Posted tagged ‘Middle East War’

US Warns Russia Over Military Buildup in Syria

September 6, 2015

The US warned Russia this weekend that its military building in Syria could lead to an unwanted escalation in the area. By: Hana Levi Julian Published: September 6th, 2015

Source: The Jewish Press » » US Warns Russia Over Military Buildup in Syria

UN troops look at smoke rising from Quneitra on the Syrian side of the Golan Heights.

UN troops look at smoke rising from Quneitra on the Syrian side of the Golan Heights.
Photo Credit: Flash 90

The U.S. warned Russia over the weekend that its military buildup in Syria could further escalate the conflict in the region.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry called Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov “to discuss Syria, including U.S. concerns about reports suggesting an imminent enhanced Russian military buildup there,” the State Department said in a statement. “The secretary made clear that if such reports were accurate, these actions could further escalate the conflict, lead to greater loss of innocent life, increase refugee flows and risk confrontation with the anti-ISIL Coalition operating in Syria,” the statement continued.

ISIL is the Obama administration acronym for ISIS, or Da’esh. The two men agreed to continue their conversation at the United Nations General Assembly in New York later this month.

According to American intelligence reports, Russia has delivered prefab housing for hundreds of people and a portable air traffic station to an airfield near Latakia.

The U.S. government warned that Russian air strikes could interfere with current operations being conducted by the United States-led coalition against Da’esh (ISIS) in Syria.

It is also possible that Russian operations could strike opposition forces the Americans support.

The United States and Russia have very different ideas about how to solve the crisis in Syria; on Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin called for “early elections” in Syria and suggested bringing “healthy” elements of the opposition to a new coalition government.

But Putin, who had first cleared his plan with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, did not specify which opposition elements would be acceptable.

Pentagon Not Targeting Islamic State Training Camps

August 29, 2015

Pentagon Not Targeting Islamic State Training Camps No airstrikes against 60 camps producing 1,000 fighters monthly

BY:
August 28, 2015 4:40 pm

Source: Pentagon Not Targeting Islamic State Training Camps | Washington Free Beacon

The Pentagon has not conducted airstrikes against an estimated 60 Islamic State (IS) training camps that are supplying thousands of fighters each month to the terror group, according to defense and intelligence officials.

The camps are spread throughout Islamic State-controlled areas of Iraq and Syria and are off limits in the U.S.-led international bombing campaign because of concerns about collateral damage, said officials familiar with planning and execution of the yearlong bombing campaign.

Additionally, the IS (also known as ISIS or ISIL) camps have been so successful that Islamic State leaders are considering expanding the camps to Libya and Yemen. Both states have become largely ungoverned areas in recent years.

The failure to target the training camps with U.S. and allied airstrikes is raising questions among some defense and intelligence officials about the commitment of President Obama and his senior aides to the current anti-IS strategy of degrading and ultimately destroying the terror group.

“If we know the location of these camps, and the president wants to destroy ISIS, why are the camps still functioning?” one official critical of the policy asked.

The camps are regarded by U.S. intelligence analysts as a key element in the terror group’s successes in holding and taking new territory. The main benefit of the training camps is that they are providing a continuous supply of new fighters.

IS training camps

An additional worry of intelligence analysts is that some of the foreign fighters being trained in the camps will eventually return to their home countries in Europe and North America to carry out terror attacks.

A White House spokesman declined to comment on the failure to bomb the terror camps and referred questions to the Pentagon.

Pentagon spokesman Maj. Roger M. Cabiness declined to say why no training camps have been bombed. “I am not going to be able to go into detail about our targeting process,” he said.

Cabiness said the U.S.-led coalition has “hit ISIL [an alternative abbreviation for the Islamic State] with more than 6,000 airstrikes.”

“The coalition has also taken out thousands of fighting positions, tanks, vehicles, bomb factories, and training camps,” he said. “We have also stuck their leadership, including most recently on Aug. 18 when a U.S. military airstrike removed Fadhil Ahmad al-Hayali, also known as Hajji Mutazz, the second in command of the terrorist group, from the battlefield.”

Efforts also are being taken to disrupt IS finances and “make it more difficult for the group to attract new foreign fighters,” Cabiness said in an email.

A Central Command spokesman also declined to provide details of what he said were “operational engagements” against IS training camps.

“Once a target is identified as performing a hostile act, or is part of an obvious hostile force, a training camp for example, we prosecute that target in accordance with the coalition rules of engagement and the law of armed conflict,” the spokesman said.

According to the defense and intelligence officials, one reason the training camps have been off limits is that political leaders in the White House and Pentagon fear hitting them will cause collateral damage. Some of the camps are located near civilian facilities and there are concerns that casualties will inspire more jihadists to join the group.

However, military officials have argued that unless the training camps are knocked out, IS will continue to gain ground and recruit and train more fighters for its operations.

Disclosure that the IS training camps are effectively off limits to the bombing campaign comes as intelligence officials in the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and U.S. Central Command, which is in charge of the conflict, have alleged that senior U.S. officials skewed intelligence reports indicating the U.S. strategy against IS is not working or has been less effective than officials have claimed in public.

The Islamic State controls large parts of Syria and Iraq and has attracted tens of thousands of jihadists in both countries and from abroad. The exact number of fighters is not known but intelligence estimates have indicated the numbers have increased over the past year.

The military campaign, known as Operation Inherent Resolve, appears to be floundering despite a yearlong campaign of airstrikes and military training programs aimed to bolstering Iraqi military forces.

