The U.S. Fiddles while Syria Burns

On October 4, the N.Y. Times reported a complete breakdown of talks between John Kerry, the U.S. secretary of state, and Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, over the bombing of Aleppo by Assad and the Russians.  This is a developing farce with far-reaching significance.  It began not with antagonism, but with Pres. Obama accepting the Russian outreach when he drew that famous "red line" regarding Bashar Assad's use of chemical weapons against civilians and the opposition.  Russia stepped in with a plan to confiscate those weapons, garnering Assad's support, as a show of "congeniality" to indicate that anything as drastic as a "red line" was not needed.  Obama, hoping to show magnanimity (but actually deficient in mental clarity and righteousness), accepted the Russian offer.

Since that occasion, when Obama accepted Putin's offer to intervene, a "deal" or "agreement" (in actuality, a treaty) was signed with Iran to slow down production of nuclear weaponization by Iran for about ten years.  Under this egregious agreement, Iran is charged to police itself in its own commitments.  Further, the USA has agreed to pay Iran about $150 billion and to remove most of the financial and banking sanctions that have been in place since the ayatollahs took power and held Americans hostage in Tehran for more than a year.

Now put this "deal" in the context – that Iran is still on the State Department list of state sponsors of terrorism, that Iran has already lost cases in court that proved Iran's complicity in numerous American citizen deaths, and that those stipends awarded by the courts have not been collected from Iran.

Please put into context that Iran has already broken the "agreement" or "deal" four times with ballistic missile tests that were unauthorized by the deal.  These missiles will be able to deliver a nuclear warhead, once developed, anywhere in the world.  All countries, allies and non-allies alike, and the USA itself will be exposed to Iranian nuclear threats once they have nuclear warheads and missiles that can deliver them.

Please keep in mind that the Iranians continue to maintain an aggressive propaganda campaign against the USA within their country ("Death to America").  And continue to test our will, and attempt to humiliate us by capturing our sailors. 

Put this "deal" in the context of a "reset" with Russia (read: "capitulation to Russian foreign policy goals") that began under Hillary, and negotiations with Iran that also began under Hillary.  Then add in that the "deal" with Iran went full steam ahead with the full approval of P5 (that includes Russia and the People's Republic of China).  Thus, the U.S. government is standing shoulder to shoulder with countries not known for their devotion to human rights, freedom of expression, and largesse toward other countries.  Is this or is this not a betrayal of the vital national interests of the USA?

Now add another note of truth: Russia and Iran are totally on board with backing Assad in Syria, whereas the USA's position has been that Assad has to go.  Notice that that has been our position for a long time, but he has not left office.  One may ask: how effective have we been in implementing our stated goal of removing Assad?  How does a deal with Iran, supported by Russia, advance our goal of removing Assad?  The answer is that it is illogical and inimical to our goal vis-à-vis Syria to have an agreement with Iran, with Russian concurrence, and enforce or even move forward our goal of removing Assad.

The continued murder of Assad's citizens could have been anticipated as soon as we moved into the "deal" phase with Iran, supported by Russia.  Any observer could see clearly that our readiness to deal with Iran and Russia was directly proportional to our willingness to abandon the Syrians, as well as Israel, to the maniacal Iranians as they prepare for the apocalyptic arrival of the Shi'ite Mahdi (their version of the Judgment Day).  The Russian bombing that we consider excessive could easily have been anticipated before we ever got to this point. 

Thus, our break-off of talks is a farce, a playacting on a serious world stage.  Our president, Mrs. Clinton (who initiated the Iran negotiations), and Mr. Kerry have sold out the Syrians, the USA, Israel, and all people of good intention.  They are to blame for the deaths in Aleppo as much as or more than the Russians and Assad.  We remember Nero fiddling while Rome burned (a fire often attributed to him), and we remember Esau selling Jacob his birthright for a mess of pottage.  Is this not a parallel development at the highest diplomatic levels?  Yet the playacting goes on.  Kerry breaks off talks pretending that we are still the "good guys," whereas, in fact, we are the responsible authors of the present violent debacle.

