Seems like an extraordinarily bad idea to trust a country whose dictator calls you an enemy and calls for others to wage war against you…
Seems like an extraordinarily bad idea to trust a country whose dictator calls you an enemy and calls for others to wage war against you…
Few, if any, Americans have a more sober and complete understanding of Islamic doctrine, particularly Shariah and Jihad, than Dr. Andrew Bostom.
Two days ago, he penned two very important and educational articles on the threat from the Islamic Republic of Iran and the willful blindness and denial Westerners and Americans in particular have when it comes to that threat. It is just this willful blindness and denial that has allowed us to sit back and watch for 20+ years as Iran builds nuclear infrastructure and ballistic missiles, all while sponsoring Jihadist terrorism directed at us…
Everyone should read these two articles…
Over on Investor’s Business Daily, Michael Barone reports that Stratfor analyst Robert Kaplan has suggested that Obama is trying to forge some alliance of sorts with Iran.
As implausible as this might seem, Kaplan evidently makes a case for it and it certainly wouldn’t be the first move by Obama that defies all logic and appears to work directly against US interests and those of our allies:
The apparent basis for Obama’s obsequiousness toward Iran, a country that has sponsored Hezbollah in its campaigns of murder of US citizens and even cooperated with Al Qaeda (YES, Al Qaeda: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/223992/iranian-entanglements/christopher-w-holton)–not to mention Iran’s involvement in supporting insurgents battling US GIs in Iraq and Afghanistan–is the newly fashionable mythology that Iranian President Hassan Rouhani is at long-last the “moderate” Iranian leader that we have all been waiting for.
The basic flaw in this thinking is that the President of Iran has no real authority over foreign policy and national security issues and policy. That authority resides only with the Supreme Leader, the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Despite the absurdity of the theory that Rouhani will make a real difference in US-Iranian relations, history suggests that it should not come as a real surprise that Team Obama is championing him. Democrats in office have held out this theory for decades. (Not that Republicans should get a free pass, since they too have sat idly by as Iran built up its nuclear infrastructure.)
The first known example of damaging Democratic naivete came, of course, during the disastrous administration of Jimmy Carter. Carter’s UN ambassador, Andrew Young, declared that Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini was akin to an Islamic “saint.” National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski considered Khomeini someone America could work with to oppose the Soviets. Young’s saint proceeded to seize political power despite public pledges not to do so and ordered the slaughter of thousands of opponents. He then dragged Iran back centuries with the imposition of Shariah law and began exporting the Islamic revolution through terrorism.
The next nauseating episode of Democratic gullibility when it came to Iran involved Ayatollah Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who served in several capacities in the Mullahs’ hierarchy in Iran, including Speaker of the Majles, a sort of parliament, and president of Iran from 1989-1997. Rafsanjani is one of the wealthiest men in Iran, his family having earned its fortune in the farming of pistachio nuts. The Clinton administration went to far as to ease sanctions on pistachio nut imports from Iran to the US under the misguided expectation that such a move would win favor with Rafsanjani, who many in the Clinton administration considered a “pragmatist.”
The rest is, as they say, history. Clinton’s pragmatist was evidently the Ayatollah in direct charge of kicking off Iran’s nuclear program to begin with.
In a 2001 speech, Rafsanjani had this to say about nuclear weapons and the conflict with Israel:
“If one day the world of Islam comes to possess the weapons currently in Israel’s possession – on that day this method of global arrogance would come to a dead end. This is because the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam.”
This was not Rafsanjani’s first statement on nuclear weapons. Before he became president of Iran and long before Bill Clinton’s team came along to declare him a pragmatist, Rafsanjani was making worrying statements about Iran and nuclear weapons. In a broadcast over Tehran radio in October 1988, when he was speaker of the Iranian Majlis, Ayatollah Rafsanjani made this chilling declaration that called for the development of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons:
“We should fully equip ourselves both in the offensive and defensive use of chemical, bacteriological and radiological weapons.”
Rafsanjani was eventually replaced as president by Ayatollah Mohammad Khatami, another Great Iranian Hope for the Democratic Party in the US. Khatami served as president from 1997 to 2005 and many in the West portrayed him as a champion of reform and dialogue between the West and Iran.