A review of Central Command reports on airstrikes since last year reveals that no attacks were carried out against training camps.

Targets instead included Islamic State vehicles, buildings, tactical units, arms caches, fighting positions, snipers, excavators, mortar and machine gun positions, bunkers, and bomb factories.

The risk-averse nature of the airstrike campaign was highlighted last month by Brig. Gen. Thomas Weidley, chief of staff for what the military calls Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve.

“The coalition continues to use air power responsibly,” Weidley said July 1. “Highly precise deliveries, detailed weaponeering, in-depth target development, collateral damage mitigation, and maximized effects on Daesh, are characteristics of coalition airstrike operation in Iraq and Syria.”

Daesh is another name for the Islamic State.

“The coalition targeting process minimizes collateral damage and maximizes precise effects on Daesh,” Weidley said earlier. “Air crews are making smart decisions and applying tactical patience every day.”

Other coalition spokesman have indicated that targeting has been limited to reaction strikes against operational groups of IS fighters. “When Daesh terrorists expose themselves and their equipment, we will strike them,” Col. Wayne Marotto said May 27.

The military website Long War Journal published a map showing 52 IS training camps and noted that some may no longer be operating because of the U.S.-led bombing campaign.

According the map, among the locations in Iraq and Syria where IS is operating training camps are Mosul, Raqqah, Nenewa, Kobane, Aleppo, Fallujah, and Baiji.

The group MEMRI obtained a video of an IS training camp in Nenewa Province, Iraq, dated Oct. 1, 2014.

The video shows a desert outpost with tan tents and around 100 fighters who take part in hand-to-hand combat exercises, weapons training, and religious indoctrination.

Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi, an analyst with the Middle East Forum, in June translated details of IS training purportedly obtained from a manual produced by a pro-IS operative in Mosul named Omar Fawaz.

Among those involved in ideological training for IS jihadists in Iraq is Bahraini cleric Turki Binali, who wrote an unofficial biography of IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Al-Tamimi stated in a blog post June 24.

According to a document thought to be written by Fawaz, training differs for native Iraqis and Syrians as opposed to foreign fighters, who generally are less experienced militarily than the regional trainees.

The document also reveals IS plans to export military manpower abroad, including Libya.

“Sessions for the muhajireen [foreign fighters] brothers last 90 days or more, and at the highest level deal with organization, determination, and intelligence operation, including training on heavy weaponry in addition to comprehensive Sharia sessions and multiple tests,” according to a translation of the document. “Sessions for the Ansar from the people of Iraq and al-Sham range between 30 to 50 days.”

The process begins with an application form and questionnaire regarding education, skills, viewpoints, and whether their backgrounds can be verified.

The training then includes physical fitness, martial arts practice, weapons training, and ideological indoctrination.

After a week of training, jihadists with special abilities are selected and placed in units. The units include special forces, air defense, sniper units, a “caliphate army,” an “army of adversity,” and administrative units for those capable of using electronic devices and accounting.

“The rest are distributed in fronts and camps after the end of the military camp training according to where they are needed,” the report said, noting that all graduates are tested in Sharia at the conclusion of their training.

The New York Times reported Tuesday that the Pentagon inspector general is investigating allegations that military officials doctored intelligence reports in an attempt to present more optimistic accounts of the U.S. military’s efforts in the conflict.

The probe was triggered by a DIA analyst who stated that Central Command officials were improperly rewriting intelligence assessments prepared for policy makers, including President Obama.

The Daily Beast reported Wednesday that senior military and intelligence officials inappropriately pressured U.S. terrorism analysts to alter estimates of the strength of the Islamic State to portray the group as weaker.

Central Command, on its website, stated that in the year since the Iraq operation began on Aug. 7, 2014, a total of 6,419 air strikes were carried out.
Targets damaged or destroyed include 119 tanks, 340 Humvees, 510 staging areas, 3,262 buildings, 2,577 fighting positions, 196 oil infrastructure targets, and 3,680 “other” targets not further identified.

Islamic State building capacity for mass casualty attacks

August 10, 2015

Islamic State building capacity for mass casualty attacks

ByPamela Geller on August 9, 2015

Global jihad 2015

via Islamic State building capacity for mass casualty attacks | Pamela Geller.

Video added by me .

What, Obama worry? The “Junior Varsity” team is not Islamic, says our supreme leader.

The U.S. intelligence community warns that ISIS may be working to build the capability to carry out mass casualty attacks, calling it a “a significant departure from the terror group’s current focus on encouraging lone wolf attacks.” Nonsense. It’s merely in addition to. It’s a jihad, a holy war, on all fronts — individual Muslims, Muslim armies, et al: “kill the unbelievers wherever you find them.”

When are we going to actually deal with the enemy and its ideology?

“ISIS seen building capacity for mass casualty attacks,” By Jim Sciutto, Chief National Security Correspondent, CNN, August 8, 2015

Washington (CNN)Some in the U.S. intelligence community warn that ISIS may be working to build the capability to carry out mass casualty attacks, a significant departure from the terror group’s current focus on encouraging lone wolf attacks, a senior U.S. intelligence official told CNN on Friday.

To date, the intelligence view has been that ISIS is focused on less ambitious attacks, involving one or a small group of attackers armed with simple weapons. In contrast, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, or AQAP, has been viewed as both more focused on — and more capable of — mass casualty attacks, such as plots on commercial aviation. Now the intelligence community is divided.