On October 4, the N.Y. Times reported a complete breakdown of talks between John Kerry, the U.S. secretary of state, and Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, over the bombing of Aleppo by Assad and the Russians.  This is a developing farce with far-reaching significance.  It began not with antagonism, but with Pres. Obama accepting the Russian outreach when he drew that famous "red line" regarding Bashar Assad's use of chemical weapons against civilians and the opposition.  Russia stepped in with a plan to confiscate those weapons, garnering Assad's support, as a show of "congeniality" to indicate that anything as drastic as a "red line" was not needed.  Obama, hoping to show magnanimity (but actually deficient in mental clarity and righteousness), accepted the Russian offer.

Since that occasion, when Obama accepted Putin's offer to intervene, a "deal" or "agreement" (in actuality, a treaty) was signed with Iran to slow down production of nuclear weaponization by Iran for about ten years.  Under this egregious agreement, Iran is charged to police itself in its own commitments.  Further, the USA has agreed to pay Iran about $150 billion and to remove most of the financial and banking sanctions that have been in place since the ayatollahs took power and held Americans hostage in Tehran for more than a year.

Now put this "deal" in the context – that Iran is still on the State Department list of state sponsors of terrorism, that Iran has already lost cases in court that proved Iran's complicity in numerous American citizen deaths, and that those stipends awarded by the courts have not been collected from Iran.

Please put into context that Iran has already broken the "agreement" or "deal" four times with ballistic missile tests that were unauthorized by the deal.  These missiles will be able to deliver a nuclear warhead, once developed, anywhere in the world.  All countries, allies and non-allies alike, and the USA itself will be exposed to Iranian nuclear threats once they have nuclear warheads and missiles that can deliver them.

Please keep in mind that the Iranians continue to maintain an aggressive propaganda campaign against the USA within their country ("Death to America").  And continue to test our will, and attempt to humiliate us by capturing our sailors. 

Put this "deal" in the context of a "reset" with Russia (read: "capitulation to Russian foreign policy goals") that began under Hillary, and negotiations with Iran that also began under Hillary.  Then add in that the "deal" with Iran went full steam ahead with the full approval of P5 (that includes Russia and the People's Republic of China).  Thus, the U.S. government is standing shoulder to shoulder with countries not known for their devotion to human rights, freedom of expression, and largesse toward other countries.  Is this or is this not a betrayal of the vital national interests of the USA?

Now add another note of truth: Russia and Iran are totally on board with backing Assad in Syria, whereas the USA's position has been that Assad has to go.  Notice that that has been our position for a long time, but he has not left office.  One may ask: how effective have we been in implementing our stated goal of removing Assad?  How does a deal with Iran, supported by Russia, advance our goal of removing Assad?  The answer is that it is illogical and inimical to our goal vis-à-vis Syria to have an agreement with Iran, with Russian concurrence, and enforce or even move forward our goal of removing Assad.

The continued murder of Assad's citizens could have been anticipated as soon as we moved into the "deal" phase with Iran, supported by Russia.  Any observer could see clearly that our readiness to deal with Iran and Russia was directly proportional to our willingness to abandon the Syrians, as well as Israel, to the maniacal Iranians as they prepare for the apocalyptic arrival of the Shi'ite Mahdi (their version of the Judgment Day).  The Russian bombing that we consider excessive could easily have been anticipated before we ever got to this point. 

Thus, our break-off of talks is a farce, a playacting on a serious world stage.  Our president, Mrs. Clinton (who initiated the Iran negotiations), and Mr. Kerry have sold out the Syrians, the USA, Israel, and all people of good intention.  They are to blame for the deaths in Aleppo as much as or more than the Russians and Assad.  We remember Nero fiddling while Rome burned (a fire often attributed to him), and we remember Esau selling Jacob his birthright for a mess of pottage.  Is this not a parallel development at the highest diplomatic levels?  Yet the playacting goes on.  Kerry breaks off talks pretending that we are still the "good guys," whereas, in fact, we are the responsible authors of the present violent debacle.