Primary Target: Iran

myriam20130910060845037Imagine if during WWII, the Allies bombed Italian cities while sparing the German cities from attack. Such a scenario would have prolonged the war indefinitely, and might have given the Nazis the time to develop and use atomic bombs against the Allies. Today, this scenario is actually being put into practice by the Obama administration in choosing secondary targets such as Syria while allowing the main target, which is Iran, to finalize the development of its nuclear program, and perhaps, in the not too distant future, use it against Israel, and ultimately against the U.S.

The Obama administration has made disastrous mistakes in executing foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East.  It supported the 2011 Muslim Brotherhood takeovers in Tunisia and Egypt in the name of democracy, while at the same time throwing a longtime ally, President Mubarak of Egypt, “under the bus.” The Arab Middle East took notice, especially the Saudis.

In 2009, the Obama administration kept silent when the Iranian people protested against the stolen presidential election that kept Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in office. Iranian liberals and democrats risked their lives in going to the streets with banners that read “Obama, are you with us or against us.” Yet, in July, 2013, the same Obama administration protested the ouster of an authoritarian and unpopular Egyptian President Morsi by the military. Obama called for a quick return of authority to a democratically elected civilian government. He declared, “We are deeply concerned by the decision of the Egyptian Armed Forces to remove President Morsi and suspend the Egyptian constitution,” while at the same time dancing around the use of the word “coup” which would carry legal consequences for U.S. aid to Cairo.

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia reacted differently. He congratulated the new government in Cairo for assuming leadership “at this critical point in history,” following the removal of Muslim Brotherhood President Muhammad Morsi by the Egyptian military.

While the Saudis have been dismayed by U.S. policies, as were the Israelis, the Islamic Republic of Iran was delighted. Middle East observers concluded that if this is how the U.S. treats its allies, America seems at best a fair weather ally and friend.

Betrayal of pro-Western allies was one thing. Lack of long-term vision regarding American interests and contradictory actions were another. On the one hand, the U.S. and its NATO allies decided to bomb Gaddafi’s Libya, thus tipping the balance in favor of the jihadist rebels. On the other hand, for 2 ½ years, the Obama administration refused to act against an oppressive dictator in Syria, Bashar Assad, who killed over 100,000 of his people.  Moreover, Assad has allied Syria with the U.S.’s arch-enemy, Iran, and the terrorist organization, Hezbollah.

In Libya, the U.S. bombing strikes were pretexted as serving a humanitarian mission.  U.S. interests were not involved and certainly not endangered. Obama did not ask the U.S. Congress to vote on authorization as he did recently regarding Syria. And, Muammar Gaddafi, unlike Bashar Assad, did not use chemical weapons on his people. In Libya, however, the U.S. Air Force destroyed the Gaddafi controlled airfields, and demolished the Libyan air force, but not in Syria. The contradiction is clear.

The crucial question today in the Middle East and elsewhere is which nation is endangering world peace and threatens to destabilize the region. It certainly was not Libya. Neither is it Syria, albeit, with its use of forbidden chemical weapons, and creating millions of homeless refugees in the neighboring states, it has created an international concern. However, the Islamic Republic of Iran is the major destabilizing force in the region and beyond. By virtue of its defying the international community on its nuclear program, Iran’s role as a state sponsor of terrorism, with its threats to “wipe Israel off the map,” makes Iran a global concern. Tehran is directly involved in undermining U.S. interests in the region.

Obama is not the first U.S. president to use a diversionary attack rather than a direct attack on the most threatening U.S. enemy in the region, Iran. President George W. Bush ordered an attack on Iraq in 2003 with unsubstantiated intelligence information about Saddam Hussein’s (Iraq’s brutal dictator) possessions of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), alleging that he was clandestinely procuring and producing more. Iraq did not possess nuclear weapons but Iran was working to acquire them. Iran is a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), signed on July 1, 1968, and ratified. It deposited its ratification of the treaty in Washington on February 2, 1970. And, while Iraq also signed the Nuclear NPT at the same time as Iran, it did not possess nuclear weapons (Israel destroyed the Osirak Nuclear facility near Baghdad in 1981).  Nevertheless, the U.S. attacked Iraq, but not Iran.