Meanwhile, the U.S. effort to train rebels in Syria to fight ISIS is having trouble.

Having trouble?? The 50 that the US recruited at the mind-blowing cost of 500 million dollars have “disappeared.”

The few rebels that the U.S. has put through training are already in disarray, with defense officials telling CNN that up to half are missing, having deserted soon after training or having been captured after last week’s attack by the al-Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front attack on a rebel site.

Al Nusra claims attack on U.S.-trained rebels in Syria

One defense official admitted to CNN that “they are no longer a coherent military unit,” and Pentagon officials acknowledged the approach of how to support the rebels has to change.

The potential change within ISIS itself is driven — in part — by a broadening competition between ISIS and AQAP for attention and recruits.

More nonsense. It’s a power struggle, no doubt, but both groups are the same. They are waging jihad to impose Islam on the world. Their playbook is the Qur’an. Their example is Muhammad.

There were struggles between the SA and SS in Nazi Germany. It hardly stopped the Nazis.

That same competition was evident this week when AQAP bomb-maker Ibrahim al-Asiri made an online appeal to supporters to carry out lone wolf attacks.

“I think they’re taking a lot of the new recruits that don’t have time to train, who have not been brought up in their systems, and they’re using them to create the type of mass casualty which produces the media attention, which is exactly what they want, that shows they’re still powerful,” said CNN Military analysts Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling. Meanwhile, ISIS is continuing to draw large numbers of new foreign recruits. U.S. intelligence assesses that the formidable flow of foreign fighters to Syria and Iraq has not abated.

isis tank

Currently, the total number of ISIS fighters is between 20,000 and 30,000, similar to the levels when the air campaign began, despite thousands of ISIS fighters believed to have been killed in coalition air strikes.

This number is far too low.

Turkey, the prime transit point into Syria, is still struggling to stem the flow. However, the U.S. believes its agreement to allow U.S. air strikes from a Turkish air base and to help establish a safe zone indicate Istanbul is stepping up.

The administration is also claiming gains on the ground.

Liar, Liar, World on Fire!

August 6, 2015

Liar, Liar, World on Fire!

Obama spins lies while Iran spins centrifuges.

August 6, 2015

Daniel Greenfield

via Liar, Liar, World on Fire! | Frontpage Mag.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.​

Obama loves to play dress up. Sometimes he likes to play FDR, but his favorite costume is JFK. By claiming to be FDR or JFK, he convinces Democrats that he is part of a historical continuity, instead of a horrible aberration, and that he is doing exactly what FDR or JFK would do if they were alive today.

The costumes make Obama seem American instead of Un-American.

Now Obama put on his JFK costume to play the leader who believes in a “practical” and “attainable peace.” His analogy of the USSR to Iran is both terrible and telling.

Nuclear war was not averted because of arms control. The USSR, like Iran, cheated blatantly. Unlike Iran, its leaders weren’t crazy enough to want to see the world burn.

The same can’t be said of the Supreme Leader of Iran who chants “Death to America” and means it.

Treaties did not end the Cold War. The collapse of the USSR, under the pressure of its economic failures, did. Had Obama kept the sanctions in place, Iran’s regime might have also collapsed.

Instead Obama chose to bailout Iran’s regime to the tune of anywhere from 50 to 150 billion dollars; just as he spat on the legacy of JFK by bailing out Castro when the Cuban regime was on its last legs.

By talking about multilateral arms control and the USSR, Obama implicitly admits that this isn’t about preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, but about opening communications with the Mullahs.

His accusation that opponents of the deal are like those who want “to take military action against the Soviets” is dishonest after he had just admitted that even taking out Iran’s nuclear program would not lead to a war between Iran and the United States.

But Obama’s whole speech is a collection of lies.

He insists that the nuclear deal is “a detailed arrangement that permanently prohibits Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon”.

There’s nothing “permanent” about it. Even Obama admitted that by Year 13, “breakout times would have shrunk almost down to zero.”  In the same speech in which he makes that claim, he admits (optimistically) that Iran might get a nuke in fifteen years. That’s not what permanent means.

Later he again insists that, “Iran is never allowed to build a nuclear weapon” and puffs up his chest and declares, “Let me repeat:  The prohibition on Iran having a nuclear weapon is permanent.”

This sounds impressive to audiences at home, but it’s completely meaningless.

Iran is an NPT signatory so it was never allowed to build nuclear weapons to begin with. That hasn’t stopped it from trying to do so.

The deal will be as useless as the NPT when it comes to actually stopping Iran from going nuclear.

Obama and Kerry have tried to sell the deal by confusing existing international obligations and laws with an effective enforceable agreement. When Obama says that Iran is not allowed to build a nuke, that means as much as Kerry telling PBS that Iran is “not allowed” to use the sanctions relief to aid terrorists.

The 9/11 hijackers were also “not allowed” to fly planes into the World Trade Center.

In this speech, Obama admits that even though it’s “not allowed” to, Iran will use the money to fund terrorists and he has already admitted that Iran can go nuclear even though it’s “never allowed” to.

Both men are deliberately misleading audiences that aren’t well versed in lawyerly technicalities.

Obama claimed that the deal, which lets Iran build up its nuclear program, “cuts off all of Iran’s pathways to a bomb.” In reality, the deal lets Iran conduct enrichment, run centrifuges and do everything but have official permission to nuke New York or Tel Aviv.

He already admitted that the breakout time drops to zero. If there were no pathway to a bomb, there would be no breakout time, let alone a breakout time of zero.

