Sunday, January 3, 2016

Iran Mocks US with Ballistic Missile Tests and Threats to US Air Carrier

On December 26, Iranian military vessels approached and fired rockets near a US aircraft carrier traveling to the Arabian Gulf through the internationally recognized maritime traffic lane in the Straits of Hormuz. The Iranian vessels came within 1,500 yards of the USS Harry S. Truman before firing the rockets. A US military official called the incident "certainly unnecessarily provocative" and "unsafe." Several Iranian navy vessels approached the Truman, as well as other coalition and merchant vessels, warned of a "previously unannounced live-fire exercise over maritime radio and requested for nearby vessels to remain clear," the official said. Forty minutes later, the exercise warnings were repeated, the Iranian ships launched rockets, firing in a direction away from the commercial and coalition ships, and then departed. ~~~~~ Iran's menacing aside, we should ask why President Obama left the Arabian Gulf without a US carrier from early October to late December. The Truman is the first US aircraft carrier to enter the Gulf, after the USS Theodore Roosevelt left in October, leaving a US carrier gap of several months. The US has maintained a carrier presence in the Gulf for decades, even keeping two carriers there to support the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Perhaps the answer is that Obama ordered the Roosevelt to leave the Gulf in early October so that Iran could conduct its first two ballistic missile tests since the nuclear deal was signed. ~~~~~ The Wall Street Journal reported on December 31 that after Iran's ICBM tests, the White House has delayed imposing new financial sanctions on Iran over either its ballistic missile program or tests. On December 30, the WSJ, citing US officials, had said the Obama administration was preparing to sanction a dozen companies and individuals in Iran, Hong Kong and the United Arab Emirates for their role in developing Iran's ICBM program. The US sanctions were expected to be formally announced this week, the WSJ said. But, Iranian President Rouhani threatened Obama by telling his Defense Ministry to “quickly and firmly continue with its plans to produce different missiles...” Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan obeyed, saying he would make Iran’s missiles even more powerful, claiming that “peace and security can only be achieved by strength.” ~~~~~ We long for the day when President Obama adopts a policy that leads from strength. But, Obama showed no strength to Iran -- Rouhani apparently stopped any White House consideration of sanctions. Obama and his team showed no spine. Apologists explain Obama’s timidity by saying Rouhani needs to stand up to the US to appease right-wing factions in Iran. We could remind President Obama that the US does not need a nuclear deal with Iran -- Iran needs a nuclear deal with the US. Putting Rouhani’s political needs ahead of US self-interest and world safety is lunacy, or deliberate appeasement. ~~~~~ Dear readers, the sanctions that Obama considered are permitted under UN resolution 1929 passed in 2010 : “States shall take all necessary measures to prevent the transfer of technology or technical assistance to Iran related to such activities,” referring to its ballistic missile program. Obama's targets were Iranians working for the Ministry of Defense, and an Abu Dhabi firm and its Hong Kong affiliate charged with providing key materiel to the weapons effort. The Obama sanctions, proposed but so far not put in place, reflect the serious concern that Iran is dealing with rogue nuclear state North Korea to procure components for its ICBM program. Obama apparently won't treat the threat seriously for fear of ruining his legacy nuclear accord, turning a blind eye and preferring to let Iran receive billions of dollars in sanctions relief desperately needed because of its oil revenues collapse. Unleashing on the world a nuclear Iran with ICBM delivery capability is the leftist view of a fitting Obama legacy and a denial of all that America stands for. No wonder US allies think Obama's real Middle East partner is Iran...and Russia.

4 comments:

  1. If we don’t want to face the truth, then wondering where Obama’s real alliances lie.

    But to stop Obama’s complete sell out of all democratic nations in the Middle East we must be willing to face up to what he is doing and stop it while stopping it is still possible

    Obama and his close friends in Iran are planning the destruction of the balance of power between the Sunni tribes, Shiite tribes and the Jewish people. When all is done he and the leaders of Iran want a backward moving region, direct by Shira Law, and probing into Southern Europe, Southeast Asia, and southern most South America.

    As it is written in John 8:32 … “and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free."

    And the truth is that there is a leader of the free world who is truly a disciple of evil.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This all demonstrates who is the "puppet" and who is the "puppeteer."

    I seriously worry about the security of the United States and the United States federal government for the next 12 months.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Be prepared for a high level delegation from Iran showing up in Washington D.C. unannounced to the general public.

      Our government no longer represents the people, it represents the destruction of the United States.

      Succession with strong agreements between individual states for protection from invaders may be the salvation.

      This administration of Obama, and the growing possibility of a Hillary Clinton Administration in 2017 doesn't really leave much else to consider.

      The Paul Ryan's, Mitch McConnell, Harry Reid, Obama, Clinton, etc are as thick as thieves. There is no difference friends.

      Delete
  3. If the American voting public (knowing what they do about the escapades of Bill and Hillary Clinton) sees it fit to vote for Hillary Clinton either in their local, state, or in the Presidential Election on November 8th, 2016 in large enough numbers to grant her the democratic nomination and possibly then the Presidential Election – if this happens they get just what they deserve for demonstrating their unmanageable stupidity.

    The coined phrase “marginally prepared voters” will have a whole new meaning.

    ReplyDelete