Look who’s become Death, the destroyer of worlds 5

 Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds. – Valerie Jarrett?

This is from Investor’s Business Daily:

Reports resurface of Obama aide Valerie Jarrett forging a secret deal with Tehran as Saudi Arabia reportedly mulls helping Israel destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities. Unlike the U.S., the Saudis recognize the threat.

Israeli television reported Sunday night that Iranian-born White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett negotiated a one-year-in-the-making deal with the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, Ali Akbar Salehi. That would render the Geneva talks now taking place between the so-called P5-plus-one group ( the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China, plus Germany) and Tehran a meaningless facade.

The White House denies the report, made by anonymous senior Israeli officials who claim Jarrett has traveled to a number of Persian Gulf states to meet with Salehi, and describes the U.S. as making concessions to Tehran as “confidence-building measures.”

But everyone knows that this White House lies by reflex.

Valerie Jarrett is the one-who-decides, not Obama.

Whether fact or rumor, it aggravates the fears not only of Israel but of the Mideast’s saner Islamic regimes.

For years, the Israelis, the Saudis and the Egyptians have seen a U.S. president conduct an Iran policy based on applying economic sanctions to fanatics who care little about the well-being of their countrymen, and on the notion that Islamofascists who await the coming of the 12th imam to lead an apocalyptic war against Israel can be reasoned with.

So it isn’t tremendously surprising to read the London Sunday Times report that Riyadh would let Israel fly over its airspace to bomb Iran, plus help out on rescue helicopters, tanker planes and drones.

No sooner had the Sunday Times published this information than Saudi Arabia denied it – of course. And perhaps the  Saudis will now disallow Israel to use its airspace. The chances of the strange co-operation between these enemy states continuing are, however, quite good.

A diplomatic contact told the British newspaper, “The Saudis are furious and are willing to give Israel all the help it needs.” The Saudis indicated several weeks ago that their relations with the U.S. had been breached by President Obama’s overture to Iran.

According to the Times, “Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency is working with Saudi officials on contingency plans for a possible attack on Iran” if a deal in Geneva doesn’t do enough to curb Tehran’s nuclear program.

Both Israel and the Sunni royal rulers of Saudi Arabia believe the Geneva talks with Shiite Iran “amount to appeasement and will do little to slow its development of a nuclear warhead”, the paper said. … But it should be appreciated what a risk it is for the regime to assist Israel. …

The Saudis and the Israelis understand that Iran cannot be appeased out of becoming nuclear-armed. Unfortunately, we have a president intent on doing just that.

And this is from Front Page, by Noah Beck:

According to a recent news report, President Barack Obama has for over a year secretly conducted negotiations with Iran (through his adviser Valerie Jarrett) and the Geneva talks on Iranian nukes now appear to be just a facade providing international legitimacy for Obama’s secret deal with Iran.

Secretary of State John Kerry’s contradictory criticism of Israeli objections to that deal only suggests more bad faith by the Obama administration.

Kerry claims that Israel has been kept fully apprised of the negotiations with Iran but then argues that Israel has never seen the terms of the proposed deal with Iran and therefore shouldn’t question it. The Obama administration apparently wants to present the nuclear deal as a fait accompli that Israel must simply accept as is. …

On the issue of Iranian nukes, France has effectively replaced the U.S. as Israel’s strongest ally and as the most sober-minded advocate of caution when negotiating over the single greatest threat to global security. Incredibly, Saudi Arabia is reportedly replacing the US in providing logistical support for an Israeli strike on Iranian nukes.

Now comes some really good news – or at least some promising information:

Yaakov Amidror, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s former national security adviser, recently indicated that the Israeli Air Force has been preparing for a potential strike on Iran. According to Amidror, such a strike could set back Iran’s nuclear program “for a very long time.” So Israel can go it alone, if it must, although the results will be far messier than those produced by a stronger U.S. approach.

While the Obama administration has suggested that critics of the current Geneva deal are “on a march to war,” it is that very deal — which gives Iran a nuclear breakout capacity — that will force the states most threatened by Iran to take preemptive military action.

If they do not …

An Iranian nuclear weapons breakout capability will produce catastrophic consequences

1) The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) will effectively be finished. The world’s most volatile region will become even more explosive as other regional players scramble to establish their own nuclear arsenals to counter Iran’s. And rogue nations will realize that by following Iran’s deceptive playbook, they too can develop a nuclear capability.

2) The force of U.N. Security Council Resolutions will be further diluted, as Iran will continue flouting six of them with impunity.

3) Iran-backed terrorist organizations — including Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah — will grow emboldened by the nuclear umbrella of their patron.

4) Terrorism could go nuclear, should Iran share some of its nuclear materials with the terrorist groups that it supports.

5) U.S. influence in the Middle East will erode even more, as Obama further damages U.S. relationships and influence in the region.