Of course, none of that amounted to anything, perhaps because Khatami, as president, had no authority over foreign policy and served at the pleasure of the Supreme Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. But, like his predecessors, Khatami was not what he appeared to be. When he was Iran’s minister of culture and Islamic propagation, Khatami was directly involved in the creation of Hezbollah, the global Jihadist terrorist organization that has served as Iran’s proxy in waging war against the West. It should also be noted that Iran’s nuclear program accelerated during Khatami’s presidency.
So, now we have Rouhani and Obama’s apparent miscalculation to follow in the footsteps of Clinton and Carter before him. The difference now is that the Iranians are so much closer to becoming a nuclear power.
Filed under: Al Qaeda, Carter, HAMAS, Hezbollah, Israel, Khamenei, Khatami, Khomeini, nuclear program, nuclear talks, Obama, Rafsanjani, Rouhani, Terrorism, US State Department, USA, Useful Idiots | Tagged: Iran, Khamenei, Obama, Rouhani | Leave a comment »
Well, the deed is all but done. The Obamanistas have gotten what they wanted all along: a false detente with the Ayatollahs.
John Kerry would have us believe that the Iranian nuclear program has been frozen by the “agreement” he “hammered” out with Iranian negotiators, but the subsequent remarks from Iranian leaders are very telling; they don’t appear to believe that they agreed to anything that truly curtails their nuclear ambitions.
Kerry is lying.
At BEST, this agreement seems to have set back the Iranian nuclear program all of 6 weeks. It is now inevitable that one day we will wake up and turn on the cable news shows and be treated to the news that Iran has nuclear weapons.
Make no mistake, Obama was NEVER committed to preventing the Iranians from becoming armed with nuclear weapons. To Obama’s world view, this is simply a balancing of world power. We have more nukes than anyone, so, what difference does it make that Iran has nukes? (Incidentally, this is essentially the same position that some Republicans, notably Rand Paul, have taken.)
Obama also has an underlying animosity toward Israel and no doubt sees Iran as a nuclear power in much the same light as Israel as a nuclear power.
Probably the most disappointing to liberals in the US who purported to support Israel, Hillary Clinton has gone along with the charade. To Hillary Clinton, everything is about political expedience and she sees it in her best political interests not to disagree with Obama on Iran.
In other words, there is no one in power in Washington who is truly concerned about Iran having the atomic bomb.
Leon Panetta may actually have believed it a few years ago when he said that the US would not allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons, but he was being lied to by his colleagues in the Obama administration who claimed to hold that view. No one in the Obama administration is talking like that now.
John Kerry would have us believe that we can just turn sanctions back on like a light switch if the Iranians don’t hold up their end of the faux bargain. This is perhaps the biggest lie.
Maybe the US can turn on sanctions again, but such unilateral sanctions will have little effect because the Chinese and the Russians are running full-speed into expanding their operations in the Iranian market now and our allies in Europe, Japan and South Korea are headed back in too. None of those countries, all of whom have closer economic ties to Iran than the US, is likely to turn sanctions back on any time soon. Nope, the genie is out of the bottle.
Meanwhile, the Iranians are up to their usual nefarious activities. They are playing chess and we still think the game is checkers.
A high ranking member of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps recently stated that Iran has IRGC and Hezbollah sleeper cells inside of America ready to strike targets:
I absolutely believe his claim to be true. There is no reason to doubt it.