Iran is also a signatory to the International Convention against the use of chemical weapons while its junior partner and proxy, Assad’s Syria, is not. Hence, Iran and North Korea have proliferated nuclear and chemical weapons (destroyed by Israel) to Syria and should be held responsible. George W. Bush, moreover, called Iran, Iraq, and North Korea the “Axis of Evil,” but not Syria. Once again, an American president (Obama) has chosen to strike the less harmful target (Syria) instead of the real culprit, which is Iran.

It is apparent that Obama has no stomach for any military action, neither on Syria nor on Iran, yet he has bungled the U.S. policy versus Syria from the start.  Obama’s “red line”  on chemical weapons has been crossed before the August 21, 2013 attack near Damascus. His threat to attack Syria was soon modified by the excuse that he needs the endorsement of the U.S. Congress. Now, a slip of the tongue by his Secretary of State John Kerry, about possibly avoiding a U.S. attack if Assad surrendered his chemical weapons, was seized upon by Russia’s President Putin, and might let Obama “off the hook.” American credibility is not, however, “off the hook,” and Obama’s credibility is in worse standing in the Middle East and especially in Iran.

Twice now, U.S. presidents have deliberately chosen to overlook the main problem in the Middle East, which is Iran. George W. Bush did it in 2003, and Barack Obama is doing it now. It is laughable to consider Obama’s arguments for the U.S. striking Syria, since Syria never ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention, and thus cannot be held legally responsible for using chemical weapons against its own people. Iran, on the other hand, has violated the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty it ratified. Tehran is seeking to develop and use nuclear weapons, and has threatened to “wipe Israel (a member state) off the map.”  If America is to expand it resources to protect world peace, it needs to punish Iran.

Iran occupied the U.S. embassy in Tehran (a declaration of war right there) in 1979, and has killed directly and indirectly U.S. servicemen in Iraq. It is instigating terrorist attacks, and obstructs peace negotiations. Additionally, Iran is threatening that “any military action against Syria will cause a military and terrorist reaction on U.S. targets and allies.” Iran is a far more strategic target than Syria. It is high time for America and the West to abandon secondary targets and focus on the primary one, Iran.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Veracious_one

    Ir’s only a matter of time before Iranian WMDs begin killing lots of people…Iran is preparing…Iran has already prepared about 325,000 graves anticipating the martyrs to come…..

    • ObamaYoMoma

      What about the massive nuclear weapons arsenal funded by the Saudis that is possessed by Pakistan? You’re not concerned about that? To me currently that is a much bigger issue. Although I agree that the Iranian Mullah regime must not be allowed to get its grubby hands on nukes either. Thus, both issues must be addressed if the West expects to remain secure.

      The millions of stealth and deceptive non-violent jihadists living throughout the West today is also an enormous problem that must be addressed as well.


        India is a counter balance to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

        • ObamaYoMoma

          Yeah right! If you are gullible enough to believe that garbage, I have some very beautiful swamp land in Arizona I need to sell you.

        • defcon 4

          India can barely contain their own islam0nazi 5th column.

      • truebearing

        I agree that Pakistan is being underrated as a potential nuclear nightmare. If the most radical elements in Pakistan get control of the government, and they are damn near there now, nukes could end up spread throughout Muslimdumb, or into the hands of terrorists. Either way, they will eventually get used.
        Iran is still more likely to be tan aggressor with nuclear weapons. Nothing is as insane or evil as the Twelver cult.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Today, this scenario is actually being put into practice by the Obama administration in choosing secondary targets such as Syria while allowing the main target, which is Iran, to finalize the development of its nuclear program, and perhaps, in the not too distant future, use it against Israel, and ultimately against the U.S.

    With all due respect, so did GWB, instead of specifically targeting AQ in retaliation for 9/11 and Iran’s nuclear weapons program, he invaded and occupied Afghanistan and Iraq instead in a fantasy based attempt to democratize and transform the Islamic world into modernity, and that effort inevitably became the biggest strategic blunder ever in American history, because for one thing, Islam is no “religion of peace”. Instead, it’s a very aggressive and destructive form of totalitarianism that has as its sole fundamental purpose the subjugation of all religions and all infidels into Islamic totalitarianism through both violent and non-violent jihad and the eventual imposition of Sharia, which is Islamic totalitarian law.

    The Obama administration has made disastrous mistakes in executing foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East.

    I agree, but at the same time we can’t exactly wash our hands of Bush’s grossly incompetent policies either in the Middle East that were even more disastrous. We must acknowledge those too, or we will never learn anything from our mistakes.

    Iranian liberals and democrats risked their lives in going to the streets with banners that read “Obama, are you with us or against us.”

