“Peace in Our Time!”

“Peace in Our Time!”

© David Burton 2015

The Iran Deal

     The P5+1 is a group of six world powers that joined forces in 2006 to try and contain or stop Iran’s nuclear program. P5+1 refers to the UN Security Council's five permanent members (the P5); namely China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States; plus Germany.

     On 14 July 2015, in Vienna, Austria, the P5+1 and Iran tentatively agreed – pending ratification by the individual countries and the United Nations - on a treaty that supposedly constrains Iran from developing nuclear weapons for a period of 10 years.

     The more we learn about the proposed agreement between the P5+1 and Iran that was announced in Vienna and the more we begin to understand the ramifications of this deal, the more it becomes obvious that this is a very bad deal for just about everyone - except for Iran. It seems that the agreement was largely fashioned by America’s president, Barack Obama and the U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry. “The White House wanted to sign a deal; Iran’s rulers wanted to ensure their path to the bomb and nuclear legitimacy. Both got what they wanted. [Emphasis mine] The consequences will be a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, more Iranian terrorism and subversion, and a greater likelihood of war.
     “The Obama/Kerry willingness to concede anything for a nuclear deal with Iran has been likened to Neville Chamberlain’s infamous Munich agreement with Adolph Hitler in 1938. [Emphasis mine] . . .” (Ref. 1)

Ignoring the Facts and History

     Our man in the White House has shown that he believes that his smile and his golden tongue can solve any crisis and make friends out of even the most ruthless murderers and enemies of humanity. He ignores advice from friends because he is convinced that only he perceives the truth and he is the only person that can bring peace and tranquility to the world. He apparently is convinced that he can make the wolf to lie down with the lamb. He smiles in a Cairo meeting of Middle East Arabs and expects global jihad to end; he believes his extended open hand can end Iranian aspirations of establishing a global Islamic caliphate; he thought his meaningless threats to Syria’s Assad could end the bloodshed there that has now cost over 200,000 Syrians their lives; he insisted that by withdrawing American forces from Iraq, there would be peace and tranquility there; and he is sure that all of Islam is peaceful and tolerant. Facts and 5,000 years of recorded history have no meaning with this president because he knows it all. Everyone else and everything else be damned!

Babes in the Woods

     The Obama administration has proven time and time again that they have not the basic concept of how negotiations are conducted in the Middle Eastern Bazaar! On the other hand, the rulers in Tehran are masters of the art of bazaar negotiations. “The most compelling argument the Obama administration is offering to boost what it acknowledges is a compromise nuclear deal with Iran is this: It’s better than the alternatives. {Not a very inspiring reason to make such a bad deal!}
     “. . . How did we get ourselves into the situation where there are no good options?
     “We did so by beginning the negotiations with three important concessions. First ,we took the military option off the table.  . . . Second, we took the current tough sanction regimen off the table by acknowledging that, if we did not accept a deal, many of our most important partners would begin to reduce or eliminate sanctions. Third, and most important, we took off the table the option of rejecting the deal by publically acknowledging that if we do so, we will be worse off than if we accept even a questionable deal.  . . . {The president} led the Iranians to conclude we needed the deal more than they did.
     “These three concessions left our negotiators with little leverage and provided their Iranian counterparts with every incentive to demand more compromises from us.  . . . {Also, President Obama was so eager to make a deal that} ‘The deal itself became more important than what was in it.’  . . .
      - - -
     “The reality is that there were always alternatives, though they became less realistic as the negotiations progressed. We could have stuck to the original redlines – nonnegotiable demands – from the beginning. These included on-the-spot inspections of all facilities rather than the nearly month-long notice that will allow the Iranians to hide what they are doing; shutting down all facilities specifically designed for nuclear weapons production; maintaining the embargo on missile and other sophisticated weapons rather than allowing it to gradually be lifted; and most crucially, a written assurance that the international community will never allow Iran to develop a nuclear arsenal. [Emphasis mine] . . .
     “Instead, we caved early and often because the Iranians knew we desperately need{ed} a deal to implement President Obama’s {naïve} world vision and to enhance his legacy.
     “. . .We were playing checkers against the people who invented chess, and their ayatollah checkmated our president. [Emphasis mine]
     “But the real losers were those countries – our allies – who were not even allowed to participate in the negotiations. Virtually every Middle Eastern leader, with the exception of Syria’s Assad, opposes this deal. Nor do they feel bound by it, since they didn’t have a vote. The deal was imposed on them, in much the same way the Chamberlain-Hitler deal was imposed on Czechoslovakia in 1938. [Emphasis mine]  . . .” (Ref. 2)

