Posted on 04/23/2015 6:34:00 AM PDT by markomalley
Repeated concessions by the Obama administration during ongoing nuclear talks with Iran have all but guaranteed that the Islamic Republic will emerge as a nuclear threshold state that could build a weapon with little effort, according to arms control experts who testified before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday.
Stephen Rademaker, national security adviser for the Bipartisan Policy Center and former assistant secretary of state for arms control, international security, and nonproliferation during the George W. Bush administration, said during the hearing that the recent preliminary deal “fundamentally signifies acceptance by the international community of Iran as a nuclear weapons threshold state.”
President Barack Obama has touted the framework agreement completed at the end of March as a deal that would extend Iran’s nuclear breakout time—the duration required to amass enough nuclear material for a weapon—to a year. But he also acknowledged earlier this month that at the end of a 10-to-15-year deal, Tehran’s breakout time would be “almost down to zero.”
“What we’re agreeing to here is a pathway, a process, but at the end of that pathway, 10 to 15 years, the football will be on the one-inch line,” Rademaker said. “That close to having a nuclear weapon. That fundamentally is what is being agreed to here.”
He added that the framework deal is a “huge retreat” from previous U.S. negotiating positions and a “big victory for Iran.”
“After year 15, we’re not going to be worried about one nuclear weapon,” he said. “They’ll be on the one-inch line for dozens of nuclear weapons, an arsenal.”
Experts at the hearing also raised concerns about the verification provisions of the preliminary deal.
While Obama has said Iran will face the “most robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regime ever negotiated for any nuclear program in history,” Iranian leaders have maintained that its military sites—key locations for potential nuclear weapons development—will not be open to inspection.
Additionally, the leader of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the chief United Nations body responsible for inspecting nuclear programs, has said that Iran has failed to answer the majority of its questions about the “possible military dimensions” of Tehran’s nuclear activities.
Charles Duelfer, former chairman of the U.N. special commission that investigated Iraq’s weapons programs under Saddam Hussein, said the commission had more access to the Iraqi dictator’s facilities and documents than anything that has been proposed so far regarding Iran
“Yet we struggled after six or seven years and couldn’t accomplish the task that was given us,” he said. “Even with all that access we couldn’t do that job.”
Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R., Calif.) noted other obstacles in verifying that Iran is not violating the deal and pursuing a nuclear weapons capability. A study released by the Pentagon last year found that the abilities of U.S. intelligence agencies to detect covert nuclear operations are “either inadequate, or more often, do not exist.”
The United States will also be forced to work with other countries—including some that have more favorable relations with Iran—to ensure that Tehran complies with the agreement, Royce said.
“The IAEA and its inspectors will play an essential role in monitoring Iran,” he said. “But it will ultimately be up to the Administration and its negotiating partners, which includes Russia and China—likely acting through the UN Security Council or another international body—to decide whether Iran is complying with its commitments. This is another weak link.”
Questions have already been raised about the willingness of U.S. negotiating partners to maintain restrictions on Iran throughout the duration of the deal. The Obama administration criticized Russia last week after it lifted a ban on selling the advanced S-300 air defense missile system to Iran, which could complicate future U.S. strikes on Tehran’s nuclear facilities.
Negotiations between Iran and the six major powers known as the P5+1 will resume this week in Vienna, where the timing of sanctions relief for Tehran remains one of the top outstanding issues between the two sides ahead of a June 30 deadline for a final deal. Iran has insisted that all sanctions be lifted immediately upon the completion of an agreement while U.S. officials prefer their removal in phases.
The State Department has not denied reports that Iran could receive up to $50 billion in unfrozen assets after agreeing to a deal, a measure critics describe as a “signing bonus.” Tehran has already received $11 billion in sanctions relief during the negotiating period.
There is no question that he is a Muslim sympathizer as is his chief adviser Valerie Jarrett. The American media and the congress will be forever stained by their unwillingness to out this traitor to America.
At one point, I read where the Queen of Nonsense, Marie Harf said “they are 3 months away from ‘breakout’; our deal makes that six times longer.”
This is a very disturbing remark. The only possible definition I could think of this administration’s use of “breakout” is to dissemble the fact that it is “deliverable nuclear capability.”
Outrageous. Six times 3 months. Just enough to see Obama walk out the damned doors of the White House. Traitors. Absolute traitors.
Further, knowing how the ghouls in his administration are so woefully wont to tell the truth, that three months was actually three months or more AGO!