President Rouhani took office last year amid wide speculation that he would finally be the long-lost “moderate” who would reach out lovingly to the West. This broken record is really getting tiresome. As if to ensure that the myth is once again disposed of properly, the Iranians have ramped up executions on his watch:
Meanwhile, Iran is using its oil wealth to exert its influence in America’s backyard. Through Hezbollah and activities emanating from Iran’s diplomatic facilities in the region, the Iranians are becoming involved in terrorism and criminal enterprises…
And as we have pointed out previously, the nuclear agreement with Iran doesn’t even mention the Iranians’ ballistic missile program:
Finally, amid all their nuclear ambitions, ballistic missile testing and sponsorship of terror, the US, thanks to the Obamanistas, is facilitating the Iranians’ access to long frozen financial resources. Money is the most fungible of all commodities. The Iranians might actually tell John Kerry and Barack Obama that this money won’t be spent on things like uranium enrichment, ballistic missiles and Hezbollah, but it makes no difference because it would definitely free up Iranian money elsewhere for such activity. We’ve known for decades that this is what the Ayatollahs do. That’s why this deal that John Kerry has perpetrated upon all of Western Civilization is criminal in its effect…
Filed under: ballistic missiles, Hezbollah, human rights, Israel, John Kerry, Latin America, missiles, nuclear program, nuclear talks, Obama, sanctions, Terrorism, USA, Useful Idiots | Tagged: Hezbollah, Iran, Kerry, nukes, Obama | Leave a comment »
The Washington Free Beacon is reporting something that the so-called “mainstream” media has chosen to ignore, namely that the Iranians have pulled out of nuclear talks with the P5+1 nations after the US further tightened sanctions on the Islamic Republic, as had been planned for some time.
It will be interesting to say the least to see if the Obama administration “blinks” in order to get the Iranians back to the negotiating table. Up to this point the Iranians have played the Obama administration like a fiddle in the negotiations. Other nations, most notably Red China and Russia, are already moving to ease sanctions on Iran based on the prior announcement of a deal with the Iranians, in return for which the Ayatollahs essentially gave up nothing of note.
It is also very important to note that the $7 billion figure for sanctions relief being thrown around is just the tip of a politico-economic iceberg. Opening up Iran’s oil and gas exports will produce a bonanza many times that figure for the Ayatollahs. Anyone who says any different is either lying or ignorant.
Iranians Pull Out of Nuke Talks
Iranian negotiators abruptly ended nuclear talks with Western powers in Vienna on Friday just a day after the Obama administration announced tighter sanctions on Tehran.
Iran had threatened that new or tighter sanctions would nullify the recently reached Geneva interim deal, which is not yet in effect.
However, Carney said that the administration continues to oppose new sanctions.
“Let’s be clear also that we continue to oppose passage of new nuclear-related sanctions,” Carney said.
If you or a family member attend Brooklyn College, Fordham University or City University of New York, there are three professors that you should avoid at all costs:
• Alex Vitae
• Heather Gautney
• John Hammond
These three geniuses are featured in an Iranian state-controlled media video segment at a conference in Tehran about the radical leftist Occupy Wall Street movement.
It’s a shame, but the Left in America as it exists today will conference with terrorists, genocidal monsters and outright enemies of liberty to promote their seditious agenda. No where is this more true than on our college campuses.
Your blogger gave a speech on the Muslim Brotherhood in America to a group near Baton Rouge, LA two years ago. A professor at LSU criticized my speech and defended the Muslim Brotherhood as a legitimate opposition movement. When I checked his CV, it turns out that he had been a visiting professor at the University of Tehran for 3 consecutive summers in recent years.
Clearly the regime in Tehran is running a successful influence campaign on US college campuses, even public university campuses, where they are essentially on the taxpayers’ payroll. The ayatollahs are finding willing fellow travelers and useful idiots in the form of American college professors who are filling the minds of America’s youth with subversive hogwash.
When you click on the link below to view this 2-minute video from Iran’s Press TV via the excellent MEMRI service, pay particular attention to Heather Gautney of Fordham. Notice that she is wearing a head scarf. We are 100% certain that this is not part of Heather’s normal attire. She is willing to bow to Iran’s Shariah law and make herself look like the hypocrite that she is in order to commiserate with those who chant “Death to America.”
These three professors are disgraceful. What they are doing is no different than a visiting delegation heading to Nazi Germany in 1938–except we arguably know MORE about Iran’s evil activities than we had yet realized about Nazi Germany in 1938…
US Professors Attend an Occupy Wall Street Conference in Tehran
This week the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency released a 15-page report which essentially amounts to a “smoking gun” that Iran is working to build nuclear weapons. Among the more significant findings in the report:
• Iran is clandestinely acquiring equipment and data needed to make nuclear weapons.
• Iran has been conducting high explosives testing and developing detonators designed to trigger a nuclear explosion.
• Iranian scientists have been using computer modeling to design the core of a nuclear warhead.
