The Blame Game Masters: Iran’s Plan B Has Always Been Obama’s Plan A-Z. Consider How Obama Blames Bush For His Iraq Failure.

This is almost funny it’s so sad.  Iran has mastered how to defeat America by watching the master at defeating America at work: Barack Hussein Obama.

Analysis Iran maneuvers to win blame game if nuclear talks collapse
By Paul Richter
June 17, 2014, 4:46 AM|Reporting from Vienna

Iran’s nuclear negotiating team has come to this city hoping to seal a deal on its disputed nuclear program that will finally remove the international sanctions crippling its economy..

But just in case they don’t win that diplomatic victory, they are carefully positioning themselves to come away with a valuable second prize: a win in the ugly blame game that would follow the collapse of negotiations.

Tehran’s team wants to make sure that if its talks with six world powers collapse, many nations would conclude that Iran had been prepared to compromise and the obstacle was the maximalist demands of the United States and its hawkish Israeli and Persian Gulf allies.

The Iranians hope that if many countries come to that view the countries will begin to shed sanctions, allowing Tehran to sell its oil again, and to continue pursuing a nuclear program.

What happens to the sanctions, the world’s great point of leverage on Iran, “depends on who wins the blame game,” said Cliff Kupchan, a former State Department official who follows Iran for the Eurasia Group risk consulting firm.

Iran’s last president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, liked to project an image of thunder and fire. He didn’t look reasonable to the world audience, and didn’t much care.

But the smiling team of President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif seek to come across as reasonable representatives of a country that deserves more than pariah status.

In the run-up to this fifth round of talks, Iran’s nuclear negotiating team has put considerable effort into convincing the world that they are not the threat to a diplomatic solution to the 2-decade-old dispute over Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

At a news conference last Saturday, Rouhani stressed Iran’s “goodwill and flexibility” and his hopes that a deal could still be wrapped up by the current deadline of July 20.

He seemed to signal that he was prepared to set aside Iran’s longstanding enmity with the United States, saying it might cooperate with the U.S. on the struggle against Sunni extremists in Iraq. Of course, as a responsible world power, any Iranian step would be consistent with “international law,” he emphasized.

Rouhani also argued that the sanctions are unraveling anyway. “Conditions will never go back to the past,” he said, in an apparent effort to convince oil-consuming nations they will soon be able to resume oil purchases.

Foreign Minister Zarif, meanwhile, has been building a case that Iran’s goals in the nuclear negotiations are reasonable and that the West’s are extreme.

In a Washington Post Op-Ed article last week, Zarif wrote that in 2005, he and Rouhani floated a plan to the West that would have allowed an international panel to regulate Iran’s nuclear program based on whether they thought it was peaceful. Instead, the George W. Bush administration demanded a halt to Iran’s uranium enrichment, undermining diplomacy and leading to a huge expansion of the Iranian nuclear program.

“They were mistaking our constructive engagement for weakness,” Zarif wrote.

He argued that “small but powerful constituencies” in the West have been calling for tough action against Iran by saying that the country is only a couple of months from having enough enriched uranium to build a nuclear weapon.

In fact, Zarif wrote, Iran would still need “several years” of work to complete all the complex processes needed to turn the fuel into a bomb.

He pointed out that 2005 and 2012 National Intelligence Estimates, which represent the U.S. intelligence community consensus, concluded that Iran wasn’t trying to build a bomb.

The Iranian team is hoping that if the talks collapse, the defection of a few non-Western oil-importing nations, such as China, Turkey or India, might begin an accelerating unraveling of the sanctions.

Obama administration officials contend the sanctions have remained strong since the signing of an interim nuclear deal last November that eased some of the penalties on Iran.

Many countries remain wary of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, in part because of evidence that Iran for years was secretly expanding the program.

Yet the administration has some vulnerabilities in the public relations battle.

One is that many countries are increasingly skeptical of the U.S.’ heavy use of its powerful economic sanctions, which the White House this spring has imposed on Russia because of the dispute over Ukraine.

Many countries, including some in Europe, see Congress’ use of sanctions as excessive.

A senior administration official, asked in a briefing this week about Iran’s efforts to win over world opinion, may have bolstered its argument by warning that if Tehran didn’t yield in negotiations it would be clobbered by more sanctions legislation.

“If Iran does not feel it can make the choices that are necessary, I have no doubt that Congress will take action,” warned the official, who declined to be identified under administration ground rules.

We’ve never seen such a demagogue in the White House.  EVER.  This wicked man ran promising to “transcend the starkly red-and-blue politics of the last 15 years, end the partisan and ideological wars and build a new governing majority.”  Obama deceived and lied his way into office, pure and simple.  And dug in like a disease-bearing tick, he proceeded to “fundamentally transform America” by abandon any and all compromise and ramming home his Stalinist partisan ideology by whatever means necessary (usually Stalinist means through “executive orders” and simple lawlessness, mind you).