Obama insisted that the deal “contains the most comprehensive inspection and verification regime ever negotiated” when Iran has stated that not even Obama knows what its military site inspection arrangements with the IAEA will involve.

Essentially the real agreement has been outsourced to the IAEA based on secret side agreements that the Senate and that even the White House may not be privy to. And the IAEA’s director-general is already complaining that Iran is refusing access to nuclear scientists and military officers.

This deal maintains Iran’s nuclear program while promising that this time the IAEA will have more access for inspections than it did before, assuming Iran doesn’t break this agreement, like it broke the NPT.

That’s it.

Obama insists that if Iran goes back to defying the IAEA, as it has all these years, the sanctions will “snap back”. He even goes further, claiming that, “We won’t need the support of other members of the U.N. Security Council; America can trigger snapback on our own.” America can go to the Security Council. It can’t however restore the full set of sanctions now in place on its own. This is one of those cases where Obama is so deliberately misleading audiences that it’s downright criminal.

Since the facts aren’t on his side, Obama falls back to accusing critics of being warmongers who want to invade Iran just like they wanted to invade Iraq. Does that include his Secretary of State, who carried these negotiations, and who stated, “I was in favor of disarming Saddam Hussein, and I’m glad we did.”

Obama mentioned Iraq twelve times in his speech. He ominously warned that “Many of the same people who argued for the war in Iraq are now making the case against the Iran nuclear deal.”

Does that include Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden?

Obama speaks of ending “a mindset characterized by a preference for military action over diplomacy.” When he attacks George W. Bush as a warmonger who liked unilateral invasions, lying to Americans about the cost of war and imposing his will on “a part of the world with a profoundly different culture”, he forgets his illegal invasion of Libya, the murder of four Americans and the rise of ISIS in Libya.

But Obama isn’t just a liar, he’s also a hypocrite.

“The deal we’ll accept is they end their nuclear program,” Obama said, during a presidential debate with Romney.

In this speech, he sneered at his own campaign promise, reframing the idea of dismantling Iran’s nuclear program, as coming from critics who are “are either ignorant of Iranian society, or they’re just not being straight with the American people”.

“Sanctions alone are not going to force Iran to completely dismantle all vestiges of its nuclear infrastructure,” Obama claims.

He seems to have forgotten how he boasted that, “The work that we’ve done with respect to sanctions now offers Iran a choice. They can take the diplomatic route and end their nuclear program or they will have to face a united world and a United States president, me, who said we’re not going to take any options off the table.”

The only options Obama won’t be taking off the table are surrendering and then lying about it.

This is exactly the type of rhetoric that he just now condemned as ignorant, dishonest and impossible to achieve. So was Obama being ignorant or dishonest then? Or is he being dishonest now?

Obama insists that we face a choice between diplomacy and war. As Churchill told Chamberlain, you can have both. “You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.” Appeasement of an aggressive conqueror doesn’t prevent war. It makes it inevitable.

The Appeaser-in-Chief tells the audience that it shouldn’t overreact to the “hardliners chanting ‘Death to America’ who have been most opposed to the deal.  They’re making common cause with the Republican caucus.”

These “hardliners” include the Supreme Leader of Iran. The man Obama has made common cause with.

While Obama never misses an opportunity to accuse Republican opponents of treason, when he isn’t accusing them of warmongering, he is the traitor. He has made common cause with those who chant, “Death to America.” And sometimes it’s hard not to wonder whether he agrees with them.

All Obama has to offer in this speech, and in every speech, is a selection of the same dishonest arguments that have been disproven even by his own allies in the Senate and in the media.

He’ll smugly repeat the same lies about Iran’s tiny military budget (the secret one is much bigger), about its “permanent” inability to get a bomb (until it does get one) and the sanctions that can snap back with a snap of his fingers, but will vanish the moment Congress votes down this deal.

There’s nothing new here and there’s nothing truthful here.

Even while Obama spins lies, Iran spins centrifuges. Even as he promises rigorous inspections, Iran covers up its nuclear activities at Parchin.

Obama has violated his own promises on Iran. He mocks the same arguments that he used to advance. He keeps talking about a military option when he won’t even stand up to Iran as it threatens American ships and helicopters, as it takes over Yemen and Iraq, And when in doubt, he begins bashing Bush without ever being honest about his own terrible legacy of military and political interventions.

It’s a petty performance from a man who likes to dress up as FDR and JFK, but who when it comes to Iran can’t even measure up to Jimmy Carter.

Former Saudi Ambassador to US: Gulf States Willing to Attack Iran

July 21, 2015

Prince Bandar said that “ObamaDeal” will “wreak havoc Prime Minister Netanyahu the Middle East.”

By: Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

Published: July 21st, 2015

via The Jewish Press » » Former Saudi Ambassador to US: Gulf States Willing to Attack Iran.

 

Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Kingdom's former chief of intelligence and ambassador to Washington.
Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Kingdom’s former chief of intelligence and ambassador to Washington.

A Saudi prince’s reaction to the nuclear agreement with Iran makes last week’s White House’s rosy spin of official reaction by Saudi Arabia to “ObamaDeal” look like an act that should never have gone on stage.

Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, former Ambassador to the United States, warned that the nuclear agreement with Iran “will wreak havoc in the Middle East” and that Gulf Powers are willing to attack Iranian nuclear sites, even if the United States is not interested.

