Devonia Smith: Obama takes Sarah Palin's advice on Iran

Palin has demonstrated the executive power of a few well placed words
*
At Examiner.com, Devonia Smith observes that just hours after Gov. Palin's tweet challenging the Obama administration to exert the same pressure for democratic change on the government of Iraq as it did on Egypt's Mubarek regime, the White House seemed to be dutifully following her advice:

Today, President Obama honored Sarah Palin's short and tweet advice following the overthrow of Mubarak in Egypt. That's another testament to the confidence that Palin fans have in her keen common sense mastery of presidential policy directives.

In a mere 140 word Tweet, Sarah Palin challenged both the sitting American president, Barack Hussein Obama and the national media.

Certainly, Palin has demonstrated the executive power of the value of just a very few words, well placed - from her tweet to the president's ear.

[More]

Now, if the White House would only heed Gov. Palin's wisdom on spending and energy independence...

- JP

Sarah Palin: It’s time to get tough with Iran

The free world must stand with the Iranian people
*
Gov. Palin posted another foreign policy statement on Facebook and in a national newspaper this morning:

It’s time to get tough with Iran

The following op-ed was published by USA Today:

Iran continues to defy the international community in its drive to acquire nuclear weapons. Arab leaders in the region rightly fear a nuclear-armed Iran. We suspected this before, but now we know for sure because of leaked diplomatic cables. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia "frequently exhorted the U.S. to attack Iran to put an end to its nuclear weapons program," according to these communications. Officials from Jordan said the Iranian nuclear program should be stopped by any means necessary. Officials from the United Arab Emirates and Egypt saw Iran as evil, an "existential threat" and a sponsor of terrorism. If Iran isn't stopped from obtaining nuclear weapons, it could trigger a regional nuclear arms race in which these countries would seek their own nuclear weapons to protect themselves.

That wouldn't be the only catastrophic consequence for American interests in the Middle East. Our credibility and reputation would suffer a serious blow if Iran succeeds in producing its own nuclear weapons after we've been claiming for years that such an event could not and would not be tolerated. A nuclear-armed and violently anti-American Iran would be an enormous threat to us and to our allies. Israel in particular would face the gravest threat to its existence since its creation. Iran's leaders have repeatedly called for Israel's destruction, and Iran already possesses missiles that can reach Israel. Once these missiles are armed with nuclear warheads, nothing could stop the mullahs from launching a second Holocaust. It's only a matter of time before Iran develops missiles that could reach U.S. territory.

Even without nuclear weapons, Iran has provided arms used to kill American soldiers and Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran is also the biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. It has shielded al-Qaeda leaders, including one of Osama bin Laden's sons. Imagine how much worse it would be for us if this regime acquired nuclear weapons.

Toughen up

President Obama once said a nuclear-armed Iran would be "unacceptable." Yet, Iran's nuclear progress still continues unchecked. Russia continues to support Iran's Bushehr nuclear reactors. It also continues to sell arms to Iran — despite the Obama administration's much-touted "reset" policy with Russia. The administration trumpets the United Nations sanctions passed earlier this year, but those sanctions are not the " crippling" ones we were promised. Much more can be done, such as banning insurance for shipments to Iran, banning all military sales to Iran, ending all trade credits, banning all financial dealings with Iranian banks, limiting Iran's access to international capital markets and banking services, closing air space and waters to Iran's national air and shipping lines, and, especially, ending Iran's ability to import refined petroleum. These would be truly "crippling" sanctions. They would work if implemented.

Some have said the Israelis should undertake military action on their own if they are convinced the Iranian program is approaching the point of no return. But Iran's nuclear weapons program is not just Israel's problem; it is the world's problem. I agree with the former British prime minister Tony Blair, who said recently that the West must be willing to use force "if necessary" if that is the only alternative.

Standing with the people

But we also need to encourage a positive vision for Iran. Iran is not condemned to live under the totalitarian inheritance of the Ayatollah Khomeini forever. There is an alternative — an Iran where human rights are respected, where women are not subjugated, where terrorist groups are not supported and neighbors are not threatened. A peaceful, democratic Iran should be everyone's goal. There are many hopeful signs inside Iran that reveal the Iranian people's desire for this peaceful, democratic future. We must encourage their voices.

When the brave people of Iran take to the streets in defiance of their unelected dictatorship, they must know that we in the free world stand with them. When the women of Iran rise up to demand their rights, they must know that we women of the free world who enjoy the rights won for us by our suffragist foremothers stand with our sisters there. When Iranians demand freedom of religion, freedom of conscience and freedom to simply live their lives as they choose without persecution, we in the free world must stand with them.