    I wouldn’t put to much stock in that so-called Green Revolution, especially since green was Muhammad’s favorite color and the revolutionaries were yelling Allahu Akbar from the roof tops at night in solidarity. Some of you guys are more than just a little gullible when it comes to Islam, while also at the same time letting your partisanship color your perception.

    Betrayal of pro-Western allies was one thing.

    Uhm…I hate to be the bearer of bad news for you, but the only strategic ally we have in the Middle East is Israel. Every other country over there, because they are Islamic, is our eternal mortal enemy. Sorry to be so blunt, but it’s true and you need to learn to recognize our enemies from our allies too.

    Lack of long-term vision regarding American interests and contradictory actions were another

    And Bush and the Republicans had long-term strategic vision too? What are you smoking? By the way, why did Bush also not target the Iranian nuclear weapons program?

    the Obama administration refused to act against an oppressive dictator in Syria, Bashar Assad, who killed over 100,000 of his people.

    Uhm…on that recognition of our enemies again, dude, uh, I hate to rain on your parade, but both sides of the Syrian jihad are our eternal mortal enemies, the Sunni side and the Shiite/Alawite side. The last place we need to be involved in is in Syria. Not to mention as well that Assad’s own people, although they were Sunnis and the eternal mortal enemies of the Shiites/Alawites, were fighting a jihad against him. Thus, those people, whether citizens of Syria or not, were killed in self-defense. It sounds to me like you have been paying a little too close attention to Fox News, which goes overboard on the idiotic theme that Assad killed 100,000 of his own people. Time to learn to read between the lines, so to speak.

    Moreover, Assad has allied Syria with the U.S.’s arch-enemy, Iran, and the terrorist organization, Hezbollah.

    Again, you need to learn to recognize the U.S.’s arch-enemies. Of course, while Iran and the violent jihad organization, Hezbollah, (as Muslims aren’t terrorists but jihadists instead), are our enemies, so are the Saudis and all of the various Sunni violent jihadists organizations as well. You can’t pick and choose our allies in the Islamic world because they are all our eternal mortal enemies and because that is only a recipe for disaster, which is why we must try to learn from our previous mistakes, as I also previously mentioned.

    In Libya, the U.S. bombing strikes were pretexted as serving a humanitarian mission.

    Another thing is the West must learn to stop morally equating the Islamic world with the Western world, since all Muslims are our eternal mortal enemies, as again the sole fundamental purpose of Islam is the subjugation into Islamic totalitarianism of all religions and all infidels through both violent and non-violent jihad and the eventual imposition of Sharia, which is Islamic totalitarian law.

    The crucial question today in the Middle East and elsewhere is which nation is endangering world peace and threatens to destabilize the region.

    It’s not a single nation per se, more than it is a movement. Indeed, a very totalitarian movement called Islam, as Islam is a very aggressive and destructive totalitarian cult masquerading as being a faith-based religion to dupe its intended victim. Hence, any sensible foreign policy with respect to this problem would involve outlawing Islam in the West and banning and reversing mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage because it is really stealth and deceptive non-violent jihad for the strategic purpose of demographic conquest. Of course, this would also include Israel since it is also a very Western country as well.

    The next step would be the eradication of the ruling Mullah regime in Iran and their nuclear weapons program, followed by pretty much the same in Pakistan with respect to their massive nuclear weapons arsenal and nuclear weapons program.

    Then after the first two steps have been successfully accomplished, we should then confiscate the Mid-East oil resources, since the Islamic world will only continue using the proceeds it generates to fund and wage jihad.

    The final and last step would involve the complete and total abandonment and isolation of the Islamic world. As a matter of fact, since the Islamic world is extremely totalitarian, it is incapable of producing anything on its own other than jihad and lots and lots of misery. Thus, it wouldn’t be very long before it would fall into crushing and debilitating abject poverty without the West propping it up. The Islamic world should then be allowed to stew in this condition for several generations until Islam as a force has become discredited and destroyed.

    • truebearing

      You forget China and Russia, but especially China. The Middle East is no longer dependent on the US, or the West in general. The Chinese and Russians can make trillions selling weapons to the nutjob Muslims, while getting all the oil they need.The Arabs and Chinese are old trading partners and both want to see the West fall. Unfortunately, the West is laying down all by itself, which is making our fall all the quicker.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        The Russians and Chinese are also on Islam’s target list as well. So they would have to be convinced that ending the scourge of Islam is in their long-term strategic interest too, and it is. Of course, they can use Islam as a proxy against the West if they choose, but eventually they will have to contend with that monster as well.

