top.

After watching this clip, I have a few questions for him.

1. How can you have easy, unlimited access if you first have to go through the process of asking and getting permission?  What does it help to have so many inspectors, if they can’t spontaneously inspect the facilities?

2. How was Netanyahu wrong on the interim deal?  You say he was wrong, but don’t say how.  What did Netanyahu say that was “over the top”?  You are full of talk, empty of content.

3. The critics of your plan offer 2 simple alternatives: 1. Give Iran an ultimatum – either dismantle, or be nuked.  What’s so difficult?  Why isn’t war an option?  You’ve had plenty of time to prepare, and pushing the war off will only make the situation worse.  2. Keep tightening sanctions until Iran dismantles its nuclear facilities entirely, and signs a two-line agreement that states this: That it is understood that if Iran ever attempts to open a nuclear facility again, they will be nuked promptly within the month, and the entire country leveled.  Very, very simple.

4. Now that the text of the agreement has been released, how can you continue to accuse Netanyahu of not knowing the exact terms contained within it?

5. Why do you think that Iran can be trusted now, if they have never kept agreements in the past?  Um, oops.  You seem to think the same of Hamas.  Are these Muslims bribing you or dosing you?  Or are you perhaps a natural-born, bona fide idiot?

Is it Okay to Decide Others’ Fates?

nuclear weapons, nukes, nuclear warheads, nuclear missiles, nuclear bombs, hiroshima, nagasaki, iran, iran nuclear deal, nuclear proliferation treaty, israel, iran, p5+1, america, obama, kerryRegarding Iran, suddenly I realized something. Most non-Shiite countries in the Middle East, most prominently Saudi Arabia and Israel, are mad about the deal that P5+1 have signed with Iran.  It’s not just us. And what I realized today was this question:

What right do Obama, and the leaders of Europe have, to decide what happens in our neighborhood?  We are the ones most directly affected; why shouldn’t we be the ones making the decisions?

It’s like this: Imagine if Israel suddenly decided that anyone living in New York who wanted to own a weapon had to pass Israeli security standards.  No one else would be allowed to own weapons, not even police officers.  Only people that Israel chose would have weapons, and only they would be allowed to make decisions on the subject.  How would New Yorkers feel?  How would America feel?  What right does Israel have to decide who is allowed to bear arms in a country that isn’t theirs, and is so far away from them?

Yes, it’s true that guns in New York could possibly hurt Israel, or Israelis abroad.  It’s also true that Iranian nuclear missiles can (and will, if Iran gets the chance) hurt Americans and Europeans.  However, they are not the ones facing the greatest, and most immediate danger: a radical Muslim country, in their neighborhood, with nuclear weapons and no common sense or humanity to match.

Tell me, world: What right do you have to decide what goes on in our neighborhood, without consulting us, and against our wishes?  Note that not one of the P5+1 is actually a Middle Eastern country.  Not one.

What right do America and Europe have, to make our decisions for us?