American Elephants


Here’s What Obama Had to Say About The Iran Deal Back Then by The Elephant's Child

LV_20131029_LV_FOTOS_D_54392535175-992x558@LaVanguardia-Web

I was looking in an old notebook, and ran across a couple of quotes I had jotted down from President Obama about the Iran Deal: I won’t testify as to their accuracy, as it’s clear I was scribbling fast. I can hardly read my writing.

“It shows what we can accomplish when we lead from a position of strength, and a position of principle. When we unite the international community around a shared vision, and we resolve to solve problems peacefully.”

Well, that sounds like Obama, doesn’t it? I can’t remember who it was who described him as “a real good talker.”

“With this deal, we cut off every single one of Iran’s pathways to a nuclear weapons program, and Iran’s nuclear program will be under severe limits for many years.  Without a deal these pathways remain open, there would be no limits on Iran’s nuclear program, and Iran could move closer to a nuclear bomb.”

Sounds like Obama alright. That worked out well.

Advertisements


President Trump Disposed of The Destructive Iran Deal by The Elephant's Child

6360155002864306931045846527_483208412-real-estate-tycoon-donald-trump-flashes-the-thumbs-up.jpg.CROP.promo-xlarge2

Everyone, by now, knows that President Trump blew up the Iran Deal. Do people understand that it was not a treaty? It was undertaken unilaterally. President Obama was never able to pull together any kind of consensus. There was no real accountability. Even as Iran was pushing one demand after another, a number of U.S. senators explained to the despots that such a deal could easily be scuttled. Nearly every Republican candidate for the presidency in 2016 promised to withdraw or renegotiate the “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.”

Obama likely didn’t believe the GOP would regain the presidency — and if it did, he probably couldn’t conceive of a situation where a president would dare back out of a non-proliferation agreement, however flawed. And, as many problems as I do have with Trump, I can’t imagine that any other Republican would have withstood the unrelenting political pressure that was likely exerted, not only from allies but also from business interests at home, either.

The President had the prerogative to walk away from the agreement at any time, whether or not Iran was found in violation of the IAEA. The Iran Deal did nothing to safeguard against the production of nuclear weapons. We even had to ask permission to inspect.

We also know that after Trump’s speech making the case for withdrawal, Iranian president Hassan Rouhani claimed that Iran would be “prepared for enrichment in the next weeks.” Which is a weird thing for a nation that has completely given up its desire to obtain nuclear weapons to say. Then again the idea that this agreement, as promised by so many in Obama administration, snuffed the Islamic Republic’s nuclear ambitions was absurd all along.

Iran is continuing to develop a ballistic missile program to deliver those weapons. The Boeing deal is off. The United States can reinstate sanctions, and we can target any nation that helps Iran in its quest for nuclear weapons. European nations will probably try to salvage the deal, as they have irons, so to speak, in the fire with profitable business to do with Iran.

Iran can come back to the table. The administration’s demands for a new agreement are wholly reasonable: Stop developing ballistic missiles that are meant to deliver nuclear weapons; Stop supporting terrorist groups around the Middle East that undermine U.S. interests and those of our allies — in Syria, Lebanon, Palestinian territories, Yemen, etc; Stop publicly threatening our ally Israel with destruction; Stop threatening freedom of navigation in the Persian Gulf and Red Sea; Stop fueling the civil war in Yemen; Stop cyberattacks on the United States; Stop kidnapping Americans.

Is there something unreasonable about that? People probably thought that those things were part of the deal. They weren’t.

We can now target Iranian aggression. No more pretenses. We can target Iran’s terror regime through economic means. We can support the human rights advocates in Iran, and maybe do something useful.

I don’t know that any other candidate could have withstood all the silly guff from the leftist media, who are far stronger in anti-Trumpism than in either common sense or history. Donald Trump just did a difficult, but very good thing.

 



100,000 Secret Files Prove Iran Lied About Nuclear Weapons by The Elephant's Child

Not a Monday like most Mondays. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced to the world that Iran and Iran’s Mullahs and Presidents and spokesmen have all been lying about nuclear weapons, and their supposed rejection of any interest in nuclear weapons or a nuclear weapons program, lying through their teeth. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu unveiled to the international community a cache of  100,000 secret files he said were obtained from inside a hidden Iranian site that clearly demonstrate that Tehran maintained  a secret nuclear weapons program despite continuing declarations to the contrary.

Netanyahu explained that Iran was, from the beginning, deceptive in their descriptions of their previous nuclear work. After signing the nuclear deal in 2015, Iran’s leaders repeatedly denied ever pursuing nuclear weapons, Netanyahu said. “Tonight I’m here to tell you one thing: Iran lied.”

After they signed the nuclear deal, they intensified the effort to hide their secret files. In 2017 Iran moved its nuclear weapons files to a highly secret location in Tehran. Netanyahu said the secret files prove the following:

Iran lied about never having a secret nuclear program. Second, even after the deal it continued to expand its nuclear program for future use. Third, Iran lied by not coming clean to the IAEA. Finally, the nuclear deal is based on lies based on Iranian deception.

