“That is why the United States and this president made it a priority to organize the international community, to reach an agreement with Iran that will prevent them from obtaining a nuclear weapon. This agreement is actually the best way for us to ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon.” So let’s see. Iran is an aggressive rogue state, actively hostile to the U.S. So Obama concluded the nuclear deal with them, because it will supposedly prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. Peace In Our Time, eh? But what makes Obama think that this aggressive rogue state that is actively hostile to the U.S. will abide by the deal?
“Earnest on Navy Incident: These Kinds of Iranian Hostilities are Why Obama Made Nuclear Deal,” by David Rutz, Washington Free Beacon, January 12, 2016:
White House spokesman Josh Earnest used the ongoing incident involving two U.S. Navy boats being held in Iranian custody as further justification for President Obama’s pursuit of the Iran nuclear deal.
Iranian aggression over the past few decades is “precisely” why Obama made the deal with the rogue nation a priority, Earnest said.
Earnest appeared on CNN’s The Lead to preview Obama’s State of the Union address, but the breaking news of the Iranian military seizing the two boats dominated the discussion. The sailors are reportedly safe.
“What do you say to people who say Iran … fired a warning shot of sorts towards an American ship in the last couple weeks?” CNN host Jake Tapper asked. “They test-fired, I believe, a ballistic missile in the last few weeks, and yet in a few days, they are scheduled to have a the relief of all those sanctions. The basic question being, this does not seem like a country that is ready to be welcomed back into the community of nations.”
“That’s right, Jake,” Earnest said.
Earnest said the U.S. has been concerned with Iran’s destabilizing behavior over the past few decades.
“That is why the United States and this president made it a priority to organize the international community, to reach an agreement with Iran that will prevent them from obtaining a nuclear weapon,” Earnest said. “This agreement is actually the best way for us to ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon.”
Tapper bristled.
“I hear you, but they have 10 American sailors in their custody right now, Josh,” Tapper said. “I think there are probably a lot of Americans watching this thinking, ‘Why are we about to give them sanction relief?’ They have 10 Americans in … a boat, in a cell, whatever.”
“Because these were sanctions that were imposed on Iran over their nuclear program, and as soon as Iran takes the steps that they’ve committed to take and those steps can be verified by international nuclear experts, then we’ll know that Iran will not develop a nuclear weapon,” Earnest said.
Earnest said sanctions would continue against Iran over their support for terrorism and their ballistic missile program.
“We continue to be concerned about this situation,” he said. “That precisely is why the president made preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon a top national security priority, and we’re making progress in actually accomplishing that goal.”
jewdog says
This is progress? If at first you can’t appease, then try, try again.
cs says
Such a libtard spinning rubbish to all of us, these dumbasses, just make me sick.
Atheist7 says
Our dealings with Iran remind me of the dealing of Neville Chamberlain with Hitler in 1938. See the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO725Hbzfls Chamberlain came back from Germany and proclaimed “Peace in Our Time”. I don’t know if Hitler publically proclaimed treachery as an official Nazi policy, but we do know that the shortest saying of Muhammad is “War is deceit”.
Jay Boo says
Bill Clinton made a similar anti-nuclear deal with North Korea.
Bill Clinton reassured us that all would be wonderful.
Atheist7 says
We know that the boats had mechanical difficulties, and if so, were the sailors “captured” or were they “rescued” from their disabled boats? Does the truth lie somewhere in between? I think that this boat thing is not a big deal and has no relationship to the Iran Nuclear Deal. However, politicians will always try to make mountains out of mole hills in an effort to make themselves look good.
In the battle of Kadesh in 1274 BC, Ramses II and the Hittites fought each other to a draw and then both sides went home and declared victory. Thus, you really don’t have to win, you just have to create the illusion of victory.
Rev g says
According to Iran the problem with the boat/boats was faulty navigation systems. That makes clear no rescue was involved.
Likely one boat had a nav malfunction, the other was trying to get it to leave Iranian waters, they were detained.
