Obama, Kerry and Hillary can’t seem to negotiate anything can they!


Iran nuclear talks end with deadline extended

Re Post from Yahoo by Simon Sturdee with Jo Biddle in Washington

Catherine Ashton, EU foreign policy chief, and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif give a press statement in Vienna, on July 18, 2014
.

Vienna (AFP) – Marathon talks between Iran and world powers in Vienna ended Saturday after negotiators gave themselves four more months to try and bridge major gaps and strike a historic nuclear deal.

New rounds of talks were expected in the coming weeks, with the date and place yet to be decided, diplomats said.

“While we have made tangible progress on some of the issues and have worked together on a text (for a deal)… there are still significant gaps on some core issues,” lead negotiator and EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton told journalists in the early hours of Saturday.

The talks will now continue until November 24, she added.

Under the terms of the extension, the United States said it would unblock some $2.8 billion (2.1 billion euros) in frozen funds, in return for Iran converting a quarter of its 20-percent enriched uranium stocks — which can be used to make a bomb — into fuel.

American officials spoke of resuming talks, perhaps at expert level, in August, with the UN general assembly in September also expected to provide a stage for the next phase of negotiations.

In a statement repeated in Farsi by Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, Ashton said the parties would “reconvene in the coming weeks… with the clear determination to reach agreement… at the earliest possible moment”.

Last November, Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany agreed an interim deal under which the Islamic republic froze certain nuclear activities for six months in return for some sanctions relief.

The deadline for a lasting deal was July 20, with the sides having the option of extending.

US Secretary of State John Kerry, who also tried to broker a breakthrough in Vienna earlier this week, said Friday that the extension was “warranted by the progress we’ve made.”

“To turn our back prematurely on diplomatic efforts when significant progress has been made would deny ourselves the ability to achieve our objectives peacefully,” Kerry said.

“A lot of work has been done and we’ve agreed… that we would like to try and complete this process and to take this extra time in order to do that,” Ashton also said in a statement Saturday.

“We are determined to make sure that the agreement is a very good one.”

– Extending breakout –

The final deal would ease fears that despite its denials Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons after a decade of atomic expansion.

But it is highly ambitious and fiendishly complex.

The six powers want Iran to dramatically reduce its nuclear programme for a lengthy period of time and agree to more intrusive UN inspections.

This would expand the time needed for Tehran to develop a nuclear weapon, while giving the world ample warning of any such “breakout” push.

The two sides are believed to have narrowed their positions in recent weeks on a few issues such as the Arak reactor, which could give Iran weapons-grade plutonium, and enhanced inspections.

But they remain far apart on the key issue of Iran’s capacities to enrich uranium, a process which can produce fuel for reactors but also the core of a nuclear bomb.

– Unlocking of funds –

The terms of the extension call for Iran to turn medium-enriched uranium into reactor fuel, which will make it “very difficult for Iran to use this material for a weapon in a breakout scenario,” Kerry said.

Although Washington will unblock some of Iran’s funds, “the vast majority of its frozen oil revenues will remain inaccessible,” he added.

Over the past six months, Iranian oil sales have brought in a further $25 billion, on top of the about $100 billion already frozen in accounts around the world, according to US officials.

But both the US and Iran face tough domestic pressure.

US lawmakers, widely supportive of Iran’s arch enemy Israel, have threatened to ramp up sanctions without a sufficiently rigorous agreement.

Iran’s negotiators in turn face pressure from hardliners, who view the United States as the ultimate enemy and oppose any agreement seen as a concession.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, on a visit to Cairo, said Saturday he hoped that with the new deadline, Iran will “at last make the necessary choices that we expect to reach a complete, credible and lasting agreement.”

His German counterpart Frank-Walter Steinmeier called for Iran to “show it is ready to dispel all doubts” about its nuclear intentions.

The next few months “could be the last and best chance for a long time to end this nuclear argument peacefully,” he warned.