One of King Salman’s first actions after taking the throne earlier this year was to yank Prince Bandar off the National Security Council, but he still is an advisor and an important voice, one that totally contradicts what President Barack Obama would like people to believe about Riyadh’s reaction the nuclear agreement.

White House Press Secretary, after a meeting between Saudi foreign minister Adel al-Jubeir and President Obama, glossed over Saudi skepticism of ObamaDeal and blah-blahed “about the important bilateral relationship that exists between the United States and Saudi Arabia.”

Believe that and then believe that President Obama has “an unbreakable bond with Israel.”

Prince Bandar’s comments to Beirut Daily Star and also reported by the Times of London were the first public criticism from Saudi Arabia, and he was straight to the point.

He warned that ObamaDeal will “wreak havoc” and then bluntly asserted:

Saudi Arabia and the Gulf powers are prepared to take military action without American support after the Iran nuclear deal

Prince Bandar is not a small voice. He was ambassador to Washington for 20 years, and MRC TV noted that it is unlikely that he would have conducted a major newspaper interview without King Salman’s blessing.
The prince’s view of the Obama administration sounds like Israel’s when it comes to relying on the United States.

“People in my region now are relying on God’s will, and consolidating their local capabilities and analysis with everybody else except our oldest and most powerful ally,” Prince Bandar told the Beirut newspaper.

He was even more candid in an article he wrote for the London-based Arabic news Web site Elaph, where he compared ObamaDeal with Bill Clinton’s agreement with North Korea, which supposedly would keep its word and not develop a nuclear bomb.

But Prince Bandar can forgive Clinton because “it turned out that the strategic foreign policy analysis was wrong and there was a major intelligence failure,” according to translation of interview provided by The Washington Post.

He said that he is “absolutely confident he would not have made that decision” if he had all the facts.
Prince Bandar said the case of Iran is different because:

The strategic foreign policy analysis, the national intelligence information, and America’s allies in the region’s intelligence all predict not only the same outcome of the North Korean nuclear deal but worse – with the billions of dollars that Iran will have access to.

He quoted a phrase first made by Henry Kissinger: America’s enemies should fear America, but America’s friends should fear America more.”

It sounds like Saudi Arabia and Israel are on the same page.

Iranian President Rouhani Describes Nuclear Deal, Says: The Superpowers Have Officially Recognized A Nuclear Iran

July 21, 2015

Iranian President Rouhani Describes Nuclear Deal, Says: The Superpowers Have Officially Recognized A Nuclear Iran

ByPamela Geller on July 20, 2015

via Iranian President Rouhani Describes Nuclear Deal, Says: The Superpowers Have Officially Recognized A Nuclear Iran | Pamela Geller.

ihadis with nukes, that’s Obama’s legacy. And remember, he was desperate for this surrender. He usurped Congress, the American people, and our allies — his name will go down in history as one of the most notorious enemies of freedom.
“Iranian President Rouhani Describes Nuclear Deal, Says: The Superpowers Have Officially Recognized a Nuclear Iran,” MEMRI TV, July 20, 2015

On July 14, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani delivered a speech detailing the accomplishments of the new nuclear deal. President Rouhani declared that prayers of the Iranian nation had been answered and described the deal as a “win-win,” adding that Iran was not seeking a nuclear bomb.
Following are excerpts:

Screen Shot 2015-07-20 at 8.21.53 PM

Rouhani: “I hereby declare to the great Iranian people that their prayers have been answered. Today, we are at an important stage in the history of our state and of our [Islamic] Revolution, and in the history of conditions in the region – conditions that, I must say, have continued for the past 12 years, and which were accompanied by illusions on the part of the superpowers, which spread them throughout society and throughout public opinion. The page has been turned over, and a new page has begun.

[…]

“In order to resolve the nuclear issue, we had to take necessary steps in various areas. With regard to politics, we had to prepare the necessary preliminary political steps. With regard to [Iranian] public opinion, [we had to make] them realize that the negotiations were not a recitation of statements, but a give and take. Negotiations mean paying money and buying the desired house. We did not seek charity or to get something for free. We sought negotiations, and sought to advance a fair and just give and take, based on national interests. We have always stressed the point that these negotiations would not be a ‘win-lose’ situation, because such talks are not viable. If negotiations are ‘win-lose,’ they will not be lasting. Negotiations and agreements will be durable and lasting when they are win-win situations for both parties. We explained this to our society, and our negotiation team began the talks on this basis 23 months ago.

[…]

“From the day that I was sworn in [as president], I said that the West would be able to engage in talks with us if it abandons the path of threats and humiliation and embarks upon a path of respect. What was achieved today under the title of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action is rooted in dialogue on the part of Iran and respect on the part of the P5+1. Without these two components, we would not have achieved a thing.

[…]

Capture07203.JPG

“In the negotiations we sought to achieve four goals. The first goal was to continue the nuclear capabilities, the nuclear technology, and even the nuclear activity within Iran. The second goal was to lift the mistaken, oppressive, and inhumane sanctions. The third goal was to remove all the UN Security Council Resolutions that we view as illegal. The fourth goal was to remove the Iranian nuclear dossier from Chapter VII of the UN Charter and from the Security Council in general. In today’s agreement, in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, all four goals have been achieved.