What the Agreement Doesn’t Address

     The agreement with Iran fails to address several major issues of concern to the U.S. and to other nations. “U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power said the nuclear deal doesn't change the United States' ‘profound concern about human rights violations committed by the Iranian government or about the instability Iran fuels beyond its nuclear program, from its support for terrorist proxies to repeated threats against Israel to its other destabilizing activities in the region. [Emphasis mine]’
     “She urged Iran to release three ‘unjustly imprisoned’ Americans and to determine the whereabouts of Robert Levinson, a former FBI agent who vanished in 2007.” (Ref. 3)

A Deal at Any Price

     What has become obvious is that Barack Obama is a president so deeply ideological that he simply can no longer see the world as it actually is. He is totally cluelessness with regard to reality and, consequently, the Obama administration has proven itself just plain incompetent. Obama wanted a deal no matter what compromises he had to make, no matter how much danger the deal represented to the countries in the Middle East and particularly to Israel - ostensibly the US's most loyal ally in the region.

Throwing Our Friends Under the Bus

     The President got a deal. At the same time, he got a deal that threw a number of countries and peoples in the Middle East under the bus. The deal ignores Iran’s funding of the Hamas terrorists in Gaza that have been attacking and killing Israelis and Egyptians. “Tehran in recent weeks has been busy financing terrorism in the Gaza Strip and reaching out to the most radical jihadi elements based in the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula . . .
     “For the second consecutive month, Iran has transferred money to pay the salaries of Hamas’s military wing, the Izz ad-Din al Qassam Brigades terrorist organization . . .” (Ref. 4)

     The proposed agreement with Iran allows “the world’s foremost state sponsor of international terror {to obtain} $150 billion with which to expand its reign of terror in a few short months, and {to receive} a pass to obtain nuclear weapons in about 10 short years.” (Ref. 5)

     The Iranian regime has clearly stated and acted on its desire to wipe Israel off the map by providing potentially devastating and increasingly sophisticated, accurate and powerful missile technology to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Its intentions were also apparent at a public rally calling for Israel's destruction just a week before the announcement of the agreement with the P5+1. These very real dangers to America’s only democratic ally in the region seem to have been totally ignored by the administration in its rush to arrive at an agreement – any agreement - that would offer some hope of reducing or slowing Iran’s nuclear weapon-building program, even if only temporarily.

Destabilizing the Middle East

     “Even if all the countries concerned ratify the results of the P5+1 talks, the red flags worrying most of the capitals in the Middle East will be flying as high as they were before the deal was signed. There are four of them.” (Ref. 6)

First: The entire Middle East will race to go nuclear. The number-one concern with the way this deal was structured was that it was bound to accelerate nuclear proliferation. Iran has violated its obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and repeatedly thumbed its nose at oversight from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Yet it winds up getting a great deal under the agreement. Regional powers like Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia are likely to believe that the odds of Iran developing nuclear weapons are undiminished and the penalty for their becoming nuclear breakout powers is plummeting, then the deterrent for them to also become nuclear powers diminishes or disappears.[6]

Second: Tehran gets to keep its vast nuclear infrastructure and its ballistic missile program. Other regional powers are likely to race to develop nuclear capabilities themselves, in part because the deal does nothing to scuttle Iran’s plans to build a weapon. The administration’s pitch is that the deal slows down Iran’s program, leaving plenty of time for “early warning” of a nuclear breakout. That’s cold comfort for Tehran’s neighbors. What is scaring them is knowing that Iran will eventually put a nuclear warhead on a missile — and this deal won’t stop that!!! Even if the administration does receive early warning (a dubious premise at best), it has never indicated what — if anything — it would do about it. Indeed, these promises from Iran only confirm the obvious: that the regime definitely has nuclear-weapons ambitions. After all, why have a massive ballistic-missile program and secret military nuclear facilities if the plan isn’t to build nuclear weapons and have the capability to deliver these weapons?[6]

Third: Sanctions relief will only make the region far less safe. People will argue the numbers, but the sanctions relief and the renewed ability to sell more oil on the open market could wind up bringing $300-$400 billion into the Iranian economy. And who seriously doubts that money will be used to tighten the Mullahs’ tyrannical grip on the Iranian people and fund the most aggressive and destabilizing foreign policy outside of ISIS? Essentially, the deal will pay for undermining U.S. policy and interests throughout the region.[6]