• Iranian military personnel have been doing work consistent with preparation for a nuclear weapons test.
• Iran is working on mounting a nuclear payload onto its Shahab 3 intermediate range ballistic missile
For its part, not surprisingly, Iran denies that its nuclear program is a weapons program. The Ayatollahs maintain that their nuclear program is a peaceful energy program.
But the UN IAEA report points out that there is activity associated with Iran’s nuclear program that can only be categorized as weapons activity. In other words, there would be no reason to conduct these activities if the Iranians were not working on a nuclear bomb. If you want to view this evidence yourself, here is a link to the report itself:
All of this comes as no surprise to sober Americans, Israelis and other Westerners. Only fringe politicos have been in denial as to Iran’s sinister intentions for its nuclear program. Nevertheless, those in the West who have denied the true nature of Iran’s nuclear program have served the Ayatollahs’ purpose as “Useful Idiots” for years. For decades in fact, the Iranians have bought time through denials, lies and theatrics designed to conceal their nuclear weapons program. And their friends, vendors and customers in nations such as Russia, Red China, Japan, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Brazil, India, the United Arab Emirates, and, yes, the United States of America, have played a supporting role in this theater of the absurd.
Nor is the UN itself blameless. Recall that the IAEA was once headed by a man from Egypt named Mohammed El Baradei. El Baradei had a terrible reputation among the Western arms inspectors assigned to the IAEA as someone who went to great lengths to give Moslem nations the benefit of the doubt when it comes to nuclear inspections. It was while El Baradei was heading the IAEA that Iran was expanding its nuclear program with huge underground facilities as places like Natanz equipped with advanced centrifuges used to enrich uranium in violation of the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty). It is difficult to believe that all of the revelations in the latest IAEA report couldn’t have been gleaned during the El Baradei years.
All of the delays have helped the Iranians grow closer to achieving their goal of arming themselves with nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, at the forefront of those whose incompetence and professional neglect enabled the Iranians to advance their nuclear weapons quest was none other than the US intelligence community. Recall back in November 2007 that the Office of National Intelligence published a National Intelligence Estimate that stated that Iran had abandoned its nuclear weapons program back in 2003.
Here is a link to that infamous document:
Within two years, that horribly flawed and politically biased report had been discredited as flat wrong:
No single document helped the Iranians more than the 2007 NIE. It paralyzed the Bush administration, Congress, Israel and some of our NATO allies for months, even though the Israelis and some of the Europeans knew the report to essentially be a work of fiction.
There can be no doubt that Iran is much closer to being armed with nuclear weapons now than they were before the DNI published the 2007 NIE. And the NIE gave them cover.
One of the things that is so infuriating about all this is that there were mountains of physical and circumstantial evidence pointing to an Iranian nuclear program years before the latest IAEA report was published.
Consider these anecdotes:
• In January 1994, the Clinton administration’s Undersecretary of State for International Security, Lynn Davis, told USA Today that “Iran’s actions leave little doubt that Tehran is intent upon developing nuclear weapons capabilities.” Davis went on to say that “Iran’s nuclear acquisitions are inconsistent with any rational civil nuclear program.” This statement was made nearly 18 years ago. EIGHTEEN years ago, we knew what the Iranians were up to, but the Clinton administration did next to nothing to stop them.
• In February 1987, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khameini uttered these words in a speech before his country’s Atomic Energy Organization: “Regarding atomic energy, we need it now. Our nation has always been threatened from the outside. The least we can do to face this danger is to let our enemies know that we can defend ourselves. Therefore, every step you take here is in defense of your country and your revolution. With this in mind, you should work hard and at great speed.”
• An even more overt statement came a year later. In a broadcast over Tehran radio in October 1988, the speaker of the Iranian parliament, Hashemi Rafsanjani, made this chilling declaration that called for the development of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons: “We should fully equip ourselves both in the offensive and defensive use of chemical, bacteriological and radiological weapons.”