Capture07208.JPG

“At the beginning of negotiations, the other side used to tell us that during the period of restrictions – which today is set at eight years – Iran would be able to have only 100 centrifuges. After many deliberations, they have reached the figure of 1,000 centrifuges. Following much opposition on our part, they said: ‘4,000 centrifuges, and that’s final.’ Today, the agreement specifies that Iran will retain over 6,000 centrifuges, of which 5,000 will be at Natanz and over 1,000 at Fordo. All the centrifuges at Natanz will continue to enrich [uranium].

Capture07204.JPG

“They said: ‘The period of your restrictions will be 20 years, in addition to 25 years.’ Later they said: ’20 years and 10 years.’ Then they said: ‘Our last word is 20 years, and we will not capitulate any further.’ In the final days of the negotiations, these 20 years shrank to eight years.

“On the issue of research and development, they used to say that Iran would be allowed only [first-generation] IR-1 [centrifuges]. This was ridiculous and unrealistic. Research and development under such conditions is meaningless. Then they said: ‘IR-2 at most.’ Eventually they said: ‘IR-8 is impossible.’ What Iran sought was IR-6 and IR-8 centrifuges. We wanted an agreement in which we would begin, on the very day of its implementations, to inject UF-6 gas into [advanced] IR-8 centrifuges. That is exactly the agreement that we achieved today.

“On the issue of Arak, they used to say: ‘The reactor can remain, but not as a heavy water facility. This is an absolute red line for us.’ Today, according to the terms agreed upon, the joint agreement explicitly mentions the Arak heavy water reactor. This reactor will be completed with the same heavy water nature, and with the characteristics specified in the agreement.

“On the issue of Fordo, they used to say: ‘It is hard to pronounce the name Fordo, even harder to hear it, so you will not say it and we will not hear it.’ Then they said: ‘At Fordo there should not be a single centrifuge, and it will be a center for isotope research.’ After months of bargaining they said: ‘Only one cascade of 164 centrifuges will remain at Fordo.’ Let me say, in a nutshell, that today, over 1,000 centrifuges will be installed at Fordo, and that part of Fordo will be used for research and development of stable isotopes.

Capture07205.JPG

“On the issue of sanctions they used to say: ‘The lifting of all the sanctions all at once – never. As for the gradual lifting of the sanctions, first you need to gain our trust over the course of months, and even then, the sanctions will be gradually frozen, not lifted. Do not use the term “lift the sanctions.” We will freeze them.’ [They further said]: ‘In the years to come, if the IAEA issues a positive report and you gain our trust, the sanctions will be gradually lifted.’ Today I declare before the honorable Iranian nation that according to the agreement, on the day of its implementation, all the sanctions – even the embargo on weapons, missiles, and [dual-use technology] proliferation – will be lifted, as is stated in a [Security Council] resolution. All the financial sanctions, all the banking sanctions, and all the sanctions pertaining to insurance, transportation, petrochemical [industries], and precious metals, and all the economic sanctions will be completely lifted, and not frozen. Even the arms embargo will be stopped. There will be a kind of restriction [on arms] for five years, after which it will be lifted. With regard to proliferation [of dual-use technology], a committee will examine goods with a dual use. With regard to the revocation of the UN [Security Council] resolutions, they used to say: ‘You have not implemented any resolution, so how can we revoke the resolution? At the very least implement it for six months.’

[…]

“According to today’s agreement, which will be approved in the coming days by the UN Security Council, all six previous resolutions [against Iran] will be revoked. With regard to the permanent removal of the Iranian nuclear dossier from the Security Council, they used to say: ‘The IAEA must report for 20 years,’ then ‘for 15 years.’ In today’s [agreement], regardless of the IAEA, after 10 years of implementation of the agreement, the nuclear dossier will be completely removed from the Security Council.

[…]

“This agreement is, of course, reciprocal.

[…]

“Today, [we are talking about] the implementation of a reciprocal agreement. If they adhere to this agreement, we will too. Throughout history, the Iranian nation has always stood behind the treaties to which it committed itself. We will stand firmly behind the current treaty, provided the other side also strictly adheres to it.

[…]

Capture07207.JPG

“This is the most important day in the past 12 years. Historically, this is the day on which all the large countries and the superpowers in the world have officially recognized Iran’s nuclear activities.

[…]

Screen Shot 2015-07-20 at 8.22.23 PM

Iranian Revolutionary Guards: UN resolution endorsing nuclear deal crosses Iran’s red lines

July 20, 2015

Iranian Revolutionary Guards: UN resolution endorsing nuclear deal crosses Iran’s red lines

via Iranian Revolutionary Guards: UN resolution endorsing nuclear deal crosses Iran’s red lines – Middle East – Jerusalem Post.

 

A UN Security Council resolution endorsing Iran’s nuclear deal that passed on Monday is unacceptable, the country’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps commander Mohammed Ali Jafari was quoted as saying by the semi-official Tasnim News Agency.

“Some parts of the draft have clearly crossed the Islamic republic’s red lines, especially in Iran’s military capabilities. We will never accept it,” he was quoted as saying shortly before the resolution was passed in New York.

The United Nations Security Council on Monday endorsed the deal to curb Iran’s nuclear program in return for sanctions relief, but it will be able to re-impose UN penalties during the next decade if Tehran breaches the historic agreement.

The 15-member body unanimously adopted a resolution that was negotiated as part of the agreement reached in Vienna last week between Iran and the world’s major powers.

In return for lifting US, EU and UN sanctions, Iran will be subjected to long-term curbs on a nuclear program that the West suspected was aimed at creating an atomic bomb, but which Tehran says is peaceful.

