ISIS vs ISIL

It has been suggested by some that the use of ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) by the president and his administration is somehow meant to be a poke in the eye to Israel. Maybe but I really don't see it. A much simpler explanation in my opinion is that it is just pretense. We have a very pretentious and professorial man in the White House. It is just his way of continuing the narrative of how smart he is. It is his way of saying, "Hey all you dummies. I know most of you are not smart enough or educated enough to understand the term "Levant". Why don't you look it up. Then maybe you will be smart like me." Another example of  Obama's pretense is the way he pronounces certain words with their foreign pronunciation. Hey just a suggestion but unless you are speaking in that foreign language a la the equally  pretentious, John Kerry, use the English pronunciation. And while you are at it, call the radical Islamists in that region what the rest of the world calls them either ISIS or maybe even DAESH. Drop the pretense for heaven sakes.

The Delusional Iranian Nuclear Deal

Apparently only the Obama Administration and a small band of "true believers" actually consider the Iranian nuclear agreement an actual deal. Hundreds of retired admirals and generals don't, most of Congress (just not enough to over-ride a presidential veto) doesn't, the Israelis don't, 81% of the American people don't and most importantly, the supposed partner in the deal, the Iranians themselves, don't think this is a deal. When asked about any aspect of the deal that could be considered beneficial to the U.S. (by definition, both sides of an agreement must receive some benefit in order to make something a deal.), the Iranians adamantly deny that it is part of the agreement. It baffles me how anyone can believe that there is an agreement when one of the parties doesn't agree to any of the terms of the agreement. That doesn't seem to deter the progressive, "we are just smarter than you are" crowd. Their delusion is complete.

Another Doomed Nuclear Agreement

After seeing Mickey Mantle and Roger Maris hit several consecutive back-to-back home runs in the early 1960's, fellow Yankee great, Yogi Berra quipped, "It's like deja vu all over again." This comes to mind as I consider the recent nuclear agreement with Iran because we have seen this before. In 1994, a similar agreed framework was adopted that was supposed to freeze and eventually eliminate North Korea's nuclear weapons program. We were told that the agreement would guarantee that North Korea would not produce a nuclear weapon by putting in place strong control measures, a sophisticated monitoring  regime and unfettered inspections of all North Korean military and civilian nuclear sites. In exchange for these concessions, the North Koreans received billions of dollars worth of fuel, food and economic aid. The North Koreans began cheating on the agreement almost immediately and by 2006, they had tested their first nuclear device.

Yesterday, President Obama announced that Secretary of State Kerry successfully negotiated a nuclear deal with Iran after nearly 18 months of talks. The agreement doesn't provide for the 24/7 anywhere/anytime inspections that we were promised; it didn't require Iran to renounce its call for the destruction of the state of Israel and in fact required no concessions from the Iranians at all. In addition, the deal ends the sanctions against Iran and frees up nearly $150 billion in frozen assets to a country that is still listed as the number one state sponsor of terrorism in the world. Do we really think that this money will be used to improve the life of the Iranian people and not to spread terror and chaos throughout the world?

If you go back and read what was reported by in the press about the North Korean nuclear deal or listen to President Clinton's announcement of the agreed framework, one could substitute Obama for Clinton and Iran for North Korea and the two situations are nearly identical. Why does anyone believe the ultimate outcome of the Iranian nuclear agreement will be any different than that of the North Korean deal?

Doing the exact same thing and expecting a different outcome has been described as one definition of insanity. Ten years from now, Iran will have nuclear weapons. This agreement almost guarantees it and believing otherwise is clearly crazy!