Iran is flexing it’s muscles, as witnessed by the missile launches as well. This is a direct response to our weak potus and his foreign policy failures. America is no longer a nation to be respected.
Atheist7 says
Thanks Rev g, That seem very reasonable.
gravenimage says
Atheist7, Iran has seized Western sailors before–these incidents certainly did not involve rescues:
“2007 Iranian seizure of Royal Navy personnel”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Iranian_seizure_of_Royal_Navy_personnel
“2004 Iranian seizure of Royal Navy personnel”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Iranian_seizure_of_Royal_Navy_personnel
Besides, if this latest *had* involved a rescue, the Iranians simply could have crowed over how they had to save “inept” American sailors.
Instead, it was the usual–accusing them of “spying”, which usually carries the death penalty in the hideous Islamic Republic of Iran.
I believe this is just more threats from the Mullahs.
Atheist7 says
Thanks for the info. So it looks like the truth is on “capture” and not on “rescue”. Personally , I like the idea of rescue – followed by the strong suggestion that the Americans find a more reliable supplier for their equipment.
Itinerant says
Indeed he did and Obama’s deal with Iran was worded in almost identical language.
“good for the safety of the entire world” said Clinton.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=49319&st=north+korea&st1
Just as well North Korea is now a beacon of tolerance and freedom…unlike it’s capitalist neighbour to the South….oh wait.
In reality the North Koreans shared their missile designs, technology, components, and even raw materials with Iran;
http://www.forbes.com/sites/donaldkirk/2015/02/20/irans-irans-long-time-partnership-with-north-korea-on-nukes-and-missiles-may-scuttle-a-real-deal/
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/missile-development.htm
Two US presidents facilitating two rogue nation’s nuclear ambitions, while making grand speeches how it actually means peace in our time.
jihad3tracker says
******* AM I THE ONLY PERSON WHO THINKS THAT IRAN DID THIS DELIBERATELY ON THE SAME DAY AS OBAMA’S STATE OF THE UNION SPEECH ? *******
The mullahs and “supreme leader” have justifiable contempt for fool Obama, and here is the perfect chance to show what an assh*le he is.
Wellington says
Good point, my friend. My God, what a fool Obama is. America has never had a true fool as Chief Executive until Obama, though Jimmy Carter came close and in his ex-Presidency has made many trips to the Land of the Fools. Obama as Chief Executive has resided in the Land of the Fools from Day One of his Presidency. Those asserting otherwise need not be paid any attention because they occupy the same Land as well.
What the hell has happened to the Democratic Party? It has completely lost its collective mind. The Republican Party is far from perfect but at least most of its collective mind is still in tact, though if the best America can do is what many Republicans pass for nowadays, this country is in huge trouble, which come to think of it it is.
Happy New Year to you and yours, jihad3tracker. Let’s hope that 2016 won’t be even worse than 2015, which was a pretty bad year indeed for anyone prizing such things as freedom and common sense. Take care, pal.
Myxlplik says
Yup, look at the story we are expected to believe.
A: Both boats broke down simultaneously.
or
B: One boat broke down and while towing the other boat it broke down as well.
and
C: Both boats broke down, and drifted but made no radio contact to get a tow.
or
D One boat broke down, and radioed in that they needed help, and then broke down and no help came.
It’s extortion:
Iran: “Give us what we want or we’ll pull what we did on Jimmy, it will be what you’ll be remembered for”.
Obama=Weak
Rev g says
Had to be an odd breakdown, aren’t those boats powered by two Detroit diesels? Not that difficult to cruise on one, with limited maneuvering towards the live screw.
Rev g says
The screws are actually Jacuzzi jet drives, great for shallow water operations
Myxlplij says
Yeah, this regime would probably be more adept at lying by now if the press wasn’t so eager to lap up its manure.
This is even worse than the Bengazi YouTube video lie.