Fourth: By design, the deal is temporary. Even the White House doesn’t claim it will permanently keep Iran from getting an atomic bomb. So, what’s the point? And, after a couple of years of cashing in on sanctions relief, Tehran might just walk away from the agreement - even before the agreement expires.[6]

Iran, the Main State Sponsor of Terrorism

     Money isn’t all that Iran supplies to Middle East terrorists. “An Egyptian security official said that some Salafist terrorists captured in the Sinai Peninsula by Egypt in recent weeks admitted under interrogations that Iranian agents initiated contact with their groups with an offer to supply weapons from Libya and Sudan.” (Ref. 4)

     In eastern Libya, a self-proclaimed jihadist Caliphate, strongly supported by Iran, is now a springboard for Islamic terrorists into Africa and southern Europe. This radical Islamic entity includes takfiri jihadists, the Muslim Brothers (Ikhwan), and many of the former Al Qaida movements. Starting early 2014, the jihad-sponsoring states have capitalized on the building chaos in order to transform jihadist-held parts of Libya into secure springboards for the spread of jihadism into both western Africa and southern Europe.[7]

     As early as 2011, Iran was involved in the Libyan chaos. “The on-site senior Iranian operative was Ibrahim Muhammad Judaki of the Quds Forces contingent in Lebanon. His deputy was Khalil Harb, then the Special Advisor to the Hizbullah’s Secretary General in charge of cooperation with and support for Palestinian, Yemeni, and other sensitive groups. Another senior member of the Iranian group was Abdul Latif al-Ashkar, one of the main logistics experts of the Hamas who was target killed by Israel near Port Sudan, Sudan, on the night of April 6/7, 2011.
     “The initial mission was to expedite the purchase of weapons and ammunition for all anti-Western jihadist forces. The Iranians brought with them several millions in hard currency (dollars and euros). Special attention was paid to the purchase of chemical warfare (CW) munitions for Hamas and Hizbullah.
     “Tehran’s objective was to provide their protégés with CW capabilities from third-party sources so that Iran would not be implicated and subjected to retaliation should Hamas or Hizbullah use these weapons against Israel.  . . .” (Ref. 7)

     According to our own Department of State, Iran has been designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism since 1984. This is the party with which we are making an agreement. Since 1984, “Iran continued its terrorist-related activity, including support for Palestinian terrorist groups in Gaza, and for Hizballah. It has also increased its presence in Africa and attempted to smuggle arms to Houthi separatists in Yemen and Shia oppositionists in Bahrain. Iran used the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force (IRGC-QF) and its regional proxy groups to implement foreign policy goals, provide cover for intelligence operations, and create instability in the Middle East. The IRGC-QF is the regime’s primary mechanism for cultivating and supporting terrorists abroad.
     “Iran views Syria as a crucial causeway in its weapons supply route to Hizballah, its primary beneficiary. In 2013, Iran continued to provide arms, financing, training, and the facilitation of Iraqi Shia fighters to the Asad regime’s brutal crackdown, a crackdown that has resulted in the death of more than 100,000 civilians in Syria {now over 200,000} . . .
     “Iran has historically provided weapons, training, and funding to Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups, including the Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), although Hamas’s ties to Tehran have been strained due to the Syrian civil war. Since the end of the 2006 Israeli-Hizballah conflict, Iran has also assisted in rearming Hizballah, in direct violation of UNSCR 1701. [Emphasis mine] Iran has provided hundreds of millions of dollars in support of Hizballah in Lebanon and has trained thousands of its fighters at camps in Iran. These trained fighters often use these skills in support of the Assad regime in Syria.
      - - -
     “On January 23, 2013, Yemeni authorities seized an Iranian dhow, the Jihan, off the coast of Yemen. The dhow was carrying sophisticated Chinese antiaircraft missiles, C-4 explosives, rocket-propelled grenades, and a number of other weapons and explosives. The shipment of lethal aid was likely headed to Houthi separatists in Northern Yemen. Iran actively supports members of the Houthi movement, including activities intended to build military capabilities, which could pose a greater threat to security and stability in Yemen and the surrounding region. {Houthi separatists backed by Iran have now totally destabilized Yemen, necessitating the intervention of Saudi Arabia.}
     “On December 29, 2013, the Bahraini Coast Guard interdicted a speedboat filled with weapons and explosives that was likely bound for Shia oppositionists in Bahrain {and which was funded by Iran} . . .” (Ref. 8)