We can start by supporting them with diplomacy and things such as radio broadcasting, just as we did with those who suffered under the former Soviet Empire. Most of all, we should support them with confidence in the rightness of the ideals of liberty and justice.

Just as Ronald Reagan once denounced an "evil empire" and looked forward to a time when communism was left on the "ash heap of history," we should look forward to a future where the twisted ideology and aggressive will to dominate of Khomeini and his successors are consigned to history's dustbin.

- Sarah Palin

- JP

Sarah Palin: Obama's priorities are backwards on Israel and Iran

*
Sarah Palin blasted the Obama administration on her Facebook Notes page Tuesday night for having made no progress on sanctions against Iran, nor on halting the mullah's nuclear program.

Peace Not Possible if Iran Escapes Real Sanctions

This is a meaningful week for so many of us. As millions of Christians and Jews celebrate this Holy Week, it’s appropriate to reflect on developments in the Holy Land. Israel faces a nuclear threat from Iran that grows every day. Today we learned that the CIA has concluded that Iran already has the capability and the know-how to build nuclear weapons. While President Obama once said a nuclear-armed Iran would be “unacceptable,” after more than a year in office it’s sobering to have to acknowledge that his administration has made no progress in implementing “crippling” sanctions on Iran, let alone halting Iran’s nuclear program. Even the rhetoric moved in the wrong direction – recently the administration downgraded their call for “crippling” sanctions to sanctions that “bite.” Shockingly, as we learned last week, these “biting” sanctions will no longer include actions that could actually change Iran’s behavior, including limiting Iran’s access to international capital markets and banking services or closing air space and waters to Iran’s national air and shipping lines. So the issue is not when the so-called sanctions will come (President Obama promised them in “weeks” today) but whether they will even “nibble.” And while the Obama administration was more than willing to use every parliamentary trick in the book to ram its government health care takeover through Congress, conversely, it has worked hard to stall bipartisan efforts to pass the Iran Sanctions Act.

Many, many Americans and our allies know that if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, the consequences will be catastrophic for our interests in the Middle East, and we want our government to do everything in its power to prevent Iran from acquiring nukes. We foresee a regional nuclear arms race beginning as other countries seek their own nuclear weapons to protect themselves from Iran. Nuclear non-proliferation efforts would be over. The U.S. and our allies in the international community would be shown to be impotent – after long claiming that Iranian nuclear weapons could not and would not be tolerated. And Israel would face the gravest threat since its creation. Iran’s leaders have repeatedly called for the destruction of Israel and with nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them, the mullahs would be in a position to launch a Second Holocaust.

Iran continues to develop long range missiles. Its missiles can reach Israel and Europe right now and in time they will be able to reach US territory.

This issue is the most serious security challenge facing the U.S. in the region. Yet just as the Obama administration inexplicably gives up on imposing crippling sanctions on Iran, it’s taken an uncompromising hard line against one country in the Middle East: Israel. On his recent visit to Washington, the Israeli Prime Minister was treated like an unwelcome guest, as shown by White House actions such as refusing to be photographed with Israel’s Prime Minister.

Public demands for concessions have been made of the Israelis while the Palestinians add ever more conditions to their participation in peace talks, and those in the administration that dare to argue for looking at these policies through the lens of Israel’s security needs are subject to slanderous attacks from “senior administration officials.” The Obama administration has their priorities exactly backwards; we should be working with our friend and democratic ally to stop Iran’s nuclear program, not throwing in the towel on sanctions while treating Israel like an enemy.

In a week when events in the Holy Land thousands of years ago are on the minds of millions, we would all do well to include Israel’s security in our prayers as we encourage our government to do all it can to ensure there is never a nuclear Iran able to threaten our interests or our allies.

- Sarah Palin

- JP

Sarah Palin Was Right #18: Iran and the Alaska Missile Shield

- by upinak

When Obama stands there with his feeble limp-wristed style to swoon the stupid liberals into believing all is good and no harm will come to them. It makes one wonder about the safety for the country as well as question when Obama is actually going to do anything about the troops in Afghanistan.

Iran has made it clear to the world that it will not abide by the sanctions that were put in place to make it “safe” for what they are doing with the yellow cake uranium. They are going their own way regardless. The mullahs have not cooperated with this nation, and Cheney and Joint Chiefs predicted that it was never going to happen. And Obama just sits there looking like the schoolyard mama's boy being pushed around by the bully.