• A lot more evidence of Iranian nuclear intentions surfaced during the 1990s. German and French security officials reported that, from 1992 to 1995, they foiled several attempts by Iranian intelligence agents to purchase equipment needed to create an atomic bomb. But perhaps the clearest evidence spilled out in January 1995 in a nuclear deal signed between Iran and Russia. After the U.S. strongly protested the agreement, Russian President Boris Yeltsin acknowledged that the agreement did in fact contain a military “component” and he announced that he was voiding that portion: “But it is true that the contract does contain components of civilian and military nuclear energy. Now we have agreed to separate those two. In as much as they relate to the military component and the potential for creating weapons grade fuel and other matters-the centrifuge, the construction of shafts-we have decided to exclude those aspects from the contract.”
• There is even more evidence. Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma, who served from 1994 to 2005, was quoted as saying that Iran was seeking help from his nation to build nuclear weapons: “We need oil from Iran because Russia is strangling us. We have no intention of responding to the repeated request by the Iranians to share with them know-how on nuclear weapons, or to sell them any equipment in this field.”
What all this obviously means is that no one should be surprised by the findings in the latest IAEA report. This leaves two main questions:
1. How close are the Iranians to having nuclear weapons?
2. What can be done?
The answer to the first question is as elusive as the wind itself. Estimates range all over the place. But keep in mind that Western intelligence agencies have provided estimates ranging from 5 years to 15 years since the 1990s. Heck, at one time, for a short period, the CIA even told President Bush that they thought Iran already had one nuclear weapon, but eventually backtracked from that statement. The fact is, if you look at the history of estimates from Western sources, it becomes clear that no one knows how close the Iranians are to having nuclear bombs. They could even already have a nuclear bomb. Or they could be years away.
But one thing we must remember is that the Iranians are awash in petrodollars, so they have been able to purchase expertise and components from the likes of AQ Khan of Pakistan and North Korea, in addition to former Soviet and South African nuclear technicians. Being able to afford to buy existing knowledge and equipment “off the shelf,” provides a real short-cut to completing a nuclear weapons program. Given that the Iranians are not idiots and they have been working on this project since the late 1980s, it would be a mistake to assume that Iran is many years away from having an atomic bomb.
This leaves us with the last question: what is to be done?
It is most unfortunate that Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama have not exhibited any of the political will necessary to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power–and we MUST acknowledge that preventing Iran from going nuclear is an absolute necessary vital national security issue for the United States. All of the good options are gone.
Had we imposed meaningful sanctions back in January 1994 when the Clinton State Department declared Iran’s nuclear program a weapons project, and worked to compel our NATO allies to do the same, there could have been a meaningful impact on Iran’s economy and ability to acquire nuclear technology. But Clinton lacked the political will to defend America.
Unfortunately, President Bush displayed little additional political will to target the Iranians with meaningful sanctions. Bush continued the Clinton policy of issuing waivers for foreign companies in violation of the Iran Sanctions Act. Big firms such as Siemens, Total SA, GE, BP, Thyssen-Krupp, Royal Dutch Shell and Alcatel-Lucent were given a free pass to provide corporate life support for the Ayatollahs. Each of companies, and others, has done hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars of business with the Iranians while the Iranians have built nuclear weapons.
The Obama administration has continued the waiver policy. In other words, since the mid 1990s when the Iran Sanctions Act was signed into law, we have failed to enforce the Act and have had n0 tough sanctions on Iran, despite the fact that Iran has armed our enemies on the battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan and have supported Al Qaeda in its war against America.
If the United States decided to suddenly start enforcing its existing sanctions policies, would there be enough time for the sanctions to make themselves felt in Iran, before Iran got nuclear weapons? That is the great unknown–but we DO know that we cannot trust anything coming out of our intelligence community on the subject.
That leaves the military option, something that the Obama administration almost certainly has no stomach for. I believe it is safe to say that Obama would rather allow Iran to go nuclear and let the next president deal with it than take any forceful action to prevent the Ayatollahs from going atomic. Moreover, Obama’s policies of withdrawal have weakened our ability to threaten Iran and strike at its nuclear facilities. US forces are almost completely withdrawn from Iraq and Obama is seeking to accelerate their withdrawal from Afghanistan. Whereas, not long ago, the US had large formations of forces bracketing Iran, including, most importantly, massive air assets and special operations forces, soon there will be few if any of those assets on hand to launch a campaign against Iran’s nuclear facilities, which have been dispersed and hardened. This will make the planning and execution of any military operation against Iran much more complicated.
