Senate’s Bimbo-Pansies Ready to Roll Over for Iran Deal Due to Fear?
President Obama’s agreement with Iran to limit immediate production of bomb-making radioactive materials in exchange for ending economic sanctions probably will strategically reshape long-range Middle Asian nuclear relations and fund an increase of terrorism in the short-term. It is difficult to understand why 34 Democrat Senators would support the deal except for reasons of craven fear. Though Iran may already have secret bombs bought from old Soviet stock in Kazakhstan, Senate Bimbo-pansies quaver like lemmings skiing off a fast ramp of dupe in panic and fear of Iran vaporizing them quick as a swoop-hawk clutches cute little bunnies.
The U.S. Senate can vote down the treaty, yet it must have fewer than 34 Senators in support of the agreement to override the President’s probably veto of their disapproval. N.P.R. ran a story explaining that though the majority votes against it they really secretly consent. That sort of approach is disapproved of in sexual relations these days were some states require explicit consent to avoid rape. It is not enough to say that the Senate bimbos secretly consent. Though the President has the power in minority to force the nuclear doctrine through, overriding the majority in such an important issue-comparable to the Supreme Court butching the majority to force homosexual marriage on all the states-isn’t a good idea. They make noises about representative democracy while practicing corporatist plutonomy wherein President Obama is the corrupt steward making deals to get financial favor ready for when he must move out of his job managing his master’s house (the people of the United States and the executive branch). The issue raised in the N.P.R. report of the Senate bimbo non-consensual pose on the Iran deal really being consensual is pretty alarming political thought occurring in America’s nominal democracy. Taking non-consensual to be consensual is an arrogated affection of elites expressed during the Bill Clinton administration et al and isn’t a good direction of political development. It is consistent though with sham democracy and a Rohipnol media social environment disabling the immune system of the American body politic.
One must consider that sanctification of long-range Iranian nuclear weapons development by the United States such that if Iran complies with the terms of the agreement they will be free from American military dangers for a decade and soon thereafter free to resume unlimited nuclear materials production. If Pakistan were in the position of Iran with no known nuclear weapons would the United States support a long range development of nuclear weapons while allowing any sort of support development for any weapons program whatsoever in the interim?
One might wonder how the future would be set with an Iran in 15 years following that period of missile and even cruise missile and drone research accomplished before beginning advanced production of fissile materials. If Iran were to produce say-250 nuclear weapons on missiles able to reach Europe, Moscow, China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United States, would that capability produce stable relations with the Sunni nuclear force leaders in Pakistan or with Chinese Communists, Indian Hindus, Russian Patriots, European and American Libertines etc,?
Once the United States enters into an agreement with Iran on nuclear materials production limits in the short-run, it will be unable in the long-run to work militarily or diplomatically to affect Iranian nuclear development long-range plans. To renege on the agreement would be to further damage U.S. credibility that suffered significantly when the Clinton-Obama administration supported destruction of the Qaddafi regime after the Bush administration had got it to forsake nuclear weapons development and terrorism in exchange for normal relations. If U.S. international agreements are not worth the paper they are written on, some nations will be reluctant to enter in to them.
While it is true that Iran is a threat to Israel, Israel in the absence of Iranian nuclear weapons is not a threat to Iran. Israel actually does seek Middle Eastern stability, yet Iran is a sponsor of Palestinian terrorism against Israel. The Obama doctrine allows Iranian prosperity sufficient to allow increased funding of terrorism upon Israel with a murky outlook for response to contain it. The Obama doctrine more so than being limited to Iran-Israel factors will alter the long-range strategic nuclear situation in the Middle East and Asia creating a new round of post-cold war strategic nuclear weapons proliferation and international weapons of mass human destruction tactical deployment possibilities.
American leftists supported the Iranian Khomeini revolution as a way to get rid of America’s Imperial puppet government of the Shah. Once more they misunderstand Iranian demography. The American left is profoundly anti-Christian and believe in error that they can queer-up Islam in Iran through constructive engagement with the new butch principles of the U.S. government. They mistake the prospects for the increase of godless, queer atheist feminism in Iran the next decade, and do not comprehend that the imperial government of the Shah promoted libertine populism so far as it went in order to make imperial subjugation of civilians tolerable. In a way, so did Saddam Hussein in Iraq and the British government in a new form in recent years seeking to dumb down and financially colonize D.C. enlisting the help of domestic homosexuals enamored with all things British.
Iranian populism resides though in Islam more so than libertinism that is weak at national defense anyplace. The U.S. government butch atheist policy will disgust Iranian clerics the next decade and keep a dialectic of self-defense and fundamental Islam an advantaged party. in a decade of developing more contempt for D.C. Iran will be better set to start placing nuclear warheads on new and improved delivery vehicles. Even if libertinism has reached out to touch a significant number of Iranian clerics bringing corruption of their already in some instances corrupted principles, that will not help to stabilize Iran’s nuclear development policy or support non-proliferation concepts.