A License to Continue Funding Terrorist Groups

     The deal with Iran, gives the Mullahs in Tehran, more than $100 billion to use as they see fit. History has shown that the use of financial resources by Iran has been to: sponsor global terrorism; fund Hezbollah and Hamas in their ongoing attacks against Israel and Israeli civilians; support Bashar Assad’s fight to stay in power that has cost over 200,000 Syrians their lives and forced millions more to become refugees; fund and arm the Houthis in Yemen who have instituted a civil war there; call for the destruction of Israel and the murder of all its Jewish population; and ongoing attempts to develop weapons of mass destruction coupled with an intercontinental ballistic missile system that would threaten nations throughout the world - including its arch-enemy, the United States. Is there any doubt that Iran will continue on this path? Since the Islamic fundamentalists took control of Iran some 3-1/2 decades ago, has Iran shown any indication of moderating its aspirations of attaining Islamic global supremacy? Why should we think that they will change now, in ten years or in fifteen years? The religious fanatics in control of Iran believe they have won another battle against the godless infidels. Their time horizon is not five or ten years, their time horizon is as long as it takes to defeat the enemy. To their way of thinking, the deal they have agreed to is just one more step on the path to ultimate victory. In any event, to true believers, any agreement can be broken whenever it serves their purpose. According to their interpretation of the Koran, all agreements with non-believers are non-binding. For the true believer, it is perfectly acceptable to lie and deceive infidels like Jews, Christians and the Great Satan. Making concessions to these Islamic extremists is futile and only reinforces their belief that they can always get more and more until they achieve their ultimate goal – the one global united Islamic Caliphate – in this case a Caliphate centered in Tehran and under the total control of the mullahs. Tehran has a long history of misleading the world and there is no reason to now trust Iran to adhere to the proposed agreement.

What the Agreement Does and Doesn’t Do

     The agreement does not require “anywhere, anytime” inspections. Instead, there can be at least a 24-day interval before inspections can take place. What will the Iranians be doing during that 24-day period of time?

     The agreement calls for the lifting of the arms embargo against Iran within five years, and the lifting of the embargo on missile sales within eight years. But Iran will have access to between $100 and $150 billion in unfrozen assets and there will be no transparency to ensure that this money does not get funneled into Iran’s financing of global terrorism, especially murderous terrorism directed at Israel.

A Poisonous Snake Can’t Change its Ways

     For more than three decades, the religious zealots in Tehran have ranted and raved about the “Great Satan” – America. We are Iran’s chief enemy - maybe even more so than Israel! Witness the burning of American and Israeli flags during Tehran's Quds Day on July 10, 2015.

     So what exactly is it that the Obama administration thinks has changed about this totalitarian regime? Where is there a shred of evidence that the rulers of Iran have moderated their ways? Just when has Washington discovered that the fanatics have stopped yelling “Death to America” or stopped screaming for the end of the State of Israel? Why should anyone in his right mind trust these Islamic extremists to honor any agreement or deviate in the slightest from their warped vision of global Islamic supremacy?

We Had Other Options

     Our president insists that there are only two choices: this deal or war. But the choices need not be that limited, nor that simple. In June of 1967, Israel destroyed Iraq’s nuclear development facility 10.5 miles southeast of Baghdad (Operation Opera) – war did not result, but Iraq’s nuclear development program ended! In September of 2007, Israel bombed Syria’s nuclear development facility at Deir ez-Zor (Operation Orchard) – war did not result, but Syria’s nuclear development program ended!

     The deal between the P5+1 and Iran is not the antidote to war. Rather, it makes increased conflict in the Middle East even more likely, as a newly enriched and emboldened Iran increases its destabilizing activities throughout the region and its threatened neighbors pursue more extreme measures for self-preservation. Sadly, the Obama administration is so focused on a “negotiations above all” foreign-policy model, that it won’t or can’t consider alternatives that would force the Iranian regime into abandoning its bad behavior.[6]

