El Baradei’s Final Admission of Failure
John on November 27, 2009 at 10:37 am
I’ll miss him when he’s gone. Hah!:
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed ElBaradei said Thursday that his probe of allegations that Iran was trying to produce nuclear arms is at “a dead end” because Teheran is not cooperating.
ElBaradei criticized Teheran for not accepting an internationally endorsed plan meant to delay its ability to make such weapons. Confidence in Iran’s leaders, he warned, had shrunk in the wake of its belated revelation of a previously secret nuclear facility.
The unusually blunt comments appeared to be a reflection of ElBaradei’s frustration four days before he ends his tenure leading an agency that has proven unable to overcome Iran’s defiance.
It has also failed to alleviate international concerns that Teheran may be using a civilian nuclear program as a cover for plans to make weapons.
In case you’ve forgotten, as recently as August ElBaradei was opposing the publication of a secret report generated by his own agency, one which indicated Iran was using its civilian program as a cover to make weapons. And why did he oppose publication? Because he didn’t want to back Iran into a corner as it might make them more intransigent.
ElBaradei has been stuck on stupid, making this same excuse for Iran’s mullahs for more than two years. To really put this in perspective, this is the same Iran that created special munitions to be used against the US in the Iraq war. Remember EFPs? Probably more than 10% of our total casualties in Iraq are the direct fault of Iran. But ElBaradei said we just needed to talk and show them respect.
How about a bit more perspective. This is a regime which, if these tapes are accurate (and I believe they are), reminded its secret operatives:
How to direct people’s own anger for government purposes. Directing demonstrators to areas with lots of getaway routes, so they can run away and not fight, allowing the Security Forces to focus on the leaders (example of a cornered cat will scratch your eyes out, but if allowed, it will run away without draining the regime’s resources)
And that really sums up the Iranian game in a nutshell. Always give the suckers at the IAEA and the EU enough of a way out that they can run rather than fight. And that’s exactly what they do, time after time.
As the years of his tenure wore on, it became clear that no progress was being made with Iran. He always had “hope” but not much to show for it. When asked why the situation seemed so intractable, ElBaradei had a stock answer:
It was others who failed.
Specifically, it was the Bush administration’s fault for not taking the numerous “diplomatic opportunities” to engage Iran. That excuse worked for him so long as Bush, the hated American cowboy, was in office. Now that we’ve had 10 months with a new President, one who made it abundantly clear more than a year ago that he intended to negotiate with Iran “without preconditions”, how is the situation improved? Well, as you’ve just heard from ElBaradei himself, it hasn’t improved at all. In fact, efforts have reached a “dead end.”
Despite Obama’s praising of Iran’s “great” Persian culture.” Despite his willingness to look the other way as they shot protesters dead in the streets. Despite Obama’s willingness to crack down on Israeli settlements as a way to gain “street cred” with the Iranians and despite his Nobel Peace prize [ElBaradei has one too of course], we’ve gotten nowhere.
So with just a few days to go in his tenure and no one left to blame, ElBaradei now admits that Iran is intransigent and there’s nothing to be done about it. Translation: George Bush was right and I was very, very wrong.
Sorry, world. Enjoy Iranian nuclear hegemony of the middle-east. I’ll be enjoying my retirement on the French Riviera [yes, really].
When the first Iranian nuke is tested, newspapers should superimpose ElBaradei’s face on the mushroom cloud. In fact, if the Iranians have any honor at all they’ll name their first nuke the “ElBaradei” in his honor. Because, let’s face it, they’d never have gotten this far without him.
Good riddance to this knave and fool.
Category: Foreign Affairs |
Word on the street is that Obamanure is currently enrolled in a “professional bowing class” so he’ll do it with great fervor and gusto when he meets the mullahs of Iran. He’s also going to give them a Dixie Chicks CD as a way to further bond with his Iranian pals. He’s also going to buy a towel from Sears with stimulus money and have it affixed to his noggin just to make a lasting impression with our Iranian friends. Further, Obamanure’s speech writers are coming up with a song that everyone can sing that condemns George Bush. They’ll sing it around the campfire as they roast Iranian protestors.
November 27, 2009 @ 11:19 amWow…where to start…
1. JPost on Iran? Yeah…no blinding bias or agenda there. I know neo-cons and Zionists always start on the “We Own the World and Obey Us or Else” square, but those of us not concerned with sniffing Israel’s ass couldn’t care less what their psychopathic “journalists” think any more than someone with a functioning brain stems cares what Krauthammer has to say on the matter (or any other, actually.)
2. If they want weapons, more power to them. Israel has them. Pakistan has them. India has them. I know conservatives think treaties are “quaint”, but once Iran entered NPT-land they were instantly on higher legal ground than the raving Kahane-ites that pass for Israel’s government. If you trust those maniacs with Dimona, then the rest of us get to give Qom a pass.
Don’t like it? Tough titty.
As I said, Israel and the US are not The World.
And by the way, the “Green Revolution” folks you and other Zionist-coddling hypocrites pretended to care about a few months ago want a nuclear program by a wide margin.
3. “They made weapons to use against the US“? Are you that much of a jingoistic automaton or just borderline retarded? Seriously?