Everything was Bush’s fault.  And as that myth started to wear out, everything was the Republicans’ fault.  Obama is a one-trick pony, and the blame game is his one trick so he keeps doing it over and over and over again, ad nauseum.

Our enemies have taken notice of how pathologically weak and cynical Obama is.  And they have taken note of how to be like Obama and use rhetoric to delegitimize truth.

Obama demonized George Bush over EVERYTHING.  Except the way Bush won the Iraq War.  Obama didn’t demonize that; nope: he tried to take credit for it (as I documented in a recent article).  Joe Biden put it this way when Bush was long out of office and everything seemed to be going so, so well:

“I am very optimistic about — about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You’re going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You’re going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government.”

Obama BOASTED in 2011 about how wonderfully HIS plan had worked to produce a stable Iraq:

“This strategy is grounded in a clear and achievable goal shared by the Iraqi people and the American people: an Iraq that is sovereign, stable, and self-reliant.”

Of course, NO ONE in the Pentagon had agreed with Obama’s plan.  They had BEGGED Obama to keep the sort of residual force in Iraq that John McCain had described America as needing to ensure true long-term security:

QUESTIONER: President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for 50 years —

McCAIN: Maybe a hundred.

QUESTIONER: Is that — is that —

McCAIN: We’ve been in South Korea — we’ve been in Japan for 60 years. We’ve been in South Korea for 50 years or so. That’d be fine with me as long as Americans —

QUESTIONER: So that’s your policy?

McCAIN: — As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, then it’s fine with me. I hope it would be fine with you if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where Al Qaeda is training, recruiting, and equipping and motivating people every single day.

Had we remained in Iraq the way we remained in South Korea and the way we remained in Japan and the way we remained in Europe, WE WOULDN’T BE WHERE WE ARE NOW.

And where we are now is a complete disaster, with Iraq collapsing to terrorists who are – get this – WORSE than al Qaeda while we beg our ENEMY Iran – which is responsible for one third of all American deaths and casualties suffered in Iraq – to help us because we are too weak to help ourselves now.

Let’s look at the timeline of what the military said was wise and what they said was idiotic.  Let’s start with Feb 2, 2009 only days after Obama took office:

WASHINGTON, Feb 2 2009 (IPS) – CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus, supported by Defence Secretary Robert Gates, tried to convince President Barack Obama that he had to back down from his campaign pledge to withdraw all U.S. combat troops from Iraq within 16 months at an Oval Office meeting Jan. 21.

But Obama informed Gates, Petraeus and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen that he wasn’t convinced and that he wanted Gates and the military leaders to come back quickly with a detailed 16-month plan, according to two sources who have talked with participants in the meeting.

Obama’s decision to override Petraeus’s recommendation has not ended the conflict between the president and senior military officers over troop withdrawal, however. There are indications that Petraeus and his allies in the military and the Pentagon, including Gen. Ray Odierno, now the top commander in Iraq, have already begun to try to pressure Obama to change his withdrawal policy.

A network of senior military officers is also reported to be preparing to support Petraeus and Odierno by mobilising public opinion against Obama’s decision.

Petraeus was visibly unhappy when he left the Oval Office, according to one of the sources. A White House staffer present at the meeting was quoted by the source as saying, “Petraeus made the mistake of thinking he was still dealing with George Bush instead of with Barack Obama.”

Petraeus, Gates and Odierno had hoped to sell Obama on a plan that they formulated in the final months of the Bush administration that aimed at getting around a key provision of the U.S.-Iraqi withdrawal agreement signed envisioned re-categorising large numbers of combat troops as support troops. That subterfuge was by the United States last November while ostensibly allowing Obama to deliver on his campaign promise.

Obama was a fool.  He still IS a fool.  He will ALWAYS be a fool.

Note that we DID have an end-run around the just-as-stupid-as-Obama Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki: just re-categorize the troops as “support troops.”  And there are PLENTY of such end runs if Obama had wanted them: for example, now, if Obama sends in ANY troops, he could provide cover for them by declaring them to be under the protections of embassy personnel.  He could have ALWAYS played such games had he wanted to.  The fact of the matter is, Obama wanted OUT of Iraq.  He cut and ran, just as we said.  He never TRIED to negotiate anything but his ass not hitting the door on his way out.

Note that back in 2009, literally one day after taking office (January 21), Obama was already IGNORING the superior knowledge and wisdom of the military and frankly even his own experts in his own cabinet that he had chosen.  And he imposed his idiot liberalism on America and now we’re paying for it and will pay far MORE for it soon.