6) U.S. credibility throughout the world will plummet. If the U.S. cannot be trusted to provide strong leadership on the national security issue of greatest concern to the free world, where U.S. interests are directly at stake, what does that mean for U.S. credibility more generally?

7) Global instability and oil prices will skyrocket. If Israel, with Saudi assistance, strikes Iran’s nuclear program, the Iranian retaliation that follows could spark World War III. Will Iran attack Saudi oil fields or otherwise pour more fuel onto the Sunni-Shia fire in Syria? Will Iran and Iran-backed Hezbollah (estimated to have at least 45,000 missiles) launch a massive attack killing thousands of Israeli civilians? Will some of the Syrian chemical weapons held by Assad (another Iranian ally) end up hitting Israel? How would Israel respond?

Is this how Armageddon happens?

8) U.S. interests will be attacked. Obama may think that his policy of appeasement will shield the U.S. from Iranian reprisals, but the opposite is true. When the U.S. appears so weak and ready to abandon allies (as with Egypt, Israel, and Saudi Arabia), Iran has less fear of attacking the U.S. and more reasons to do so, as a way to exacerbate U.S. tensions with Israel.

Will attacking U.S. interests be yet another Obama “red line” that gets crossed with impunity? If so, then whatever is left of U.S. deterrence and credibility will have been destroyed. If not, then the U.S. will get sucked into another Mideast war but on terms dictated by the adversary, and without any first-strike advantage.

The catastrophic consequences outlined above would all directly result from Obama’s disastrously weak policies on the Iranian nuclear threat.

Obama should know by now that if he forces Israel’s hand, then Israel alone will neutralize the Iranian nuclear threat, regardless of how messy the aftermath may be.

We wish we knew that!

What we perceive is that if “Armageddon” develops from this chain of events, its mastermind is one Valerie Jarrett. And religious doom-predictors should note that nobody ever prophesied a 57-year-old woman, elected by nobody and representing no constituency, will launch the destruction of  the world.

  • rogerinflorida

    I for one am very grateful for the efforts of Ms. Jarrett. I hope that the US and Iran can come to an agreement, better yet an alliance.
    Currently we are “allies” with Saudi Arabia; this is a family estate masquerading as a country, and what a family it is: The House of Saud is a decadent, corrupt, backstabbing criminal gang who are proudly responsible for the spread of fundamental islam across the world. They are the terror financiers, not Iran, they are the funders of the “Mega Mosques” sprouting up all over the world, they are the proselytizers of this foul ignorance known as islam, in case you have forgotten 11 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudis. KSA is also the major funder and pot stirrer in this mass murder going on in Syria, do you think the Syrian people will be the better for a Saudi financed Al Qaeda victory?
    As for Israel, they need to be very cautious, remember the old adage; “those whom the gods would destroy, they first send mad”. Israel does not have the military muscle to defeat Iran, and assistance from the Saudis won’t be worth a damn. Iran has actually been very patient with Israeli (and US) provocations, but that patience will break in the event of an Israeli military strike, the Iranian response will create a veritable hell on earth for Israelis.

    • Jillian Becker

      Iran created and funds Hezbollah. Iran is funding Shiite terrorism everywhere it can. You speak of madness? The people of Iran are oppressed by a tyranny of mad mullahs who believe their long-dead 12th imam will soon rise out of a well where he’s been hiding for hundreds of years. It will not just be Israel that will experience hell on earth if Iran gets “the bomb” – the mullahs are developing ICBMs that can bring nuclear war to America too. They are “negotiating” in bad faith. There can be no peaceful alliance between the US and Iran. Roger, you are really on the wrong side here. Please think again.

      • rogerinflorida

        The answer to this is to rid Iran of the “tyranny of mad mullahs”, ultimately by any means necessary but hopefully by assisting the Iranian people themselves.
        In my experience of working with people of the ME or near Asia, Iranians are the most western oriented, Arabs, Afghans and Pakistanis are mostly beyond redemption.
        We need to deal with this situation, it is either talk or war!

        • Jillian Becker

          Sure. But it must be the right talk. Not the US caving in to the mullahs. Yes, the people of Iran need to liberate themselves from tyranny. Obama had a moment when he could have helped but he didn’t act because he didn’t want to. Why do so many people shut their eyes to the hugely obvious fact that Obama favors tyranny, Islam, statism, collectivism – everything that is inimical to what this country was founded to stand for and embody?

  • liz

    Great prospects here – either World War 3 or the tyranny of a nuclear Iran.
    Talk about unintended consequences. All this because we just HAD to elect a historical “first black president”. Because that is of course the most intelligent reason to vote for a president. It was just the right thing to do!
    No need to look into his background or his ideology, or even his citizenship. That would be racist! Affirmative action was finally applied at the highest level.
    And here we have the ultimate outcome of that genius idea – Armageddon.