The US is the world’s largest weapons supplier by a GIANT margin. We armed both sides as the Iranians and Iraqis tore each other to shreds. And, sorry to once again rain on your Authority-Worshiping/the-Military-is-My-Daddy parade, they had as much right to provide help with resistance to an unlawful occupation as the Iraqis had to resist in the first place.
Any source for that laughable 10% number? Did it come from the Sunni insurgents we paid off? They’re great statisticians.
4. Those “secret” documents weren’t just held back because of El Baradei; they were also slept on because they reeked of B.S. and forgery. Hand written notes in the margins? Really? Doesn’t anyone in Tel Aviv own a copy of Photoshop? Even if they were 100% legit (they aren’t), it doesn’t matter. Your ilk is in a giant glass house when it comes to secret nuclear programs.
5. You’re right on the “nothing has changed” point. Don’t release the “Yay Stopped Clock” balloons just yet, though; as much as it annoys both your kind and sheeplike Democrats/Liberals, Obama and Bush differ only in style, not substance. If you’re claiming Obama has been “too soft” on Iran, you’re either coming from a “damn it can’t we just bomb these uppity brown people” perspective or you don’t read the papers (other than the WSJ and various rags with “New” in the name, of course.)
The supposed “diplomacy” over the past few months has more to do with whitewashing past (Bush) belligerence than it does with peaceful outcomes. Dennis Ross came right out and said it in his book. And where is he now? Hint: rhymes with “Might Mouse Madvisor“. The sanctions make Obama look all “nice” for long enough to drum up another moronic war like all the ones you support but lack the balls to sign up for.
For the record: if you can show any evidence of Obama “cracking down” on any Israeli behavior, I’ll Paypal you $5,000. Not words – deeds. $5,000 dollars to spend on bomb shelters and nude pictures of Alan Greenspan and whatever else conservatives spend money on.
And if it makes you feel better, he also lets the Honduran military and the Israelis gun down protesters. Y’know, the kind of gunning down of civilians you approve of.
6. You don’t seem to know what that big word “hegemony” means:
1. leadership or predominant influence exercised by one nation over others, as in a confederation.
2. leadership; predominance.
3. (esp. among smaller nations) aggression or expansionism by large nations in an effort to achieve world domination.
Iran lacks all three. It’s a second world country and you’re ascared of it because you were told to be. Grow up. Israel is the only “mideast” country west of Pakistan with nukes. Hundreds of them. And yet you say one Iranian bomb will be a “mushroom cloud”. Switch to decaf, Condoleeza.
So there you have it. You’re wrong just like Bush was wrong. Just like your fathers and grandfathers were always, always, always wrong. Stick to debunking intellectual lightweights like Gregory Paul and leave the foreign policy to people who don’t dream of perpetual 1950.
November 28, 2009 @ 9:51 pm1) The Jews are crafty. Got it. [Hey, I think you missed a spot on that head shave.]
2) I might feel differently if Iran were a free democracy. I have no problem with Israel and India having nukes for this reason. As it is, Iran is an Islamic oligarchy and the number one state sponsor of terror in the world. They can not be allowed to have nukes.
3. Your ignorance is astounding. Yes, they are responsible for the most deadly roadside bombs in Iraq which killed hundreds of our soldiers. That’s in addition to C4, RPGs and high end sniper rifles which all were transported into Iraq from Iran. They trained and paid people to attack US forces in Iraq. They were also tied to the Karbala attack which resulted in 5 kidnapped and murdered servicemen. The Wall Street Journal published a Pentagon estimate of 170 servicemen killed and 600 wounded back in 2007. So that’s 5% not 10%. However, at one point in the conflict, EFPs were responsible for nearly 30% of deaths in Iraq.
4. I don’t know what secret documents you’re talking about. I’m talking about a report by the IAEA which was kept secret by ElBaradei. His stated reason had nothing to do with sources, it was his desire to avoid backing the Iranians into a corner.
5. In your entire list, this one is uniquely stupid. Yes, Obama has only deployed words against Israel, what a brilliant insight. Meanwhile, against Iran he has deployed tanks and predator drones and…no he didn’t do that did he. Hmmmm. He’s only used words against Iran and, in fact, against pretty much everyone? What an insight! I see now why you are renowned as the internet’s #1 jew-hating trash talker.
6. Thanks for the definition. Sadly it doesn’t seem to have helped you much. Once the Iranians have nukes, they will dominate Iraq, Afghanistan and likely Pakistan as well which already has significant elements sympathetic to their point of view and a shaky central government. Turkey has also been leaning increasingly toward Islamic control. A nuclear Iran will make that transition more likely. Syria of course will fall in line. Bottom line: With or without Pakistan, Iran becomes the dominant power in the middle east, hence hegemony. Who do you see standing up to them besides Israel?
What I said was that they will test a nuke soon, most likely next year if they aren’t stopped. When they do ElBaradei should take a bow. It’s his legacy.
You’re right about one thing…Gregory Paul is an intellectual lightweight. You’re more of a flyweight.
November 29, 2009 @ 9:09 am[...] using its civilian program as a cover to make weapons. And why did he oppose publication?” {more} Do you feel blissfully peaceful now when you ponder [...]
December 10, 2009 @ 7:07 pm