Netanyahu accuses Obama of trying ‘to kick the Iranian can down the road’…
Obama brushes off Netanyahu saying there is ‘nothing new’ in Congressional speech…
Saudi Arabian newspaper: Obama Listen to Netanyahu …
In Geneva, North Korea’s Foreign Minister warns U.S. it now has (nuclear) preemptive strike to deter U.S. if necessary…
With the eyes and ears of the world focused on the U.S. Congress, Bibi Netanyahu railed at America’s impending nuclear deal with Iran – Barack Obama was not impressed. The U.S. President said there was ‘nothing new’ in the Israel’s leader’s warning:
“We don’t yet have a deal. But if we are successful, this will be the best deal possible with Iran to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon… On the core issue, which is how do we prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, which would make it far more dangerous and would give it scope for even greater action in the region, the prime minister didn’t offer any viable alternatives.”
Without a deal, Iran will certainly advance its program – installing advanced centrifuges, fueling its plutonium reactors and reducing or eliminating its breakout time line. What would leave us with the choice of accepting a nuclear threshold Iran or taking military action.
And another American senior official told CNN:
“Without a deal, Iran will certainly advance its program – installing advanced centrifuges, fueling its plutonium reactors and reducing or eliminating its breakout time line. What would leave us with the choice of accepting a nuclear threshold Iran or taking military action.”
Think about it, something does not sound right. These reactions indicate that the mindset of Obama and his top officials actually concurs with Netanyahu’s message to the U.S. Congress that the Iranian regime is bent on acquiring a nuclear arsenal by hook or by crook. The Israeli leader indirectly accused Obama of ‘kicking the can down the road’, leaving the Iranian nuclear threat to his successor, at most in another ten years time.
Netanyahu did not pussy foot, he whaled into the effort by Secretary of State John Kerry’s repeated efforts to achieve ‘a very bad’ nuclear deal with the Iranians. In a well crafted speech, Bibi told the U.S. Congress, the American people and media that the deal being worked out was fraught with danger not only for Israel and Iran’s Arab neighbors, but also for America and the entire world. But Obama was not left wanting and brushed off Bibi with his disdainful remarks so the crisis between the two leaders has not yet crested.
Bibi’s strategic target – American public opinion…
Israel’s leader has long realized that Obama wants to ride out his second term with an Iranian nuclear deal under his belt. The Iranians have also seen the writing on the wall and will squeeze out every ‘last deadline’ and concession from the U.S. to achieve their goal of a gradual lifting of the sanctions while leaving their nuclear infrastructure intact for ramping it up whenever they chose to do so. Choosing his words carefully, Bibi mounted by chapter and verse an impassioned appeal to U.S. public opinion and the media to start asking questions about what is being hidden in Secretary Kerry’s secret negotiations with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif. As reported previously by IsraCast, Netanyahu had considered exposing some of the secret aspects of the negotiations but the White House, Kerry and National Security Adviser Susan Rice warned Netanyahu to back off, which he did; he said he would stick to information that could be googled. To his credit, Netanyahu was still able of keeping his audience riveted to his address.
Has the Israeli leader planted the seeds for the American media to ask more and more questions about what Netanyahu portrayed as a faulty and simplistic analysis of the Iranian nuclear threat?
But now the big question: Has the Israeli leader planted the seeds for the American media to ask more and more questions about what Netanyahu portrayed as a faulty and simplistic analysis of the Iranian nuclear threat? And if so, will this be translated into public opinion urging Democrat senators to reject an administration request to start lifting the Iran sanctions as part of a nuclear deal?
Although the New York Times was swift in backing Obama’s dismissal of Mr. Netanyahu’s arguments, the Washington Post contended that Netanyahu’s arguments deserve a serious response from the Obama administration – one it has yet to provide:
“The White House has sought to dismiss the Israeli leader as a politician seeking re-election, and has said he was wrong in his support of the Iraq war and in his opposition to an interim agreement with Iran, and has claimed that he offers no alternative to President Obama’s policy. Such rhetoric will not satisfy those in and out of Congress who share Mr. Netanyahu’s legitimate questions.”
Netanyahu had warned Congress that such a deal would not block Iran’s path to A-bombs, on the contrary it would pave Iran’s path to them.
The Post pointed Obama’ acceptance of a large Iranian nuclear infrastructure including thousands of centrifuges for uranium enrichment and the second was the time limit on any restrictions, so that in as little as a decade Iran could be free to expand its production of nuclear materials. Netanyahu had warned Congress that such a deal would not block Iran’s path to A-bombs, on the contrary it would pave Iran’s path to them.
Saudi Arabia advises Obama to listen to Bibi…
One of the most startling supporters of Netanyahu’s Congressional speech is Saudi Arabia. Faisal Abbas, the editor-in-chief of the Al Arabiya newspaper, entitled his editorial, Obama Listen to Netanyahu:
“One must admit Netanyahu did get it right, at least when it came to dealing with Iran.”
The influential journalist who would not have written such a comment without the consent of the Saudi government went on to back Bibi’s contention that Middle East countries have been collapsing, creating a vacuum that is being filled by terror organizations that are supported by Iran:
“What is absurd, however, is that despite being perhaps the only thing that brings Arabs and Israelis together (because it threatens them both) the only stakeholder that seems not to realize the danger of the situation is President Obama …”
“What is absurd, however, is that despite being perhaps the only thing that brings Arabs and Israelis together (because it threatens them both) the only stakeholder that seems not to realize the danger of the situation is President Obama, who is now infamous for being the latest pen-pal of the Supreme Leader of the world’s biggest terrorist regime, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.”
But what is glaringly obvious in this part of the world remains invisible from the White House. Just what are the U.S. ambassadors doing anyway not only in Riyadh but Cairo, Amman and the Gulf states? Or are Obama and Kerry so locked on to an Iranian nuclear deal that they don’t read their diplomatic dispatches? It is fair to say that Saudi Arabia’s support for Netanyahu and its severe criticism of Obama represents a growing sentiment in Egypt, the Gulf Emirates (except Qatar), and Jordan, which now fear the U.S. is about to side with their arch enemy, Iran.
PS: The Foreign Minister of North Korea, Iran’s mate and mentor, which conned the Carter administration into a bogus nuclear deal has now warned the U.S. that it currently possesses the power (nuclear) to deter ‘an ever-increasing American nuclear threat with a pre-emptive strike if necessary. It stands to reason the North Korean official was referring to his country’s development of nuclear weapons that the nuclear accord was supposed to have blocked.