The prime minister’s speech was based on 55,000 pages of documents and 183 CDs that were smuggled out of an “atomic archive” painstakingly preserving Iran’s secretive nuclear program so that the country would have the option of restarting the program after the nuclear deal ends or in the case of Tehran dumping the agreement.  Israel’s ability to acquire the archive marks a massive coup for the Jewish state.

It contains “incriminating documents, incriminating charts, incriminating presentations, incriminating blueprints, incriminating photos, incriminating videos and more.” Israel has shared the material with the U.S. and “the United States can vouch for its authenticity.”

The Plan, called Project Amad, aimed to design, produce and test five warheads, each with a 10 kiloton TNT yield, for integration on a missile.  “That is like five Hiroshima bombs to be put on ballistic missiles.”

Netanyahu called on President Donald Trump to do the right thing for the United States, the right thing for Israel, and the right thing for the peace of the world.  The May 12 deadline to recertify the nuclear agreement approaches.

Deafening silence from the usual suspects: John Kerry, Ben Rhodes, Samantha Powers, and former president Barack Obama. Here’s a collection of Ben Rhodes’ Tweets on Iran that got absolutely everything wrong. But there’s no pleasure in proving that they were way too gullible. We tried to tell them so, but they wanted to believe.



U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley Is Taking Names. by The Elephant's Child

Nikki Haley, our UN Ambassador, is doing a marvelous job. The UN, by an utterly meaningless vote, said they mostly disapprove of the Americans saying we will move our embassy to Jerusalem. The UN doesn’t get to decide where we or anyone else will open our embassy. Then, the Israelis say that Jerusalem is their capitol city, so it is. We can say that we are moving our embassy in Canada to Calgary and that would just make it awkward to travel back and forth to the capitol of Canada all the time. However a lot of nations who are quite dependent on American aid and good feeling chose to vote to condemn our move, or abstain, and that doesn’t go over so well. Ambassador Haley is taking names.

The U.S. Congress voted to move the embassy to Jerusalem unanimously in 1995. But it never happened because—cold feet—about the Peace Process. But there is no peace process. The Palestinians have no interest in peace, they just want the nation of Israel to disappear, and all the Israelis to be thrown into the sea. There is some tenet in Islamic doctrine that says that any territory once controlled or invaded by Islam is forever Islamic, never mind if someone else is living there now. History doesn’t matter. So everybody is expecting a big Islamic arousal of some sort, and they are nervous about it. That goes for nations of Europe who due to their own idiocy have chosen to accept all sorts of Muslim ‘refugees’ or ‘migrants’. They are having enough trouble with their refugees already, they don’t need more because America is being difficult. Sweden is becoming anti-Semitic  because they have so many violent Muslims, and France has problems with anti-Semitism as well.

Nikki Haley’s performance is so impressive that Republicans are suggesting that she would be a splendid presidential candidate. At which point Democrats erupt in outrage. Having the first woman president was their idea and  they go on from there, insulting everyone as is their wont. Politics is just so complicated.

ADDENDUM: Nikki Haley is giving a reception for those who voted with the U.S. on this obnoxious resolution. Not dropping anyone’s foreign aid, nor any other drastic modes. But we do a lot of foreign aid, because it is mostly in our own interest as well. A lot of nations resent the fact that we are big and powerful and may I add—free— which does make a difference. It is a bit startling to read foreign newspapers and see how much of their news covers what is happening here, with all the fake news the leftist media can produce. They do get an odd idea of what is going on here.



President Trump Has Announced that the United States Recognizes that Jerusalem is the Capitol of Israel. by The Elephant's Child

The nation of Israel designated Jerusalem as its capitol city in 1950. When President Trump announced that the U.S. government recognizes Jerusalem  as the capitol city of Israel and would begin preparations for moving our embassy there, the international community instantly had the vapors. And this is 2017. Roundly condemned as injurious to prospects for Israeli-Palestine peace and detrimental to America’s interests. The Middle East Forum reports:

Thus, the intense anger expressed by Palestinian and Arab leaders toward the proposed relocation isn’t rooted in concerns that Palestinian claims to disputed territory will be compromised. Indeed, it doesn’t appear to be rooted in any concerns of ordinary Palestinians. According to a recent poll, just 12% of Palestinians in the West Bank and 25% in Gaza consider the location of the U.S. embassy a “very important” issue.
As Marshall J. Breger, a professor of law at the Catholic University of America, explained in a 1994 Middle East Quarterly article, Muslim religious and cultural attachments to Jerusalem are not very deep. Contrary to mainstream media depictions of the city as the “third holiest” in Islam, Jerusalem is not mentioned by name in the Qur’an, was never visited by the Prophet Muhammad, and was never the capital of any Arab-Islamic polity.