        Furthermore, the Chinese need a healthy West to sell their products and Russia needs the West for its oil revenues, as both can make exponentially far more money selling to the West.

        • defcon 4

          Islamic terrorism is definitely a reality in Russia (e.g Beslan, Moscow theater incident). Maybe not in China yet — especially considering how they’ve been treating the islam0nazis in China to the same kinda ethnic cleansing muslimes are used to dishing out.

  • Walter Sieruk

    Concerning the Islamic “Republic” of Iran some things need to be stated. First, the regime of Iran is not a real republic for a real republic means – res pubica “the property of the people ” This is what this Islamic regime is not . It is a rutheless and heinous dictatorship. It is rules by the clerics and the people are forced to behave in a specific ways by the cruel and vicious gang who are called the Revolutary Guards. Second , this Islamic regime treats the Iranian people inso many harsh ways. To such a thing as this the Bible teaches “All the days ofthe oppressed are wretched…” Proverbs 15:15. Moreover, Proverbs 28:15 may may apply to the either “moderate” president Rouhani or Ayatollah Khamenei. Which reads “LIke a roaring lion or a charging bear is a wicked man ruling over a helpless people.” In short the ruthless dictatorship of these two characters as well and the mullahs who have power in Iran in the way they treat to Iranian people may be best summed up in Proverbs 29:2. Which teaches “When the wicked rule, the people groan.” [NIV]

  • Softly Bob

    The snake actually has two heads, Tehran and Mecca. Destroy both, and Islam is effectively finished.

    • EarlyBird

      Uh huh. Because people will stop believing in Islam and will learn to love America.

      • truebearing

        Fear and respect will keep a country safe. Trying to buy love returns nothing but scorn and aggression.

        • EarlyBird

          You’re not getting it: simply decimating the spiritual home of Islam, and wiping out a nation’s capital, will not “effecitively finish” Islam, any more than bombing Rome will end Catholicism. It will only make it more extreme, in fact.

          But of course, my having to explain to you why these acts would be evil and counter productive, just reminds me that this is an electronic insane asylum.

          • Softly Bob

            You’re wrong. Catholics do not believe that Rome is the center of the World, nor do they believe that God resides there.
            Muslims believe that the Black stone of Allah contains the spirit of Allah himself. If the Black Stone (which resides in the Kaaba at Mecca) is completely annihilated, then Muslims would have nothing to pray to, there would be no annual Haj and Islam would have been proven to be a false religion worshiping a false god, who far from being creator of the Universe, could not prevent his own destruction.
            You’re incredibly misinformed my friend.

          • EarlyBird

            You’re misinformed. It’s like saying Catholics pray TO statues. They don’t. And you are still describing actions which are evil and counter productive. But thanks for trying.

          • Softly Bob

            Oh dear. looks like you really need educating. Whether Catholics do or don’t pray to statues is irrelevant.

            When the Black Stone was stolen, several hundred years ago and Muslims did not know its whereabouts, many were horrified that they could not pray to it. They did not know which direction to face. Many believed that they would burn in Hell.
            There will be no suicide bombing if Muslims don’t have a place to pray to. They will be afraid to die.

            Without the Black Stone, Islam ceases to exist, but Christianity continues, with or without statues!

          • ziggy zoggy

            He is 100% correct about fear and respect being what a nation needs rather than love. And dead islamopithecines aren’t extreme, they’re fertilizer.

      • defcon 4

        They don’t “love” america now Mehmet.

    • ziggy zoggy

      I agree. The Saudis are the ones spreading Islam with their oil dollars. They build mosques and madrassas all around the world and supply korans to scumbags in prisons.

      The best time to destroy Mecca is when the islamopithecines are milling around the qaaba stone during their haj, like the apemen in “2001: A Space Odysssey.”

  • DeShawn

    Man, no more jewish Zionist wars for Israel! I am sick and tired of your warmonering jews always calling for sending our young black and white “goys” men and women to fight for you. If you want war so bad, take off your yamukas, shave those curl things, and go over to Iran and fight yourself. We are SICK and TIRED of spilling our childrens’ blood for you parasites.