Note that American military commanders ALWAYS assumed that Obama wouldn’t be such a fool as to do what he did, as this article underscores:

Despite Obama’s declarations Friday and the celebrations they have sparked on the liberal blogosphere, the Pentagon certainly seems to believe its forces may well be in Iraq after 2011. NBC’s Pentagon correspondent Jim Miklaszeswki reported on Friday that “military commanders, despite this Status of Forces Agreement with the Iraqi government that all U.S. forces would be out by the end of 2011, are already making plans for a significant number of American troops to remain in Iraq beyond that 2011 deadline, assuming that Status of Forces Agreement agreement would be renegotiated. And one senior military commander told us that he expects large numbers of American troops to be in Iraq for the next 15 to 20 years.” Some have suggested that such statements from the military are insubordination and contrary to Obama’s orders, but they could also reflect discussions between the White House and the Pentagon to which the public is not privy. Then there’s the monstrous U.S. embassy unveiled last month in Baghdad, the largest of any nation anywhere in the history of the planet and itself resembling a military base. Maintaining this fortified city will require a sizable armed U.S. presence in Baghdad and will regularly place U.S. diplomats in armed convoys that put Iraqi civilian lives in jeopardy.

The fact is this: the military demanded that we need to have at least 20,000 men as a residual force; Obama refused to listen to wisdom and ordered the military to draw up a new plan.  So the military scratched their heads at Obama’s arrogant idiocy and returned, asking for at least 10,000 troops.  Again, Obama refused common sense.  Obama was only going to allow a way-too-small force of 3,000.

And when Obama came to the Iraqi Prime Minister with that clearly-too-small-to-do-any-good number, Nouri al -Maliki understood that Obama had absolutely no intention of truly remaining as a stabilizing force in Iraq, that he was cutting and running, that America under Obama was useless, and that he would need to run to the Iranians instead of relying on the Americans.

In other words, Obama lost the war right then and there.  Obama – who wanted OUT – offered absolutely nothing whatsoever that al-Maliki could use, which made it easy for al-Maliki to refuse Obama’s “assistance.”  Hence no status of forces agreement.

Let’s go to a period – April 10, 2011 – after the Obama-King-Dumbass-of-the-Universe policy on Iraq is on the verge of being implemented:

WASHINGTON — Eight months shy of its deadline for pulling the last American soldier from Iraq and closing the door on an 8-year war, the Pentagon is having second thoughts.

Reluctant to say it publicly, officials fear a final pullout in December could create a security vacuum, offering an opportunity for power grabs by antagonists in an unresolved and simmering Arab-Kurd dispute, a weakened but still active al-Qaida or even an adventurous neighbor such as Iran.

The U.S. wants to keep perhaps several thousand troops in Iraq, not to engage in combat but to guard against an unraveling of a still-fragile peace. This was made clear during Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ visit Thursday and Friday in which he and the top U.S. commander in Iraq talked up the prospect of an extended U.S. stay.

Note how the media slants and distorts the story.  The military wasn’t having “second thoughts” about this idiotic move by Obama; THEY HAD ALWAYS OPPOSED IT.

Also, note that they feared not only terrorists taking over Iraq, but the terrorist State of Iran taking over Iraq.  Under Obama’s wicked, demon-possessed stupidity, BOTH ARE NOW HAPPENING.

We learn – if we care about history rather than liberal’s fact-warping rhetoric – that:

Obama’s plan, as his advisors have often said, is subject to “conditions on the ground,” meaning it can be altered at any point between now and 2011. Underscoring this point, a spokesperson for New York Rep. John McHugh, the ranking Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, said on Friday that Obama “assured [McHugh] he will revisit the tempo of the withdrawal, or he will revisit the withdrawal plan if the situation on the ground dictates it. … The president assured him that there was a Plan B.”

In other words, Obama made the call.  He made the call AFTER Bush had secured victory.  And Obama foolishly made THE WRONG CALL.  And now the Middle East is melting down around us as a result of our Idiot-in-Chief.

Of course, we now know what Obama’s “PLan B” was: to blame Bush for Obama’s idiotic failures and count on the mainstream media to sell it.

As another example of how the Fool-in-Chief annihilated American influence in the Middle East, consider how Obama – after his “red line” debacle refused wisdom in sending aid to the pro-democratic rebels in Syria as John McCain and Lindsey Graham begged Obama to do a good two years plus ago.

We had a chance to topple Syrian dictator Assad AND install a government friendly to us, but Obama dithered too long and blew any chance we had.  And then – because Obama is a true fool – he involved Russia and Putin who takes Obama to school every time they negotiate.  And Putin maneuvered Obama into literally NEEDING Assad to remain in power to secure a WMD deal that Putin and Assad held over Obama’s head like a carrot while Assad murdered now well over 160,000 of his own people.  And while a vicious terrorist group known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria – ISIS – metastasized first across Syria and now into Iraq.

These are all just facts.  It is what happened.

But the way Obama – using his “Iran Plan B” strategy as per the top article above – has handled his debacle is to blame Bush for it.  If Bush hadn’t started the war, we wouldn’t be here.

You know, just like “If I didn’t have an opposable thumb, I wouldn’t have smashed my finger with this hammer.”

It is significant that BOTH of Barack Obama’s Secretaries of State – first Hillary Clinton and then John Kerry – voted to authorize Bush to attack Iraq.  Because they looked at the clear and present danger that Iraq posed and they looked at the intelligence evidence that Bush was also looking at, and they came to the same decision that any rational human being would come to faced with such overwhelming evidence.

History records THAT as a fact as well.  It also records the fact that nearly sixty percent of DEMOCRATS in the United States Senate (29 of 50) supported Bush’s policy on Iraq in the form of something called “the Iraq WAR Resolution.”  That’s right, kids: “The Iraq WAR Resolution.”  Only to turn on him like treasonous dogs the moment that politics and unbelievable dishonesty and cynicism on the part of the Democrat Party entered into the picture.

Again, note that the two people who served as Obama’s Secretaries of State – Hillary Clinton and John Kerry – both voted “YES.”

Democrats are demonic, backstabbing traitors.  And if you give them power, they will undermine America every single time.

So Obama is trying to play games and blame pretty much all of the scandals that HIS administration is responsible for on Bush.  Like the VA scandal.

Now Obama’s – OBAMA’S – failed policy is coming home to roost.  And the man who just a few years ago was claiming total credit for Iraq is now using his army of media cockroaches to suggest that Bush so screwed up Iraq that it’s wrong to blame Obama.  BULLCRAP.

The fact of the matter is that George W. Bush secured victory in Iraq and handed off a safe, stable, secure nation to Barack Obama.  Barack Obama claimed credit for what he received and in so doing claimed ownership of it.  Had his policy not been so wrong, had he not so completely and so arrogantly IGNORED his wise military advisors, we would not be in this mess.

Don’t let Obama play his “Iranian strategy” on this one.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

12 Responses to “The Blame Game Masters: Iran’s Plan B Has Always Been Obama’s Plan A-Z. Consider How Obama Blames Bush For His Iraq Failure.”

  1. dog walker Says:

    Hold on to your hats boys. I f either Iraq or Iran become nuclear powers then we don’t gotta worry about the Civil War that I purport to desire.

  2. Michael Eden Says:

    dog walker,

    You mean like the bloody, vicious, ugly civil war that Obama has caused to consume Iraq??? Because that’s what you’re looking at when the Sunnis and the Shiites get into it (as they are DOING).

    That war is also going to spread. And the most whackjob region in the world will soon be ABOUNDING with nuclear weapons as the Sunni powers like Saudi Arabia are forced to produce their own nuclear weapons to counter Iran’s program which is very clearly moving right along.

    Hold on to your hats, indeed.

    The Antichrist is right around the corner. And he aint going to deal nicely with ANYONE opposing him when he shows up.

  3. dog walker Says:

    For a while I thought your Armageddon, Apocalypse, AntiChrist arguments to be over the top. These days have got me saying, Yikes!

  4. Michael Eden Says:

    dogwalker,

    I rejoice to hear that. Forewarned is forearmed. If you don’t understand what’s coming, you can’t correctly respond to it.

    I became a Christian at the age of 15 in 1979 (there, that ought to date me!). For some reason only God truly knows, I immediately became interested in Bible prophecy. One of the early books I read that had a great impact on me was Hal Lindsey’s “There’s A New World Coming”, which is basically an easy-to-understand commentary on the Book of Revelation. It is STILL a great read because he interprets the Bible literally and explains it: it was written in the 70s and the timelessness of the Word of God shines through.

    Anyway, the ONE thing I couldn’t wrap my mind around was the fact that America is NOT in Bible prophecy. And I could simply not understand how the mightiest nation in the history of the entire world could somehow not be mentioned. I mean, you could understand that if the Bible were just the word of man written thousands of years ago. but obviously God – the God of the Bible who knows the end from the beginning – would know that there would be a United States of America in the last days.

    Well, God was right and I turned out to be wrong, I now understand.

    The United States is doomed. It WILL collapse. Not just because the Bible prophesied it 2,000 years ago, but because of our fiscal insanity.

    What is our true debt? It is very likely on the order of $250 TRILLION. Not the “paltry” $17.5 trillion you keep hearing about.

    In 2012, it was $222 trillion: http://www.realclearpolicy.com/blog/2012/12/01/economist_laurence_kotlikoff_us_222_trillion_in_debt_363.html

    It is growing by $11 trillion a year: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-08/blink-u-s-debt-just-grew-by-11-trillion.htm

    And you do the math, add your $22 trillion for these last two years, realize that the rate of debt is likely INCREASING RAPIDLY, and yeah, $250 trillion.

    How much longer can we paper over our bankruptcy before the collapse comes???

    The United States is about to crash into reality. And it will be a necessarily fatal crash.

    I believe I understand how it will happen: the US has been, since the end of WWII, the “reserve currency.” That means that all vital commodities such as oil are bought and sold in US dollars. Which is why most of the oil producing states have their currencies backed by the US dollar.

    Which, by the way, is why the “Arab Spring” happened as Obama’s reckless devaluation of the US dollar through his insane policies led to FOOD RIOTS as the currencies of these nations could not just “print more money” or add zeroes to their federal reserve computers the way the US as “reserve currency” could do.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/8492078/How-the-Fed-triggered-the-Arab-Spring-uprisings-in-two-easy-graphs.html

    Anyway, the next four largest economies – China, Russia, India and Brazil (the “BRICs) – have been openly calling for an end to the US dollar as the reserve currency do to our massive insane abuse of the power.

    The ONLY thing that has kept that from succeeding is America’s influence and prestige in the world.

    But guess what: we’ve pissed that away.

    Now it’s only a matter of time before “our chickens come home to roost,” as Obama’s “reverend” once put it. And we will collapse overnight when we have to be like other nations and can’t just print money without hyperinflation kicking in as it does in the nations that DON’T have “reserve currency” status.

    I believe that when that happens – when the United States catastrophically implodes ecomonically – there will be a global depression that will make the one in 1929 look like a walk on a sunny beach. It will get crazy as Jesus said in His prophecy, “Ethnos shall rise against ethnos” in Luke 21:10 (literally, “Race shall rise against race.” Nations shall rise up in competition for increasingly scarce resources and we will see war and famine and disease and death unlike any other period in human history. And it will only get worse thereafter.

    I believe the world will be in a position where it will HAVE to cut its losses with the US dollar in spite of the risk, and I believe that there are economists in these nations who will believe that they will be able to contain the damage or at least insulate their currencies from the havoc that will ensue. But it will swallow up the world.

    And out of that chaos, out of that violence, out of that fear, liberals will get what they’e always dreamed of: a one world big-government leader. The Antichrist. The Word of God sees him for what he will be: a beast.

    I’ve pointed it out in my articles discussing “Cloward and Piven.” The left – rightly, I believe – think that if they can just crash the US economy by overwhelming our welfare and social support systems, a frightened American people will call on the GOVERNMENT to step in. And they will have the communism, the totalitarian government control – they have always dreamed of.

    That will happen on a WORLD scale.

    And the terrorized world will see this Antichrist, this ultimate big-government leader, come riding in on his white horse (see Revelation chapter 5) and seemingly save the day with his policies – and they will WORSHIP him. And I’ve even seen that rabid, fanatic spirit of worship applied to Obama. Just as the same sort of people rabidly and fanatically worshiped Hitler and Stalin and now worship the Kims in North Korea. It’s just who they are.

    Right now, dogwalker, there is a war between those who in the name of “separation of church and state” want to destroy religon and any influence religion has over society and replace it with the State. They want to replace God with human government – the State – and they want to replace “the Church” with the bureaucrats who run the government. Such that the leader, the “Obama,” is “God” and the bureaucrats who carry out his policies are “the Church.”

    In the form of the Antichrist, they are going to get PRECISELY what they want. LITERALLY.

    The Bible predicts that Israel will be allowed to rebuild their Temple that was destroyed by the Romans 2,000 years ago. It will be part of a “peace deal” that the Antichrist will sign with Israel as recorded in Daniel chapter 9. It will seem as if the Antichrist has solved the Jewish-Muslim conflict. But of course it is a lie. And when the Temple is completed, at the midpoint of a seven year period the Bible calls “The Tribulation,” the Antichrist will go and sit in the holy of holies and declare himself God.

    And if you are unfortunate enough to still be on this earth at that time, you will see all hell come to earth in suffering unlike anything even DREAMED of.

    From this point the seven year “Tribulation” will devolve into the last three-and-a-half years that will be called “The Great Tribulation.” And it will culminate in the war of Armageddom.

    At Armageddon, all the major players of planet earth will gather in the Middle East for a final showdown. And God Himself – Jesus Christ as recorded in Revelation chapter 19 – will show up with a giant can of whoopass.

    The thing is that at this point, secular humanists are saying, “If we could only get rid of the Christians (i.e., the intolerant, bigoted, racist, moralist, right wing Christians), the world could enter a Utopia.

    Jesus will give them their chance in an event that will PRECEDE the Tribulation called “the Rapture.” Chronologically, it takes place in the Book of Revelation at the beginning of chapter 4. God will remove every true Christian believer from planet earth in what I now call “the Great Bailout” to protect His people from His wrath.

    And the secular humanist liberal progressive world will finally get their chance to see how their world without God and without His people will run things.

    And of course, when Jesus returns it will literally be to stop that secular humanist, liberal progressive world from destroying itself with nuclear weapons.

    What is most interesting about the left is that they can NEVER be wrong. It is a fanatic religious belief every bit as much as it is a political one. The $862 billion stimulus Obama assured us would work did NOT work only because Obama didn’t go far ENOUGH and make it far bigger, they assure us. The ObamaCare health care takeover is failing only because Obama should have socialized the entire medical system with a “single payer system.” They cannot be wrong. It is impossible. And in the same way, Obama himself – as much as he has completely failed – only failed because he didn’t have enough power over the whole world and can’t control your Russias and your Putins, etc. He couldn’t ruthlessly crush and exterminate the Republicans. Obama ONLY failed because he lacked the power they dream of in the form of the global leader, the Antichrist. They yearn to worship Government in place of God, but of course “Government” is so byzantine, so monstrous, so amorphous, so impersonal. They need a human face to worship when they worship their “God.” And that will culminate in Antichrist – who will be everything – EVERYTHING – the left dreams of.

    Anyway, you get the idea.

    That was predicted 2,000 years ago. And when you see all the things that the Bible said would happen before these last days culminate – such as the capability of a 200 million man army coming out of the east at a time when there weren’t anywhere near 200 million human beings on the whole planet earth; such as a coalition led by Russia and Iran consisting of nations that all have all become Islamic states attacking Israel – well, it starts seeming more and more likely. Particularly when you also read the newspapers.

    I can see it coming. At this point it’s not even “biblical” as much as it is logically inevitable.

  5. dog walker Says:

    I don’t see this happening. Maybe you could elaborate.

    “And of course, when Jesus returns it will literally be to stop that secular humanist, liberal progressive world from destroying itself with nuclear weapons.”

  6. Michael Eden Says:

    dog walker,

    I will answer your question by first asking one: you don’t see nuclear world war three happening?

  7. dog walker Says:

    I see it happening. You say Jesus’ return literally will stop that from happening?

  8. Ajax Lessome Says:

    Obama’s outreach to Iran smacks mostly of strategic desperation. It is what an Administration does when it realizes its policy has failed and the damage to U.S. interests is becoming too obvious to hide from the American public. His abdication on Syria created a mecca for jihadists and his total withdrawal from Iraq created a vacuum for regional sectarians and Iran to fill.

  9. Michael Eden Says:

    dog walker,

    YES.

    “Armageddon” is the term that even the most atheist, secular humanist progressive uses for the war that ends all wars by ending the human race and most life on earth. They understand that much.

    I think I see where I need to fill in the blanks now.

    In my previous long-winded reply, I described this global dictator, this ultimate big government leader, “Antichrist,” as taking over the whole world. But – as you can imagine it would be – the Bible describes it as a very tenuous hold. Antichrist will have a powerful stronghold in Europe – particularly over the region of the world dominated by the Roman Empire in its heyday. But as for the Middle East, as for The Far East (e.g. China and India), Antichrist will ultimately find his world begin to slip away as his policies fail and fail and then fail some more.

    I now understand that in many ways Antichrist really WILL be like Obama. He will be a word-magician. The book of Daniel is highly informative here: while the prophet Daniel is given the gift of wisdom by God to untangle mysteries and reveal the truth, Antichrist, Satan’s chief chess piece, will be given “wisdom” (the same word is used!) to so tie the truth up in knots that no man will be able to know the truth for a lie. Apart from God’s Spirit, every human being on earth will be deceived. BUT HIS POLICIES WON’T WORK.

    And so he will keep lying and lying and lying and finally as the world turns into – and I mean LITERALLY – hell on earth, regions of the world such as China will turn against him.

    You know how liberals say if we could unite as a planet we’ll have a Utopia? Guess what: they’re wrong.

    There are four “end-times wars” specifically described in the Bible. 1) the war of Psalm 83, in which the neighbors of Israel – now Muslim countries who rabidly hate Israel – will attack. This may have already been fulfilled in 1948, 1967, etc. The Bible told us who would fight and who would win: Israel. 2) The war of Gog-Magog as recorded in Ezekiel 38-39 in which God supernaturally defeats a Russian- and Iranian-led Muslim national force. 3) The war of Armageddon. And a FINAL war of God and Magog described in the book of Revelation which takes place AFTER the Tribulation, AFTER Jesus returns as King, and AFTER the thousand year Millennium in which Christ rules in Jerusalem to fulfill all of God’s promises to the Jews.

    In the Tribulation, it’s all going to come to a head – according to the Bible – at an enormous plain called Har-Megidon (or Armageddon) as found in Rev 16:16. It’s the Valley of Jezreel, running diagonally across Israel from Haifa to the Jordan River. Imagine: just the army of “the kings of the east” (led by China) will be 200,000,000 men. And that’s just one of the four combatants who will enter the war to end the human species.

    It’s amazing to read Ezekiel chapters 38 and 39 and then see that the nations referenced are ALL Islamic republics today. “Persia” Is modern Iran and Magog is Russia. And the Bible teaches that God will put a hook in the jaw of Russia and drag it into this war. The “hook” is probably oil.

    Anyway, take a look at Daniel 11:40 to see these “kings” mentioned. When you go through all the passages and trace the peoples, what we find is that “the king of the North” will be primarily Shiite Muslim peoples with the center being either Syria or Turkey, “the king of the South” will largely be Sunni Muslims and the center is Egypt. You also have a reference to “rumors from the North” in Daniel chapter 11 which would be a reconstituted Russian army defeated in the Gog-Magog War of Eze 38-39. As we know, Russia is primarily allied with Shiite Islam. This article describes that more fully: http://raptureready.com/featured/kelley/jack288.html

    When you see “south,” “east,” “north,” realize that it is from the perspective of JERUSALEM. That is God’s epicenter, His focal point.

    Jesus as “King of kings and Lord of lords” in Revelation 19 returns in His “Second Coming” right in the heart of the battlefield of Armageddon to save His people Israel and basically to save the world from certain nuclear annihilation.

    We’ve got several wars ahead of us. And we may very well see the LIMITED use of nuclear weapons in those wars. BUT Christ will return just short of too late to stop the all-out nuclear frenzy that would destroy all human life on earth in the final moments of the coming “Great Tribulation” as described in Revelation.

    And the thing is that the Bible laid out a template – literally as far back as 2700 years ago (in Ezekiel and Daniel). There’s a little bit of murkiness as we try to look at the people groups of those times in light of who they are today; BUT we have a fairly clear picture that most scholars who interpret the Bible literally agree on. I particularly like Joel Rosenberg on this stuff: http://www.joelrosenberg.com/ezekiel-38-39-faq/

    Liberalism tells us that the world would get better and better. The Bible has not only been proven right, but proven right down to the DETAILS.

  10. Michael Eden Says:

    Ajax Lessome,

    I completely agree. And you see a fundamental hypocrisy as well as a fundamental cowardice and a fundamental disregard for American national security.

    As for national security, understand that Iran is a bigger enemy to us than al Qaeda or ISIS. Iran was responsible for one out of every three casualties we suffered in Iraq.

    Consider: Obama is saying he doesn’t want to be the Shiite’s air force in a war against Sunnis. Well, that’s certainly a valid point: UNLESS YOU ASK SHIITE IRAN TO BE THE MUSCLE OF SHIITE IRAQ AGAINST THE SUNNIS AS OBAMA IS DOING. I mean, hell, if you’re going to invite Iran in, why the hell not be the Shiite air force, too???

    Which just points out that Obama is a weak man and a coward. After breaking Iraq by pulling out and leaving when a small force would have stabilized the country, he is now to weak and too useless to get involved. So he finds an excuse. And then violates the grounds of his excuse by inviting Iran to solve the problem for him AT THE COST OF AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY, AT THE COST OF AMERICAN PRESTIGE AND AT THE COST OF AMERICAN NATIONAL SECURITY.

  11. Anonymous Says:

    Relax Michael, Jesus! You’re gonna give yourself a heart attack from all the self-imposed fear you’ve created for yourself. Look, Obama’s a lot smarter than you, OK? That’s why he’s President of the United States and you’re the president of your bedroom. The world’s gonna be OK, even though Bush and Cheney created all this death and destruction originally by letting us get hit on their watch on 9/11 and then invading Iraq on lies and for no good or honest reasons. So relax, Obama’s just trying to mop up the mess the righties left behind. Sometimes that that takes a little longer than one would like. In the meantime, start voting Liberal and stop voting conservative, so that we don’t end up in messes like the ones you and your right-wing, war-mongering nuckleheads got us into in the first place.

  12. Michael Eden Says:

    Anonymous,

    I marvel at how you liberals literally refute yourselves in your own words.

    You say,

    Look, Obama’s a lot smarter than you, OK? That’s why he’s President of the United States and you’re the president of your bedroom

    Okay, so any man who is president is therefore “smart” and his decisions are therefore wise.

    But, oh, wait, being a liberal you are also therefore by definition a hypocrite and a liar. So therefore you contradict your own theory:

    The world’s gonna be OK, even though Bush and Cheney created all this death and destruction originally by letting us get hit on their watch on 9/11 and then invading Iraq on lies and for no good or honest reasons

    But, but, but, Bush was a lot smarter than you, OK? That’s why he was president of the United States and you were the president of your bedroom. The world was therefore OK. I mean, that is exactly the idiotic argument you just fed me. To be president you have to be very smart and therefore you can’t make horrible mistakes. Except as a fascist your “reason” only applies when you want it to; otherwise just turn it on its head so it means the exact opposite thing.

    Yeah. Logic is a pretzel for you moral idiots that you just keep twisting around until it arbitrarily connects to whatever end you want it to.