Which is exactly what Obama and his hard left, Soros-funded allies want. Like Ron Paul on the right, they’re just fine with Iran getting nuclear weapons. It’s an insane policy, unless your goal is to see the United States substantially weakened in the world and Israel threatened.
Speaking of Israel, it appears that it will be up to that isolated and abandoned republic to defend itself and rid the Free World of the Iranian nuclear menace. Are they up to it?
They certainly have the political will that America’s leaders have lacked, but they lack pure numbers of suitable weapons and geography.
Iran has at least 15 significant nuclear sites. While some observers maintain Israel would not have to destroy every site to cripple Iran’s program, Israel’s intelligence would have to be extremely good to skip over any known sites, much less sites that are not widely known. Iran has been secretive about its nuclear program for nearly two decades and it is possible that crucial activities are hidden in unknown areas and sites.
Israel would not want to leave any aspect of Iran’s nuclear program intact, therefore, to suggest that an attack would need to destroy 15 sites may be conservative.
Israel used 16 aircraft just to destroy Saddam Hussein’s Osirak nuclear facility in June 1981. Osirak was relatively poorly defended and was only approximately 570 miles from Tel Aviv. By contrast, Iran’s largest nuclear site is 1,000 miles from Israel. The furthest Iranian nuclear site is in Tabas, in the eastern end of the country, some 1600 miles from Israel. The other 13 nuclear sites are widely dispersed.
The Iranians are very aware of what happened at Osirak. Their nuclear sites are hardened—often built underground—and are heavily defended by Russian-made surface to air missiles and anti- aircraft artillery. Israeli planning tends to be very good, but with so many targets, follow-up strikes would almost certainly be needed. This makes the fact that the Iranians have gone to great lengths to defend their nuclear facilities a problem. Even if the initial strikes get by Iranian defenses, the Iranians will be that much more alert for follow-up strikes. And Israel does not possess stealth aircraft or large numbers of long- range cruise missiles to conduct such missions. The Israelis would need to be uncannily accurate in their initial strikes to ensure success and this is not the same Israeli Air Force that existed in 1981. Today, many Israeli pilots have not seen true combat, have not had to deal with sophisticated air defense systems and have never flown long-range precision strike missions.
Iran’s nuclear facilities are not the only problem. Iran’s Shehab-3 ballistic missile has the range to hit Israel. It is not certain how many of these missiles Iran has (though some published reports give a number of 15, with no acknowledged source), nor is it known if any are equipped with chemical or biological warheads.
So, Israel would also have to try to account for potential Iranian missile sites in any strike. There are at least 8 known sites throughout Iran capable of launching ballistic missiles: Tehran, Bakhtaran, Garmsar, Karaj, Mashhad, Qom, Semnan, and Shahroud,
This means that Israel would be faced with having to strike no fewer than 23 separate targets, all more than 1,000 miles from Israeli air bases and it simply does not have the number of long-range aircraft necessary to do so. Israel has 100 F-16I and 30 F-15I capable of carrying out this mission profile.
What this means is that Israel would have to do more than just launch air strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Perhaps this is why Israel has recently tested a new, extended range version of its Jericho ballistic missile, equipped with a larger warhead.
Additionally, Israel has a number of cruise missiles installed on its German-built Dolphin class submarines, with which it could strike Iran from the Persian Gulf or the Arabian Sea.
Given all its weapon assets, special operations forces and intelligence capability, Israel may very well be capable of setting Iran’s nuclear program back by a number of years, but in the process Israel will be subjecting itself to unrestricted warfare at the hands of Iran’s terrorist allies around the globe, as well as other forms of retaliation from Iran’s ballistic missile forces.
We can’t help but wonder if all of this would have been necessary if the US had fulfilled its proper role as world leader and enforced robust sanctions against Iran 18 years ago…
Filed under: Afghanistan, Al Qaeda, ballistic missiles, Gas & Petroleum, Hezbollah, IAEA, Israel, Khamenei, military, missiles, Mohammed El-Baradei, Natanz, NATO, Navy, nuclear program, Obama, Pakistan, sanctions, Terrorism, UAE, US State Department, USA | 4 Comments »