Susan says
Perhaps Obama orchestrated this incident and the capture of our sailors, to justify his nuke deal and cement his legacy?
David says
Perhaps “neo-cons” in the Pentagon sent these sailors with “mechanical failure” “straying into Iranian waters” to provoke confrontation and “scuttle” the Iran deal in what is rumored to be a “soft coup” between the Pentagon and the Obama administration?
Tell me the name of the person who ordered those patrols (putting three boatloads of sailors in harms way and capture), and we will know where to direct our contempt. I don’t think Obama ordered it right before an “Iran deal” and State of the Union address, why would he?
What upsets me is that they were willing to sacrifice those sailors to make their “point”.
gravenimage says
David wrote:
Perhaps “neo-cons” in the Pentagon sent these sailors with “mechanical failure” “straying into Iranian waters” to provoke confrontation and “scuttle” the Iran deal in what is rumored to be a “soft coup” between the Pentagon and the Obama administration?
……………………..
*Rumored by whom*? This makes no sense. Besides, Obama has shown that he doesn’t care if our people are put in harm’s way.
It is clear that the thuggish Iranians were looking to kidnap American sailors. They have done the same thing–twice!–with British naval personnel.
Karen says
This is not really the neo-cons MO, since they tend to revere the military. It’s the Left that will throw anyone to the lions to prove a point. They will destroy whomever they please.
Personally I don’t believe there is a plot involved, but found Susan’s comment interesting, probably because I completely distrust Mr. Obama.
gravenimage says
And Obama didn’t even mention our sailors in peril during his State of the Union Address:
“Obama Official: ‘No Chance’ of Iran Hostage Crisis Mention in SOTU”
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/01/12/obama-has-no-plans-to-address-iran-hostage-situation-during-sotu/
“There are no plans to address this issue,” Psaki told CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer. “He’s tracking this closely, he’s following this closely, but the State of the Union will not be about this issue.”
The President will, however, “absolutely” highlight the merits of the Iran nuclear deal, she said.
…….
In other words, he pretended that the Iran Nuke Deal was a resounding success–even while our military personnel are being held by an enemy nation and accused of spying–a charge which carries the death penalty there.
The Oval Office has also claimed–unbelievably–that holding our people hostage and threatening them with death is “not a hostile act”.
Avspatti says
Earnest makes ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE!!!!
RobertM says
It’s not meant to make sense. It’s meant to put the People to sleep.
Susan says
It’s psycho babbling.
gravenimage says
It *is* babbling. I’d feel sorry for Josh Earnest–what an ironic surname!–if he hadn’t put himself in this untenable position.
Rev g says
Not a problem, just send over John Kerry with James Taylor.
Jeremiah says
Iran’s aggression is precisely why we should not have trusted them and spend so much time in allowing them time to hide nuclear weapons. This is clearly a matter of the Emperor having no clothes. I love how Earnest can keep a straight face while he rationalizes Obama’s deception. He must be placed in prison for treason as soon as we can get control back of the administration.
duh_swami says
When you make a deal with the devil, expect devilish results…
gravenimage says
True, Swami. Iran is just further emboldened by Obama’s craven show of weakness.
Edgar Allen says
People have compared Odumbo to Chamberlain. I seriously disagree, because this is an insult to Chamberlain. Chamberlain was cleraly no leader, but he had some kind of (poor) excuse: Britain was weaker militarily at the time than Germany. Or there was at least close parity. You could say he was buiying time until Britain ramped up her military build-up. Or some such argument.
But militarily, the US dwarfs Iran 100 times over. We have the military leverage, if the Iranians believed a Churchill-like was at the helm, it would have brought them to their knees. Or even JFK, who made Kruschev blink over the Cuban missile crisis. And a war with Russia would have been the end of both the USA and the USSR as we knew them. Also, Iran was significantly weakened by the sanctions. They were desperate for a deal. Any average citizen who followed the news knew their currency was in the dumps, oil prices were low and staying low. We had the “perfect storm” scenario to make them blink.