If I were Israel, I’d have my raid planned, rehearsed and rinse and repeat as necessary for a tacnuke strike anywhere in Iran that even looks like they could hide that crap. More power to them and God’s blessing in my opinion.
Bad title: Should read Obama Helping Iran Become Nuclear State.
IMHO: Iran is already a Nuclear Threshold state. A Bomb or dirty bomb could be produced any time now.
a) Weakens America/AmericansThere are NO counter examples.
b) Distances America's allies
c) Strengthens America's enemies
d) Serves Islam
e) Harms Israel
Or some combination of the above.
Maybe Obama thinks HE is the Mahdi, and is just setting things up. After all, his ego knows no bounds.
Bump
How to bribe someone to sign a contract the democrat way.
$50 billion in unfrozen assets after agreeing to a deal
if that is the case, then it is equally or more probable that they have one already and it is not unbelievable that they might have several. I keep wracking my brain to figure out why Obama, a Sunni, would want the Shiites of Iran to have nukes. I believe it is because they have nukes already and the whole deal thing is a deception to keep them from using them while Obama is still in office. Tin foil hat and I might go so far as to suspect he might want them to do an EMP attack on us in October of 2016 (surprise!) to disrupt the election to keep him from having to leave office.
IMHO, Obama is a Muslim with post-modern liberal values.
Post-Modernists take the view that all truths are relative to oneself. Obama is probably thinking that all Muslims (having been raised in a madras) are like himself who he considers logical and reasonable.
Obama, IMHO, does not believe Muslims will actually use Nukes because in his mind they have the best family values.
However, most in America have no such trust in any Religious group to hold Nukes (a WMD) and are aware of the human tendencies toward evil (think of Hitler and ISIS). Hitler used gas to commit genocide against the Jewish people, and now ISIS is committing a religious death Jihad against Christians.
IMHO: Obama being a post-modernist Muslim, has no clue how to deal with these issues since his internal values are Muslim and he thinks they are logical as he thinks he is (relative to himself). Therefore, he believes them when they say they're using nukes for energy and that ISIS has legitimate grievances against Christian nations because of the Crusades such that he wants to leave ISIS alone as much as possible they being Muslim.
He, like most post-modern liberals, are blissfully unaware that they are taking us toward complete societal chaos with no moral values - Muslim or otherwise.
IMHO, Obama is a Muslim with post-modern liberal values.
Post-Modernists take the view that all truths are relative to oneself. Obama is probably thinking that all Muslims (having been raised in a madras) are like himself who he considers logical and reasonable.
Obama, IMHO, does not believe Muslims will actually use Nukes because in his mind they have the best family values.
However, most in America have no such trust in any Religious group to hold Nukes (a WMD) and are aware of the human tendencies toward evil (think of Hitler and ISIS). Hitler used gas to commit genocide against the Jewish people, and now ISIS is committing a religious death Jihad against Christians.
IMHO: Obama being a post-modernist Muslim, has no clue how to deal with these issues since his internal values are Muslim and he thinks they are logical as he thinks he is (relative to himself). Therefore, he believes them when they say they're using nukes for energy and that ISIS has legitimate grievances against Christian nations because of the Crusades such that he wants to leave ISIS alone as much as possible they being Muslim.
He, like most post-modern liberals, are blissfully unaware that they are taking us toward complete societal chaos with no moral values - Muslim or otherwise.
IMHO, Obama is a Muslim with post-modern liberal values.
Post-Modernists take the view that all truths are relative to oneself. Obama is probably thinking that all Muslims (having been raised in a madras) are like himself who he considers logical and reasonable.
Obama, IMHO, does not believe Muslims will actually use Nukes because in his mind they have the best family values.
However, most in America have no such trust in any Religious group to hold Nukes (a WMD) and are aware of the human tendencies toward evil (think of Hitler and ISIS). Hitler used gas to commit genocide against the Jewish people, and now ISIS is committing a religious death Jihad against Christians.
IMHO: Obama being a post-modernist Muslim, has no clue how to deal with these issues since his internal values are Muslim and he thinks they are logical as he thinks he is (relative to himself). Therefore, he believes them when they say they're using nukes for energy and that ISIS has legitimate grievances against Christian nations because of the Crusades such that he wants to leave ISIS alone as much as possible they being Muslim.
He, like most post-modern liberals, are blissfully unaware that they are taking us toward complete societal chaos with no moral values - Muslim or otherwise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.