But here is a new shocker. I have pointed out that Alaska has a missile shield for the United States which would protect the West Coast and the Eastern Seaboard in some cases as Alaska's location in the hemisphere the ability of the the 49th Missile Defense Battalion to react quickly argue strongly for the US. to expand and strengthen its missile defense capabilities. Indeed, recently in the news it has come to light that there is a new measure on the table to complete the missile defense system at Ft. Greely but only subject to a bizarre condition:

Sen. Mark Begich, a Democrat, appealed to the Senate Armed Services Committee in June to maintain money to expand the ground-based missile defense system, saying it's not just about North Korea but also about shooting down missiles launched by Iran. In a news release Tuesday, Begich said the plan is "a welcome decision that will decrease the risk of the ever-evolving ballistic missile threats from rogue nations by increasing capacity required to defend the United States."

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a Republican, was less enthusiastic about the decision in an e-mailed statement to the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, noting that the completion of Missile Field 2 comes with plans to decommission another missile field at the base, about 100 miles south of Fairbanks. "I remain unconvinced that abandonment of the Bush administration's plan, previously supported by Secretary Gates, is the right thing to do from a national security perspective," Murkowski said.

So we can have all the missiles that were slated for our protection under the Bush administration for overall protection, but we have to dismantle Missile Field 1, fund get the missiles for Missile Field 2 at Greely. Does anyone else think this sound like a self-defeating proposition? Especially since the Missile Field 1 only became fully operational in 2003/2004! Why does the Washington establishment want to waste the taxpayers' hard-earned money in such a cavalier manner?

Sarah Palin, you were right. It is America's misfortune that it has come to this.

- u

Sarah Palin Was Right #14: Missile Defense - Russia and Iran

- by upinak

I wrote about Russia a few days ago concerning Iran and why Russia doesn’t seem to care. I also noted that something was amiss, and here it is: Russia said no to sanctions and now is allowing Iran to have a preemptive nuclear option. No regulations, no sanctions, nothing. What is Russia getting out of this deal?

Breitbart shed some light on the situation:

The interview appeared in the daily Izvestia during a visit by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, as U.S. and Russian negotiators try to hammer out a nuclear arms reduction treaty by December. It also came amid grumbling in Moscow over U.S. moves to modify plans for a missile shield near Russia's borders rather than ditch the idea outright.

Patrushev said a sweeping document on military policy including a passage on preventative nuclear force will be handed to President Dmitry Medvedev by the end of the year, according to Izvestia.

Officials are examining "a variety of possibilities for using nuclear force, depending on the situation and the intentions of the possible opponent," Patrushev was quoted as saying. "In situations critical to national security, options including a preventative nuclear strike on the aggressor are not excluded."

As did Reuters:

"There is no need to frighten the Iranians," Putin told reporters in Beijing.

"We need to look for a compromise. If a compromise is not found, and the discussions end in a fiasco, then we will see," he said, adding that talks of sanctions was "premature" at present.

This stinks, worse then a dead elephant in the room. And what is worse is the fact that Obama is letting Russians visit our nuclear sites. WHY????

Via Foxnews.com:

Russia and the United States have tentatively agreed to a weapons inspection program that would allow Russians to visit nuclear sites in America to count missiles and warheads.

The plan, which Fox News has learned was agreed to in principle during negotiations, would constitute the most intrusive weapons inspection program the U.S. has ever accepted.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who met with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, said publicly Tuesday that the two nations have made "considerable" progress toward reaching agreement on a new strategic arms treaty.

The 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START, expires in December and negotiators have been racing to reach agreement on a successor.

There are two start agreements, START 1 and START II. The Fox report refers to START II. But take a look at the title on the State.gov website:

THE TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS ON THE REDUCTION AND LIMITATION OF STRATEGIC OFFENSIVE ARMS AND ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS

Interestingly, all of a sudden it seems that Russia wants to look into this. Putin has been around for a while, so why the sudden interest? I believe it has to do with that Russian-Iranian alliance, that was forged in 2005. Yet no one really talks much about it in the U.S., even now.

Sarah Palin was right about Missile Defense here at home. But is anyone listening? There is good cause for concern.

- u

Sarah was right: Missile defense Part 4 - Russia & Iran

*
- by upinak

Russia has an interesting relationship with almost all other nations. She has never been one to back down from a fight, but something has been amiss in Mother Russia lately.

The Jerusalem Post published this interesting article concerning Russia and Iran, presenting two theories why Russia has no fear of the Persian state:

First, Iran is primarily a threat to Israel, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. The mullahs will increase regional tensions and strengthen Russia's position there. Good relations with Iran could position Russia as a mediator between these countries and the Islamic republic. For example, the recent cancellation of the deal to sell Iran anti-aircraft complexes was used to leverage Russia-Israel relations.

Second, Russia can use its relations with Iran as a bargaining chip in opposing the United States. The latest events demonstrate how, by changing its position toward sanctions, Russia achieved its goal: getting Obama to cancel the AMD program and reversing the previous US administration's policy.

I think there is more to it then just what the Jerusalem Post has stated.  Russia is a country that uses other countries to gain what they consider power, or a stepping stone of power.  The Russians like to test other countries, such as when they probe American and Canadian airspace with their Bear strategic bombers, for example.  But this isn't just about America and Canada.  Russia is constantly checking the boundaries of what it can do to judge how other countries react, including Pakistan.  The Russian Bear is playing with fire and grinning from ear to ear while doing it.

Imposing sanctions on loose cannons such as Iran will not make much of a contribution to regional stability, especially when nuclear arsenals are involved. Such a measure may only make it more difficult for those nations that are trying to keep the peace.  Hillary Clinton is also on the front end of the situation, but there is something which just doesn't add up. Stating that Secretary Clinton never asked for Russia's help seems odd to me in light of another article which states that she said no to the Russians. Something is not right.

And yet here we sit, without what should have been a missile defense, waiting to see what will happen.  Meanwhile, the Russians say they do no want sanctions on Iran... The 64 Megaton question is why not? Hmm.

- u

Sarah Palin Was Right #8: Obama's Missile Defense Cuts Are Reckless, Part 2

I mentioned a couple days ago about the problematic issue with Iran, its nuclear facilities and missiles, while Obama is dismantling ours. It's a situation which shows that Sarah Palin was right about missile defense.

Now that we have been threatened by North Korea, which bluffed and now warned by Iran… how off is Sarah Palin now concerning Missile Defense in our own country? Even Defense Secretary Gates is beginning to wonder what the deal is and is saying that letting Afghanistan go is a bad idea, even after the administration and Congress ended production of the F-22 air superiority fighter. What is Congress thinking now? Meanwhile, Obama seems to be letting the Gitmo detainees out one at a time to keep from drawing attention.

It really doesn’t matter. We are at the mercy of what Iran's mullahs may do. Israel has long urged the U.S. to stand up and take action, but sadly it looks as though the tiny democracy is on its own. But the United States is under the missile bubble as well. Yet Obama just grins and campaigns as usual, this time for an extended school session. Isn’t there something more pressing than worrying about the length of the school year? How about keeping Americans and their children safe?

I also mentioned that Venezuela is seeking its own uranium, possibly with help from Russia. I said that China would be involved. It seems I was right about that as well, but one country that I thought would be on our side, India, is preoccupied with building up its own nuclear arsenal, and it's anyone's guess when Pakistan is going to get into the mix.

So while all this is going on in the world, we should be on high alert. But, no, House Democrats are too focused on their push to give healthcare to illegals. Where was Obama's plan to grant them U.S. citizenship?

None of this is good news. In fact, this is depressing news. Is there anything positive about the Obama Administration's lemming march over the cliff?

I hope Sarah Palin and others who value the nation's security, will we speaking out on these issues at upcoming events. This is not the time for silence, nor is it the time to look past the issues that are staring the world in the face.

As I was writing this, the Iranians fired two medium range missiles. Say an Our Father. (The 23rd Psalm might also be appropriate. - JP)

From Reuters.com:

Iran has test-fired medium-range missiles, state TV reported on Monday, a day after the Islamic Republic's elite Revolutionary Guards launched short-range missiles as part of several days of war games.

So, Mr. President, should Americans be concerned about the mad mullahs and their missiles yet?

- u

Gov. Sarah Palin tweets out on events in Iran

From her Twitter page:

"W/deadly Iranian protests let us be thankful for, & supportive of, U.S. Military defending OUR democracy & freedom. God protect the innocent."

Amen.

Update: On Sunday, the governor again tweeted on events in Iran:

"Women worldwide watching Iran protests led by women demanding fair election & equality; their voices loud, strong; they will usher in change."

- JP

The Vice President With Half a Brain Speaks

Michael Goldfarb has a post up at The Blog on The Weekly Standard's website titled "Stupid Things Vice President Palin Wouldn't Have Said."

Yes, Joe "The Brain" Biden has been talking again, no doubt causing the White House to double the normal order of Maalox for the week. The deep veep said yesterday that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's new government would be "ill-advised" to attack Iran to prevent the rogue nation from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

Ah, but cheer up, West Wingers. As Goldfarb observes, "On the upside, Biden doesn't really speak for the administration." Good thing that idiot didn't get elected vice president, eh? Oh, wait...

- JP