Now we have to ask why did Obama INITIATE HIMSELF the secret talks, using Oman as a go between? The answer is clear. He WANTED Iran to get out of a the “perfect storm.” He wanted to help them out, at the expense of world security/stability; at the expense of Israel’s existence and against our own best interests. This is the very definition of TREASON.
Chamberlain may have been a weak and cowardly moton, faced with a situation above his leadership level, but he was not a traitor to Brtitain. Odumbo is not stupid. He grew up inside Chicago politics and knows how to apply pressure if he wants to. He does it all the time to Israel, middle-east Christians, and tea party donors.
The only rational explanation for the Iran deal, just like his unilateral normalization of relations with Cuba is that he is a TRAITOR. The best interests of Iran, (and to a lesser degree of damage those of Cuba) was the SOLE purpose of this Iran non-deal.
Donovan Nuera says
JFK screwed up the Cuban missile crisis. Gave Castro basically a “can’t touch me pass” for the next 55 years. The Castros still tried to bomb Macy’s and Grand Central Terminal on Black Friday after the crisis ended. JFK left the Cuban freedom fighters to die at the Bay of Pigs without aircover.
Obama is messing it up even more. 7000 political arrests by Raul Castro of dissidents in 2015 alone. Castro gets billions of hard currency to prop up his tyrannical regime (just as it was imploding with the turmoil in Venezuela endangering their oil subsidies)
eduardo odraude says
And Rahm Emanuel vacations in Cuba.
Well, to be fair, that doesn’t necessarily mean he supports the regime. He claims he has taken his children all over the world to expose them to the many different ways people live. That may include ways he disapproves of.
SpiritOf1683 says
Churchill never blamed Chamberlain for Munich and our weakness and unpreparedness for war in 1939. He blamed it on Chamberlain’s predecessor Stanley Baldwin, who was at the helm when Hitler started rearming Germany and the Wehrmacht first tested our resolve by marching into the Rhineland in 1936. To have stood up to Hitler then might have changed history. Hitler himself admitted “If the French had moved in to the Rhineland, then we would have had to withdraw with our tails between our legs”.
RobertM says
I was in the USN for 25 years. Much of it during the Reagan presidency.
In 1983, I was deployed to the North Arabian Sea on USS America. We ran into the Iranians regularly. If they came too close, we informed them of that in no uncertain terms. I wish you could hear the apologies and abject fear in their voices as they turned tail and ran. They KNEW that if they pushed us, we would blow them out of the sky/water.
gravenimage says
Good analysis, Edgar Allen.
Wellington says
Josh Earnest, aside from being a fool, is also a very dishonest man. Obama’s deal with Iran does not PREVENT Iran from getting nuclear weapons. It only (at best) DELAYS (by about ten years worth) this Islamic terrorist state from acquiring nuclear weapons. Thus, the madness, deception and appeasement continues, courtesy of the Obama Administration, easily the most harmful presidential administration in all of American history.
eduardo odraude says
If the deal reliably delayed Iran for ten years, that might be pretty good compared to the alternatives. What bothers me is that even a ten-year delay does not seem like something we can count on from the deal. I gather that the agreement’s inspection regime doesn’t really allow us the use of surprise and the freedom of movement that would be required for us to find any clandestine nuclear activity in Iran. So the deal may be worthless. But maybe I’m wrong. I hope so. A ten-year delay would mean five to ten years more during which we can prepare to solve the problem again — by diplomacy if possible, or by war if necessary.
Wellington says
Iran should be told in no uncertain terms that under its present regime it will NEVER acquire nuclear weapons——not five years from now, not ten, not twenty but rather never. Let Iran worry about this. The world’s most terrible weapons should be in the possession of the world’s most decent powers. Yes, I know this is not the case but no reason to add one more bad operator to this select “club.”
The barbarian must fear the civilized man more than the civilized man fears the barbarian. Not that way now that’s for sure.