Passage of the resolution triggers a complex set of coordinated steps agreed by Iran during nearly two years of talks with the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France, Germany and the European Union.

It says that no sanctions relief will be implemented until the International Atomic Energy Agency submits a report to the Security Council verifying that Iran has taken certain nuclear-related measures outlined in the agreement.

Under the deal, the major powers don’t need to take any further action for 90 days. Then they are required to begin preparations so they are able to lift sanctions as soon as the IAEA verification report is submitted.

The European Union approved the Iran nuclear deal with world powers on Monday. US President Barack Obama’s administration has sent the nuclear agreement to Congress, which has the next 60 days to review it.

Once sanctions relief can be implemented, seven previous UN resolutions will be terminated and the measures contained in the resolution adopted on Monday will come into effect.

The resolution allows for supply of ballistic missile technology and heavy weapons, such as tanks and attack helicopters, to Iran with Security Council approval, but the United States has pledged to veto any such requests.

The restrictions on ballistic missile technology are in place for eight years and on heavy weapons for five years. The resolution leaves in place an arms embargo on conventional weapons for five years.

The resolution places restrictions on the transfer to Iran of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes for a decade.

It allows all UN sanctions to be re-imposed if Iran breaches the deal in the next 10 years. If the Security Council receives a complaint of a breach it would then need to vote within 30 days on a resolution to extend sanctions relief.

If the council fails to vote on a resolution, the sanctions would be automatically re-imposed. This procedure prevents any of the veto powers who negotiated the accord, such as Russia and China, from blocking any snap-back of Iran sanctions.

All the provisions and measures of the UN resolution would terminate in a decade if the nuclear deal is adhered to.

However, the six world powers and the EU wrote to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon last week to inform him that after 10 years they plan to seek a five-year extension of the mechanism allowing sanctions to be re-imposed.

Iran Dictator Calls For Muslim World to Unite and Destroy Israel, Says USA Created ISIS

July 20, 2015

Iran Dictator Calls for Muslim World to Unite and Destroy Israel, Says USA Created ISIS

By Jordan Schachtel19 Jul 2015

via Iran Dictator Calls For Muslim World to Unite and Destroy Israel, Says USA Created ISIS.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei went into a conspiracy-laden tirade on Saturday, blaming the “arrogant powers” for getting in the way of the Muslim world’s mission to unite and destroy Israel.

“If the Islamic Ummah were united and relied on their own commonalities, they would certainly be a unique power in the international political scene but big powers have imposed such divisions on the Islamic Ummah to pursue their own interests and safeguard the Zionist regime [of Israel],” Khamenei said in remarks to commemorate the end of Ramadan.

Khamenei also defended Iran’s support for its Lebanese proxy, Hezbollah, which is a U.S.-designated terrorist organization, and the Assad regime in Syria.

“The Americans dub the Lebanese resistance as terrorist and regard Iran as a supporter of terrorism because of its support for the Lebanese Hezbollah, while the Americans, themselves, are real terrorists,” Khamenei said. Hezbollah was originally created by Tehran’s first “Supreme Leader” with the mission to “turn Lebanon to a graveyard for Jews,” according to its leader, Hassan Nasrallah.

The Iranian dictator claimed that al-Qaeda and the Islamic State terror group were created by the United States, according to Iran’s state-controlled media. The U.S. “have created al-Qaeda and Daesh [ISIL]” and “support the wicked Zionists [Israel],” he said.

The U.S. cannot criticize Iran’s support for Hezbollah’s “resistance” movement because the U.S. supports the “Zionist, terrorist and infanticidal” Israelis, added Iran’s ruler.

The “Supreme Leader” declared victory over the United States in Tehran’s recent nuclear agreement with world powers, saying, “This is the outcome of the Iranian nation’s resistance and bravery and the creativity of dear Iranian scientists.”

He predicted that in the case of war with the United States, The U.S. “will emerge loser,” PressTV reported.

Khamenei swore to never engage the Americans in dialogue over regional differences, asking, “Our policies and those of the US in the region are 180 degree different, so how could it be possible to enter dialogue and negotiations with them (Americans)?”

In declaring victory over the U.S. in nuclear negotiations, he added, “today, they [world powers] have been forced to accept and stand the spinning of thousands of centrifuges and continuation of research and development in Iran, and it has no meaning but the Iranian nation’s might.”

Noticeably, Khamenei’s more-controversial comments were left out of a CNN story on his remarks.

Documentary Shows Rising Islamic State Influence Among Israeli Muslims

July 19, 2015

Documentary Shows Rising Islamic State Influence Among Israeli Muslims

via Documentary Shows Rising Islamic State Influence Among Israeli Muslims | Missing Peace | missingpeace.eu | EN.

 

 

By Missing Peace

The month-long Muslim fast of Ramadan is behind us, having ended with the traditional Eid al-Fitr feast.

Many people will not see another Ramadan after the Islamic State unleashed a wave of terror attacks across the globe during the fast.

Some of the attacks predicted by the Islamic State at the outset of Ramadan didn’t materialize, such as the attack on the United States.

Another country that was on the ISIS list of targets was Israel; but Ramadan came and went and the predicted large-scale attack didn’t take place. Israel did, however, witness a surge in Palestinian terror during Ramadan.

Tzvi Yehezkieli, the Middle East expert of Israeli TV Channel 10, investigated what the relation is between incitement in Israeli and Palestinian mosques and the increase in terror attacks during Ramadan. He came to the conclusion that the influence of the Islamic State ideology is growing in Israeli mosques and discovered that the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount has been turned into an Islamist bulwark dominated by Hamas, the Islamic State, and Hizb ut-Tahrir.