The Iranian exiled opposition in Paris meanwhile slammed the extension as “providing time to the mullahs for further deception.”

Retired 4-star admiral: Benghazi was an Obama false flag that went wrong


Just a reminder of the situation in Benghazi, least we forget for it does make a difference!

Obama ignored advice of military & CIA against Bergdahl prisoner swap


Almost anyone that served knows how aggrieves this trade was! It was an insult to all of us that served honorably!

StMA's avatarConsortium of Defense Analysts

The Obama administration’s release of five senior Taliban terrorists from Guantanoma Bay in exchange for the Taliban’s freeing of U.S. Army deserter Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl not only is in violation of a federal law (Sec. 1035 of the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act), the prisoner swap also went against explicit advice of senior U.S. military and intelligence leaders.

Bergdahl prisoner swap

FOX News reports, June 6, 2014:

Senior military officials had advised President Obama not to make the Taliban-for-Bergdahl trade, a senior Defense official told Fox News, likening it to “handing over five four-star generals of the Taliban.”

The claim adds to the picture that is emerging about the tense internal debate over whether to proceed with freeing five hardened Taliban leaders from Guantanamo in exchange for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s release.

Sources told Fox News earlier this week that the Obama administration largely bypassed the intelligence community to green-light the…

View original post 460 more words

Obama at West Point: speech panned by media; 25% standing ovation


More on the Obama west Point Speech!

StMA's avatarConsortium of Defense Analysts

On Wednesday, May 28, 2014, Barack Obama delivered his foreign policy speech at West Point, in which the President of the most powerful country in the world insisted “I am not weak” and argued for a contradictory foreign policy of American exceptionalism while he delegates authority to international coalitions.

"I am not weak" “I am not weak”

Jonathan Topaz reports for Politico that editorial boards at three major U.S. newspapers criticized President Barack Obama’s foreign policy speech at West Point on May 28 as incomplete and failing to recognize America’s international standing.

  • The New York Times editorial board, long supportive of Obama, wrote that his address “did not match the hype, was largely uninspiring, lacked strategic sweep and is unlikely to quiet his detractors, on the right or the left.” Obama “provided little new insight into how he plans to lead in the next two years, and many still doubt that he fully appreciates the leverage…

View original post 248 more words

Obama admin removes all battle tanks from Europe


I missed this when it came out, re-posted as prove that the dismantlement of the US military is why the bad guys are acting up!

StMA's avatarConsortium of Defense Analysts

Amidst the still-ongoing crisis in Ukraine, the Obama administration is moving the last U.S. battle tanks from Germany and, thus, from Europe.

At the same time, the Pentagon also is disbanding two of the U.S. Army’s heavy brigades in Germany. Last year, the 170th Infantry out of Baumholder disbanded, while the 172nd Separate Infantry Brigade at Grafenwöhr is in the process of doing the same.

Abram tank out of GermanyOne of 22 Abram battle tanks, bound for South Carolina, being loaded at the railhead in Kaisersalutern, Germany (photo by Alexander Burnett/U.S. Army). 

John Vandiver reports for Stars and Stripes, April 4, 2014, that the U.S. Army’s 69-year history of basing main battle tanks on German soil quietly ended last month when 22 Abrams tanks, a main feature of armored combat units throughout the Cold War, embarked for the U.S.

On March 18, the remaining tanks were loaded up at the 21st Theater Sustainment…

View original post 412 more words

US Marine Corps commandant openly blasts CIC Obama


As a former army officer I know how unusual this is and could lead to his being asked to give up his commission! It will be interesting to see if he joins General Stanley McChrystal in retirement.

StMA's avatarConsortium of Defense Analysts

USMC Gen. James AmosU.S. Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos

On July 15, 2014, speaking at the Brookings Institute think tank in Washington, DC, the Commandant of the United States Marine Corps, 4-star Gen. James Amos, openly and publicly criticized Commander-In-Chief Barack Hussein Obama.