    • lori

      my stepmother recently bought an almost new cream Toyota Sequoia only from working parttime off a laptop. check this link right here now


    • Soundnfury

      DeShawn, I’m going to assume that despite your name, you’re really African American & not French. If so, I would be careful about calling others parasites when your own history of living off the backs of others leaves much to be desired.

    • Drakken

      Time for you to get back to the hood boy.

      • defcon 4

        Or back to his NoI meetings.

    • m4253y

      DeShawn, I am curious, what brings an erudite, young scholar like yourself to this website?

      You obviously posses a great degree of racial sensitivity and knowledge of history that many here are awestruck in your presence.

      Were you aware that the Israelis fight their fight rather well? In fact, can you recall for me when you or any of your ilk fought for the Israelis (Jews)?

      You haven’t spilled an iota of intellect let alone blood. You are an embarrassment to yourself as evidenced by your perfunctory narrative and your ignorant and racist laurels are nothing to be rested upon.

      Read some books of history, educate yourself. Then speak and you may in fact be heard.

    • tokoloshiman

      Listen De Shawn
      ALL of the wars america has participated in in the middle east and in the eastern european arena , eg serbia, were to protect muslims from each other, not jews. when israel nearly lost the 67 yom kippur war the usa only provided aid not troops at the end of the war
      when israel had already won against its amassed foes.
      Get the facts straight before blaming israel!

    • truebearing

      Maybe you should read the whole article next time. Just pace yourself….you can do it.
      A war against Iran wouldn’t be a Zionist war. It would be a war to preempt a much more destructive and inevitable nuclear war, where we will be one of Iran’s top two targets. Even someone of your diminutive reasoning capabilities should be able to understand why that would be bad for everyone…. even people with their head in the sand.
      Try to understand that the wars of the past were temporary, and despite being terribly destructive, not so horrible that there was no possibility of a recovery. Nuclear war could mean the end of human life, but certainly globally devastating for centuries to come. Radiation has a nasty tendency to last a really long time.

      • DeShawn

        Don’t talk down to me, jew, I’m smarter than you are. It would DEFINITELY be a Zionist war, since you jews are the only ones who want it or would benefit from it. Why is Israel allowd to have nukes but not Iran? Why does Israel threaten to blow up all of Europe with the Sampson Option? You people are such hypocrates. Iran hasn’t attacked anyone for hundreds of years. Jews meanwhile have started every major war in modern history. You can try to spew your lies and fool the “goys,” but most of us are waking up to the cold hard facts.

        • defcon 4

          Damn your intelligence is awe inspiring.

        • Softly Bob

          The problem with first class idiots like yourself, De Shawn is that you are blind to the truth. You will rant about Zionists and Jews but cannot provide one ounce of truth, yet Muslims around the World are committing violent terrorist attacks on a daily basis.

          Name one Jewish terrorist organization. Name one Rabbi who preaches hate from the pulpits. Name one Jewish leader who claims that non-believers should die. Go on, I challenge you! You will never win an argument with me. For every so-called fact that you throw at me, I will throw a hundred back.

          You are completely blind to the obvious, and are relying on your own sad deluded fantasies to create your own view of the World. You are little more than a deranged idiot. You are possibly mentally ill. In fact, you come across as a gibbering moron. You embarrass yourself every time you post something on here. I feel sorry for you. You are a lost little child.

          Why don’t you just take your medication like a good little boy? Stop ranting, stop complaining, and go and educate yourself.
          You’re really getting boring now!

        • rebaaron

          “Don’t talk down to me, jew, I’m smarter than you are.” You sound like a Nazi to me. Are you German DeShawn? Maybe just mom, or Grandpa? Tell us where you’re from, your pedigree, your role models, your heroes? Not Winston Churchill, right? Maybe, the other guy. Don’t be ashamed. Tell us.
          And by the way, you’re not likely to be smarter than anyone. Your comments put you in the seriously stupid category:
          “a Zionist war”. “Sampson Option” (it’s Samson)? Where did you read those? In the Protocols?
          “Why is Israel allowd to have nukes but not Iran?” How smart can you be?
          “Jews meanwhile have started every major war in modern history.” What can one say to that other than, lying, twisted, Jew hater?
          All these are fighting words, DeShawn. Come to Israel, and shout them out on any street corner. You’ll get a full answer.

  • redwood05090

    This is what Bibi tried to tell the world community in the early 90’s and was ignored, it did not sound nice….

  • Mladen_Andrijasevic

    Why Israelis See Shi’ite Axis as a Greater Threat Than Syrian Jihad