The Secretary of State John Kerry is repeatedly claiming: "This deal is not based on trust; it is based on the verification".
As a non-American, which English language is not my mother tongue, should i define the term "verification" in this regards for Mr. Kerry? What a pity, the Secretary of State Mr. Kerry has signed a deal with the Islamic Regime; has agreed to send the deal to the UN Security Council, while he hasn't read the IAEA-Iran deal report in this important matter. How on earth could the administration of a super power like the USA do such a huge mistake with regards to a revisionist state like the Islamic Regime in an important issue such as nuclear activity? Unbeliavableeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.
Note: As i mentioned in earlier posts repeatedly: Iran will obtain nuclear weapon somewhere in the future. In other words, the international community will be left with two options as follows:
1- Accepting a nuclear armed Iran free of any sanctions (In case of lifting the sanctions)
2- Accepting a nuclear armed Iran under severe sanctions.
Which one of these options is less dangerous and more controllable?
My suggestion is choosing the second option (Imposing severe sanctions on Iran) along with performing a fundamental and comprehensive regime change. This is the best solution and less dangerous plan for the whole region. Please do not compare my idea about "performing a fundamental and comprehensive regime change" with what you have done in the past 36 years. During all those years, you have wasted your resources in a totally wrong way and in most of the cases you have helped and promoted either Iranian Regime's lobbyists or you have been trapped in good cup & bad cup tactic of the Islamic Regime.
M. Sirani 24.07.2015
No comments:
Post a Comment