His documentary, titled “Every Muslim Was Born to Become a Jihadist,” was broadcast on Channel 10 two days ago.

At the end of the documentary (in Hebrew and Arabic), images can be seen that were taken on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem after the Friday prayer services during Ramadan. A large crowd displays Hamas and Islamic State flags and chants, “Jihad is our way and death for Allah is more important than anything else.” (Images start at 14:50.)

During sermons at the Al-Aqsa Mosque, Muslim clerics can be seen promoting jihad, the display of Islamic State flags by Muslims, and the expulsion of Jews from Israel. One cleric predicted that the Muslim armies will conquer Rome, Constantinople, London, and Washington. “Islam will rule over every place on earth,” the cleric proclaimed.

Another one shouted, “The Muslims, also the ones who are not soldiers, built Daesh (Islamic State) and other armies. Every Muslim is born to become a jihadist. Jihad is the essence of the Islamic nation.”

A third one said that it is not a given that there is a Jewish state and that the day will come that the Muslim nations will swallow that “monstrous” and “bleak” entity.

“At the end of days there will be a war between our people and (the sons of) Israel in the Holy Land, and in that war the trees and the stones will speak and say: ‘Oh Muslim there is a Jew behind that tree, let’s kill him,’” another Imam lectured.

Yehezkieli (who speaks fluent Arabic) explained that what he saw in the Al-Aqsa Mosque was more extreme than in any other mosque he visited during Ramadan. He said Hizb ut-Tahrir, which has an ideology similar to that of the Islamic State, was controlling the mosques and the daily affairs on the Temple Mount.

“In general we can conclude – based on what we saw in the fifteen mosques – that the ideology of Hamas (and Hizb ut-Tahrir) is on the rise in the mosques in Israel and the territories under Palestinian control and those mosques that were already under the influence of Hamas are now adopting the Islamic State ideology,” Yehezkieli said. “The Temple Mount in Jerusalem is the only place in Israel and the territories under Palestinian control where Muslims openly talk about the Islamic State and jihad. On Fridays you can see here the black flags of Daesh (ISIS) on the place where the Temple stood in Jerusalem.”

Netanyahu: No way to compensate Israel if Iran deal goes through

July 19, 2015

Netanyahu: No way to compensate Israel if Iran deal goes through

By Roi Kais

via Netanyahu: No way to compensate Israel if Iran deal goes through – Israel News, Ynetnews.

In divergent appearances on US media, PM says ‘There are many things to be done to stop Iran’s aggression and this deal is not one of them,’ while Kerry hits back: ‘If the Congress turns this down, there will be conflict in the region because that’s the only alternative’.

 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continued to do battle against a pro-deal media campaign Sunday, urging US lawmakers to hold out for a better Iran deal, and saying there was no way to compensate Israel if the nuclear agreement goes through.

US Secretary of State John Kerry and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz also gave competing interviews Sunday, contesting Netanyahu’s point of view.

“I think the right thing to do is merely not to go ahead with this deal. There are many things to be done to stop Iran’s aggression and this deal is not one of them,” Netanyahu said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” as he continued a string of US media interviews denouncing the deal reached on Tuesday between Iran and six major powers.

 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Photo:Reuters)
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Photo:Reuters)

Netanyahu said he felt obligated to speak out because the deal endangers his country, the region and the world and there was no way Israel could feel safe if it takes effect.

The strain in US-Israeli relations was further evident over the weekend, when it was revealed that Kerry spoke with Netanyahu on Thursday, saying that the idea of reaching a better deal with Iran over its nuclear program is a “fantasy.”

As part of media offensive launched by President Barack Obama after the signing of the deal, Kerry has given several interviews with the intent of explaining the agreement to the public – an agreement that Congress lawmakers have up to 82 days to review.

The secretary of state rejected Netanyahu’s position that the West should maintain pressure until Iran entirely capitulates its nuclear ambitions. “They won’t be crushed by sanctions; that’s been proven. We’ll lose the other people who are helping to provide those sanctions. They’re not going to do that if Iran is willing to make a reasonable agreement.

“If the Congress turns this down, there will be conflict in the region because that’s the only alternative,” said Kerry. “The Ayatollah, if the United States says no, will not come back to the table to negotiate and who could blame him under those circumstances?”

Kerry also addressed Netanyahu’s concerns that Iran will use its newly recovered financial capabilities to fund its proxies throughout the region and increase its military influence, directly endangering Israel’s security interests.

“They’re not allowed to do that, even outside of this agreement. There is a UN resolution that specifically applies to them not being allowed to transfer to Hezbollah.”

 

Kerry with the deal in hand. (Photo: AFP)
Kerry with the deal in hand. (Photo: AFP)

 But according to Kerry, Iran will struggle to find additional cash for its proxies for the next several years at least. “President Rouhani needs to deliver to the Iranian people. They have high expectations from this deal for a change in their lifestyle. Iran needs to spend $300 billion just to bring their oil industry capacity back to where it was five years ago.

 

President Barack Obama has promised to exercise his veto if Congress rejects the deal. Overriding the veto will require a two-thirds majority of both the House of Representatives and Senate, so the administration is working to win over enough of Obama’s fellow Democrats to offset strong Republican opposition.

 

Rueters contributed to this article.

 

First Published: 07.19.15, 12:01