Karen says
“We continue to be concerned about this situation,”. My, what a comfort to the sailors and their families.
Mr. Earnest sure had a lot to say about the Iran deal, and recited the script very well, but didn’t have much to say about the captive sailors. Strange.
billybob says
These sailors were taken as hostages to ensure the US hands over the $100 billion.
Beyond that, the nuclear deal was pointless. Iran will simply by nuclear weapons from North Korea, then thumb their nose at us.
Paul says
Yep
Paul says
Up is Down
Sniper says
OF ALL THE DOUBLE TALKING BULLSHIT I HAVE HEARD OVER MY ENTIRE LIFE, THIS MUST BE THE BEST EXAMPLE I HAVE EVER SEEN.
SoCalMike says
Josh not Earnest needs and deserves a cap in his head just for justice.
What a vile scum bag.
Of course I’m exaggerating and being dramatic but not by much.
Same for his traitor boss and party.
I’m so sick of him and his like minded thinkers pretending middle Americans represent the same and equal threat he and his colleagues wish to demonize and pretend are dangerous while they help our enemies.
SoCalMike says
The treason is getting old and becoming insufferable.
eduardo odraude says
Makes one a bit queasy to see the smile on the spokesman’s face as he tells us Obama has prevented Iran from getting nuclear weapons. The smiling confidence seems a little creepy in light of the fact that Iran, which has declared a desire to destroy us many times, may well be engaged in secret nuclear activities that we don’t know about and can’t detect. Millions of lives may depend on what the Obama administration does about the matter, but the spokesman, concerned with politics, not with reality and the fact that millions could die, smilingly projects confidence that has no basis in fact. Shouldn’t he acknowledge that the deal does not provide an inspection regime with enough latitude and unpredictability to allow us to find any hidden activities? Isn’t it kind of creepy of the spokesman to BS us, for mere political reasons, about something that may kill millions?
Donovan Nuera says
The only good thing is when Iran nukes Washington, D.C., these pukes will be within the blast zone with all their elite cronies.
eduardo odraude says
Actually, they may have the last laugh, Donovan. (Though I don’t really think they’d be laughing much, of course.) If the White House gets any notice, all the government officials will no doubt get to a blast- and radiation-proof shelter 200 feet below the White House with all the amenities to last for years, and escape routes out of the city. Or is such a shelter just a fantasy? Don’t know.
eduardo odraude says
Addendum: Of course it’s not utterly impossible, just unlikely, that the spokesman may for some reason believe, not just for political reasons, but for other more principled and substantive reasons to do with saving lives, that it’s best to act as if the deal were secure and reliable, even if it there are significant problems with it.
eduardo odraude says
It does seem a Neville Chamberlain moment.
Champ says
Game changer: the road to hell isn’t always paved with good intention, but with bad intentions too courtesy obama & company — err, I mean evil intentions. After all this is obama I’m talkin’ about.
gravenimage says
Very true, Champ. Very few good intentions involved in *initiating* capitulation to a vicious enemy state. I think most Democrats and other Leftists have convinced themselves that Obama’s action *must* have been both well-intended and somehow effective. Will this kidnapping of our sailors change their minds? Probably not–their investment in this denial is in most cases too great.
ICH says
Its like the whole kidnapping scenario was lost on the guy
Did he ever answer it ?
Susan says
“Iran’s seizure of Navy boats “precisely” why Obama made the nuke deal”
Try this: Obama’s nuke deal is precisely why the Iranians seized the Navy boats.
steve says
Everything that vomits out of the mouth of gosh ernest is more obama s*** based on this administrations permanent constipation with foreign policy and everything else related to government for that matter! I recommend daily enemas for the entire administration for the rest of their time in office shaming the American people and silence therapy.
gravenimage says
White House spokesman: Iran’s seizure of Navy boats “precisely” why Obama made the nuke deal
…………………………..
Um–Obama made the Iran deal so that Iran could seize our naval personnel?