Daniel Pipes concluded that “the Muslim interest is not so much in controlling Jerusalem as it is in denying control of the city to anyone else. Islam carries the expectation that a land once under Muslim control (Dar al-Islam) is an endowment (waqf) that must inevitably revert to Muslim rule.”

It’s fairly clear that there is no “Peace Process.” The Palestinians simply want the nation of Israel dead with all its inhabitants. Well, except when they need a medical operation for a stricken child, or someone needs some other skilled operation unavailable elsewhere.  Palestinian leaders have launched an aggressive campaign to delegitimize Israel  in the International world, culminating in a Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign in the west. The Obama administration’s turn against Israel gave a burst of approval for the delegitimation campaign. A good many in the West just do not want the Jews to have full control over the  “eternal city.” The growing Muslim population in Europe reflects the growing dependence of left-wing parties on the Muslim vote.

India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi made an unprecedented visit to Jerusalem last July, and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s foreign ministry officially recognized Israeli sovereignty over West Jerusalem in April. President Trump’s action is simply a recognition of the real world. Israel is a sovereign nation, and Jerusalem is its capitol. The image at the top is the American embassy in Tel Aviv.



Defense Secretary James Mattis: 95% of ISIS Eradicated Under Trump. by The Elephant's Child

Secretary of Defense James Mattis announced this last week that 95% of ISIS bases and hideouts have been eradicated. Good News indeed. Deciding that you actually do intend to defeat them makes a difference. Obama seemed concerned that he might be blamed for something. ISIS fighters have been surrendering saying they haven’t been paid and haven’t been fed, and little things like that seem to matter.

Good for our coalition. Hope they all got a wonderful Thanksgiving dinner, and the gratitude of a nation giving thanks.



How the EU went Wrong and Why they did. by The Elephant's Child

George W. Bush gave a speech last Thursday at “The Spirit of Liberty: At Home, In the World” event in New York City. Politico called it a speech on Trumpism, but they were perhaps a bit hasty with their definition. But then, any opportunity to accuse Trump of designated awfulness, is the goal of the current news media.  I had admired George Bush for his ability to avoid speaking out on politics as a past president, especially in not commenting on Obama who had canceled all his executive orders, which must be galling.   I know it’s hard, but we really don’t want to hear from past presidents or past candidates. Their time is past.

We’re having some trouble with definitions, and throwing way too many “isms” around:  nationalism and nativism, for example. The Left, big on wide open borders, prefers to define nativism something evil, as if favoring your own citizens over illegal immigrants is reprehensible? Look up the definition of nativism. Other troublesome words are bigotry, prejudice, civility and incivility, and immigrant and migrant. ABC recently called illegal aliens (illegal: not according to law, alien: owing allegiance to some other nation) to avoid using such negative language, “undocumented citizens.” No, they’re not.

We are living in a time when the difference between undocumented citizens, immigrants and migrants is increasingly important. Europe, because of their cradle-to-grave social welfare benefits, has a declining birthrate. Because they have a declining birthrate, without enough young people working to pay for the cradle-to-grave social welfare benefits they so generously offered in order to get elected, they thought by inviting more immigrants to work and pay for the benefits, they could still prosper. “Poor” Americans have more living space than ordinary Europeans who are not poor. And more amenities.

The inviting immigrants in was a mistake for Europeans. They were feeling sorry for those in Middle Eastern refugee camps, and the well-meant invitation quickly became a flow of migrants from every hell-hole on the planet, and many ordinary countries that just didn’t have the presumed wealth of Europe.

Charles Hill explained how modernity went astray, based on a system that made room for wide cultural diversity based on a judicial doctrine of “the equality of states.”      (Do read Hill’s whole piece linked just above. It’s not long.)

The EU would become a new form of trans-national entity that would eschew war, abolish sovereign borders, exalt diplomacy, and supersede the Westphalian system by offering the world a compelling model of how to dismantle the state by devolving some of its powers downward according to the concept of “subsidiarity” while pulling other powers up into a pan-European bureaucracy in Brussels which, however defined, would not be a state. The EU assured that it was entirely un-religious and noted the care with which the text of its voluminous constitution – unratified – avoided any reference to Europe’s Christian heritage.

Put simply, the EU made itself the epitome of the Modern Age by relentless secularization. Islamism, emerging from the post-World War I collapse of the Ottoman Empire and Caliphate, made itself the vanguard of jihadist religion’s rise to become the implacable adversary of modernity. If Europe is where the siege is to take place, the drawbridge already is up:

Ambassador Hill adds: “Transatlantic unity has been the keystone of the defense and extension of freedom in wartime for a hundred years and must remain so.”

It is not the EU but NATO that has been the key to transatlantic solidarity. Strengthening NATO as a military alliance with political consequences in support of a reformed EU must be at the core of American policy. NATO’s role “out of area” will be vital along with continued efforts to integrate like-minded partners to the extent possible: Russia, Israel, the Gulf Arab states. The Modern Age itself is at stake.




%d bloggers like this: