VIEW

I believe Landan-nNeshin and Vildemose sum it up very well

US policy for the last 30 years has been to bring IR under its sphere of influence and control. Iran's resistance to take orders from the "world's policeman" or the "world's mobster" depending on your view of things, is not setting right with Washington. What makes this new deal even worse, now the nations that are suppose to be taking orders themselves are raising and becoming part of the decision making process. That surely does not go well at all with Washington either. The irony is that more and more nations of order-takers are joining forces and resisting the master/slave relationship.

Mehrdad

These developments have

These developments have taken many observers by surprise.

No, just you. What's the point of swapping enriched uranium if IRI continues to enrich it on its own. The issue has never been peaceful nuclear energy. The issue was -and is- nuclear weapon making capability.

You are getting very close to insulting our intelligence Mr. Parsa. 

Juan Cole calls NIAC, "the

Juan Cole calls NIAC, "the most effective Iranian-American Lobby"???

Whatever the hell that means??Who are they lobbying on behalf of??

Excerpts:

There are four domestic political forces affecting Iran policy. The War Hawks, including the more hard line of the Israel lobbies, would like to see the US back on the war footing with Iran characteristic of the late Bush administration. The pragmatic hawks such as US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, aware of how ruinous entering a third war would be for the US at this point, would at least like to see the imposition of robust sanctions. The Realists, exemplified by Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett, would like to see engagement and negotiation with the regime in Tehran, even at the cost of ignoring the Islamic Republic’s crackdown on the Green Movement and massive human rights violations. The Democratic left and the National Iranian American Council (the most effective Iranian-American lobby) would like to see a rapprochement with Iran, but urge continued pressure by the West on the regime to open up and to cease its authoritarian measures.

//www.juancole.com/2010/05/iran-threatens-to-pull-out-of-nuclear-exchange-deal-over-new-un-sanctions.html#comments

There are many factors that

There are many factors that go into shaping US policy on Iran. Oil/gas is an obvious and not so obvious ones such as not giving into what they regard as terrorists and terrorism from hostage taking to khobab and Beirut bombing....

Israel is another obvious one and neither will tolerate opposition to their hegemonic designs. Regime change is the starting point and all sanctions and maneuvers are designed with that in mind. If Iran didn’t have a uranium enrichment program other issues would be offered up for the tightening of the screws. Add to that Iranian influence in Iraqi politics and the outlook gets even more gloomier.

This Anomaly Called USA

Those who have travelled the world a bit more than George W Bush had before assuming the role of the world's policeman ( just once across the border to Mexico for a bit of a good time) have witnessed that no matter where you might be in the world, the term "American" is synonymous with "Buffoon". Now, the $64m. question is Why? and that's a question for people in certain positions such as Mr. Parsi!

The global US foreign policy aside, on Iran alone, any objective observer, with a dash of historical perspective in hand, would conclude one thing and one thing alone: that the US hasn't got a clue what it wants or can do about Iran.

 All they have told the world since 1979, from Carter to Reagan,and then to Clinton and Bush to the present day's Obama is that we don't like the IRI and wish it to go away! And, of course, it hasn't happened and it won't just because all the tenants of the White House in the last 31 years had wished it to happen.

The world didn't work that way 45 years ago when the might of the US Armed Forces had to accept defeat at the hands the bare footed guerrilla army of the Viet Kong,nor would it work today that China is owed $3trillion by the US as Washington struggles to find a face saving exit strategy from Iraq and Afghanistan.

This begs the question 'who decides for America?'

Only a day after Washington's very 'telling' reaction to the Turkey,Iran,Brazil agreement, The only non-American American, who had the vision to guide the US towards a more realistic foreign policy in the last four decades, said bluntly that Washington should think again.

Henry Kissinger, who as National Security Adviser to Nixon, started direct talks with North Vietnam to end the war and carried out secret visits to Peking at the time of Mao's red revolution, said " more sanctions against Iran won't work"

The US political class, regardless of Party affiliations, has demonstrated time and time again that it has a problem with IRI that it can't define.

If anybody, and I mean anybody from anywhere and with whatever political view, believes that whatever Mr. Ahmadinejad said about Israel, or the dispute over the presidential elections or, whether there are any homosexuals in Iran or not, or can women divorce their husbands or take part in football matches or anything else that you can think of under the blue sky is giving shape to the hostile American policy toward IRI, please forgive me,but think again as I believe that you are missing the point by a long shot. 

It is common knowledge that there are some Iranians within and without Iran that are hoping for the US to do something to change the political system in Iran, whatever their reasons or motives, they should look at two determining factors: historical reality and prevalent circumstances.

By dismissing the Tehran accord, in my view, the US has revealed the cards that so far had kept relatively close to its chest, namely, the US demands nothing less than Iran's total capitulation on its nuclear policy.

This, first of all, proves that Iran's rejection of the previous swap deal was totally justified, as Washington is now saying that no nuclear fuel for Tehran's research reactor should be supplied before the total suspension of the enrichment activities.

Secondly, it goes to show how off the mark the US policy makers are. Although the EU, Russia and China have not openly said so, but the accepted wisdom now is that, like it or not, Iran is a nuclear state and what is required now is to make sure that there will be no circumstance under which Iran would seek to turn it into a military capability. Even most American analysts now seem to accept this as a realistic and pragmatic solution, but, not those who have been advising successive US presidents.

Finally, Washington, in all its buffoonery in foreign affairs, is now fuming with anger and frustration, not only because of Tehran's brinkmanship, but because now its ardent servants, such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey, that are openly saying enough is enough of double standards.

They've stated that you can not talk of a Middle East free of nuclear weapons and only blame and threaten the one country that, by your own admission has no nuclear weapons, and keep a 40 year deadly silence on another regional country that you helped to stockpile more nuclear bombs than France and UK's combined. 

Perhaps the scholars of the US foreign policy would find it thought provoking as to why when the former US president, Jimmy Carter, in his book confirmed Israel's big nuclear weapons stockpile, Washington and Tel Aviv called it "speculative and irresponsible".         

Coincidence after coincidence?

With this opinion piece the lifetime president and chief lobbyist for NIAC lobby has some explaining to do of his own.

Speaking about the Turkish/Brazilian deal with IRR, the Islamist Rapist Republic, the NIAC lobbyist says: “two emerging powers had the audacity to intervene and find a solution.”

1- The 1200 Kilo deal the NIAC lobbyist labels as the “solution” was when that amount of illegally enriched uranium constituted the majority of the stock the Islamists had at their disposal to build a bomb.

During the time IRR has been defying legally binding UNSC orders to stop their illegal enrichment activities the Islamists have enriched much more uranium, the 1200 kilo is an irrelevant amount now.

As a kicker, IRR has officially announced their 20% enrichment of uranium will continue which given enrichment being the subject of concern for the sane world, NIAC lobbyist’s “solution” is wholly tarnished.   

2- The chief NIAC lobbyist has to explain why he personally and his lobby almost always prefer to take the side which at final analysis is favorable to IRR, is it all some sort of coincidence after coincidence?