     The Iranian regime that we are dealing with consists of Shiite Islamists who interpret their faith as a code of governance. This ideology holds that Muslims are required by Allah to wage global jihad until a messianic figure called the Mahdi appears to bring about final victory over Islam’s non-Muslim enemies. i.e., you, I and everyone else on this earth who won’t bow down to these Islamic extremists. Their interpretation of their holy book, the Koran, gives them license to murder, cheat, lie or do anything else they deem necessary to achieve their final victory. Iran’s unshakeable commitment to jihad is stated in the preamble of its constitution. It states that the government is committed to “the establishment of a universal holy government and the downfall of all others.[9]

America Chose Not to Lead

     Very unfortunately, whether or not the United States approves the deal with Iran is largely irrelevant. The United Nations is ultimately the body that endorses and enforces the agreement. And so, on 20 July 2015, “The U.N. Security Council . . . unanimously endorsed the landmark nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers and authorized a series of measures leading to the end of U.N. sanctions that have hurt Iran's economy. {So much for an extensive and meaningful review of all the provisions and implications embodied in the agreement. The U.S. Congress will at least take 60 days to review the agreement.}
     “The resolution had been agreed to by the five veto-wielding council members, who along with Germany negotiated the nuclear deal with Iran. It was co-sponsored by all 15 members of the Security Council.
      - - -
     “. . . Iran's nuclear program will be curbed for a decade in exchange for potentially hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of relief from international sanctions. Many key penalties on the Iranian economy, such as those related to the energy and financial sectors, could be lifted by the end of the year.
     “The document specifies that seven resolutions related to U.N. sanctions will be terminated when Iran has completed a series of major steps to curb its nuclear program and the International Atomic Energy Agency has concluded that ‘all nuclear material in Iran remains in peaceful activities.’
     “All provisions of the U.N. resolution will terminate in 10 years, including the snap back provision.” (Ref. 3)

What Happens after the Deal is Signed?

     So the deal - good or bad - gets signed, then what? According to President Obama, “The deal is not contingent on Iran changing its behavior.” and “It solves one particular problem, which is making sure they don’t have a bomb.(Ref. 10) So the president is telling us that the deal allows Iran to continue its bad behavior of threatening to destroy Israel, of spreading turmoil throughout the Middle East and Africa, of threatening death to America, and of continuing to be the main sponsor of state terrorism. As to making sure that they don’t have a bomb, at best that assurance is only good for 10 years, and then, only if Iran honors the agreement. Past history predicts that there is very little chance of Iran sticking to its promises.

     President Obama had no plan to stop President Assad of Syria in his use of poison gas, he had no plan on how to defeat ISIS in Syria and Iraq; he had no plan on how to stop ISIS and al Qaida from destabilizing Iraq; he had no plan on how to stop the Taliban from regaining control in Afghanistan; he had no plan for defeating the Houthi rebels in Yemen; he had no plan for stopping the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt; and now, he has no plan for containing a post-deal Iran.

Death to the Infidels

Fact: The fanatics in power in Iran do not play by the same rules we do. In fact, they obey only one rule – Conquer the world! Are we willing to put our faith in any agreement with such people?


  1. A Nobel prize for an ignoble deal?, Jeff Jacoby, Boston Sunday Globe, Page K6, 19 July 2015.
  2. U.S. gave away better options in this porous agreement, Alan M. Dershowitz, Boston Sunday Globe, Page K6,
    19 July 2015.
  3. UN endorses Iran nuclear deal with 6 world powers, Associated Press, 20 July 2015.
  4. Iran Negotiates Peace In Vienna, Funds War in Gaza, Aaron Klein, The Jewish Press, 17 July 2015.
  5. O should nix toxic rhetoric of war, Jeff Robbins, Boston Herald, Page 13, 16 July 2015.
  6. The Iran Deal: 4 Big Red Flags for the Middle East (And the World), James Jay Carafano, Ph.D.,
    The Heritage Foundation, 16 July 2015.
  7. Post-Gadhafi Libya now a jihadist springboard backed by Iran, Qatar, Sudan and Turkey, Yossef Bodansky, WorldTribune.com, 2 March 2015.
  8. Chapter 3: State Sponsors of Terrorism Overview, U.S. Department of State, Accessed 18 July 2015.
  9. FACT SHEET: IRANIAN SUPPORT FOR TERRORISM, Ryan Mauro, clarionproject.org, Accessed 18 July 2015.
  10. Obama has no plan for containing a post-deal Iran, Trudy Rubin, Boston Herald, 21 July 2015.

  22 July 2015 {Article 228; Undecided_43}    
Go back to the top of the page