Reporting for The Fiscal Times, David Francis observes that “It’s highly unusual for a high-ranking soldier, let alone a high-ranking Marine, to publicly question White House and Pentagon policy. Yet that’s exactly what four-star Gen. James Amos, Commandant of the Marine Corps, did yesterday in Washington.”

Speaking at the Brookings Institute, Amos criticized the Obama administration for:

1. Paving the way for the emergence of the Islamic State of Syria and Iraq (ISIS) by completely withdrawing American troops in 2011. Amos said: “I have a hard time believing that had we been there, and worked with the government, and worked with parliament, and worked with the…

View original post 289 more words

Poor Obama, he just can’t get Iran to give up their Nuke


Not that many of us thought that Obama and Kerry were serious about stopping Iran from getting nukes but this is really ridiculous.  Extend the deadline because you are so far apart that you can’t even talk; obviously these clowns have never negotiated anything!

Re Post from Powerline by Paul Mirengoff Posted on July 16, 2014

The Iran nuclear negotiations — slow motion defeat for the U.S.

John Kerry reportedly is preparing to extend the deadline for negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran. Evidently, the two sides are too far apart to reach an agreement by the deadline date of Sunday, July 20. In fact, as Seth Mandel points out, they are sufficiently at loggerheads that they plan to stop talking before the deadline is reached.

Why are the two sides so far apart? Probably because Iran has no serious incentive to reach a deal.

America’s incentive to reach one is as strong as ever. Obama wants a piece of paper that he can tout as a foreign policy success. He also wants to preempt an Israeli attack against Iran by insisting that he has negotiated a satisfactory resolution. Israel is unlikely to put much faith in the piece of paper, but will be under immense pressure to “give peace a chance.”

By contrast, Iran’s incentive to reach a deal is now vastly diminished. The incentive that drove the mullahs to the bargaining table last year was the sanctions regime and its debilitating impact on the Iranian economy.

But thanks to the considerable relief President Obama granted Iran from sanctions last year, the Iranian economy has picked up substantially. Eli Lake reports that, according to a new study, Iran’s economy is now growing at a rate of about 2 percent per year. That’s a modest number, but a huge improvement over the 6.6 percent contraction of 2012-13.

The study estimates the value of Obama’s economic relief at $11 billion over the last six months. The value of the relief extends beyond the additional money Iran was permitted to obtain through oil sales and from the release of funds from global banks. According to Mark Dubowitz, author of the study, the de-escalation of sanctions has improved international sentiment towards the Iranian economy, thereby encouraging investors and bankers to risk doing business with Iran.

Dubowitz says that when these factors are taken into account, the overall value of the relaxed sanctions will likely exceed the $20 billion per year that he originally predicted.

With its economy recovering, Iran has little incentive to reach an agreement. In theory, Obama could try to revive the prior sanctions regime which, in theory, might reverse Iran’s economic recovery.

But Iran understands that (1) Obama is highly unlikely to walk away from the table, much less go back to square one with sanctions, since to do so would be to admit failure and (2) as we suggested at the time of the original deal, the old sanctions regime probably cannot be restored in any event given the need for international cooperation.

Thus it is not surprising that, in the words of a State Department official, “Iran has not moved from their—from our perspective—unworkable and inadequate positions that would not in fact assure us that their program is exclusively peaceful.” Why should they?

And so we’re left with the status quo, which is, by the State Department’s own admission “unworkable and inadequate.” As I said at the time the original deal was struck, “The mullahs got an easing of sanctions [and] retained their capacity to go nuclear in short order.”

Obama and Kerry blew it. Mandel concludes:

[They] had leverage: economic sanctions. They used up much of that leverage just to get the Iranians to the table, and now the Iranian leadership wants to run out the clock.

Thanks to the weakening of the sanctions, and the lack of stronger sanctions to begin with, they’re in a position to do so. And Kerry seems prepared to play along.