    Which is why trying to reason with you people is such a complete waste of time. You are blinded by the devil and unable to see any light of truth whatsoever.

    I know that you hate and despise God and mock His Word, but He offers quite a few words for fools like you:

    When people are saying, “Everything is peaceful and secure,” then disaster will fall on them as suddenly as a pregnant woman’s labor pains begin. And there will be no escape. — 1 Thessalonians 5:3, NLT

    Confirmed: ISIS Fighters Have Returned To The US From Syria And The FBI Are Looking For Them

    You blame Bush for your pathetic messiah’s disasters because you are a liar and your father is the father of lies. Bush WON the war in Iraq. Joe Biden took credit for that victory, saying Iraq was one of Obama’s “greatest achievements.” Barack Obama boasted that “he” had created a “sovereign, stable, and self-reliant” Iraq. It was OBAMA who pulled all of our troops out over the generals’ fierce objections and allowed Iraq to descend into a terrorist hell. Yes, you fool, they PREDICTED Obama’s stupid plan would end in the disaster that it surely has ended in.

    The President Bush you mock so warned us about exactly what would happen:

    “I know some in Washington would like us to start leaving Iraq now. To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we are ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region and for the United States. It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to al Qaeda. It would mean that we’d be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It would mean we’d allow the terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they lost in Afghanistan. It would mean increasing the probability that American troops would have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous.” — George W. Bush, 2007

    Now let’s turn to Syria and see how your “incredibly smart” president Obama ignored ALL of his generals and ALL of his handpicked advisors and overruled them with his superior intellect:

    That set me thinking about an incident that has been widely reported, but whose true significance might not have been fully appreciated. Last year, the entire US national security team came up with a unanimous recommendation. These people very rarely agree with one another, but they all told Obama that the time had come for America to arm the Syrian rebels. The degree of consensus was remarkable: Leon Panetta, then defence secretary, Hillary Clinton, then secretary of state, General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the joint chiefs, and General David Petraeus, then head of the CIA, all advised Obama to tip the balance of the war by sending weapons to carefully vetted units within Syria’s insurgency. And the President turned them down.

    Now we are in a hellhole in Syria. We can’t topple Bashar al-Assad any more. All the actual moderate rebels are largely dead or were forced to sign truces with ISIS/ISIL by now. And if we bomb the terrorists it will only strengthen Assad’s stranglehold as HIS “boots on the ground” seize the territory our bombs won him.

    Meanwhile, ISIS has TRIPLED IN SIZE because of Obama’s dithering and will soon triple in size again. And they say that they are coming back to hit us worse than before. And now they’re vastly better funded, vastly better trained and vastly more powerful than the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11.

    And now we’ve got this: “Confirmed: ISIS Fighters Have Returned To The US From Syria And The FBI Are Looking For Them

    Leon Panetta
    – probably because he’s a Clinton stooge trying to help Hillary in 2016 – stated flat out the very night you wrote that Barack Obama ignored damn near EVERYBODY’S advice to arm the rebels in Syria years ago when it would have made a difference. After being asked by 60 Minutes’ Pelley if not arming the moderate Syrian rebels was a mistake, Panetta maintained that “I think that would have helped. And I think in part we paid a price for not doing that in what we see happening with ISIS.”

    In other words, according to Obama’s own handpicked top intelligence official, we are now reaping what no one other than OBAMA sowed. It wasn’t Bush who allowed ISIS to first take root and then grow stronger and stronger and stronger while he mocked them as “jayvee.”

    But no worries for you: because you live with your head buried in the sand and most likely you just keep it firmly up your nastiest orifice – where ALL you sodomites keep your heads.

    Now, if that isn’t enough, we turn to the future to see what a pathological, lying, two-faced HYPOCRITE you truly are. Because for all your vitriol about how “Bush screwed up the world,” you don’t give a flying damn that Hillary Clinton – YOUR CHOICE FOR PRESIDENT IN 2016 – VOTED FOR HIM TO DO IT.

    When we got Saddam Hussein, Hillary Clinton tooted her horn that SHE voted for Bush to attack Iraq and go in there and get that bastard. She said:

    I was one who supported giving President Bush the authority, if necessary, to use force against Saddam Hussein. I believe that that was the right vote. I have had many disputes and disagreements with the administration over how that authority has been used, but I stand by the vote to provide the authority because I think it was a necessary step in order to maximize the outcome that did occur in the Security Council with the unanimous vote to send in inspectors.

    Hillary Clinton joined a long list of Democrats who voted for the Iraq War Resolution.

    But you’ll vote for her anyway, because you are without honor, without decency, without integrity, without honesty and without virtue of any kind.

    You just go on worshiping your false messiah and believing that everything is all right because you’re a hypocrite and deceiving yourself is what you do best. Soon you will be laughing as you gleefully take the mark of the beast and you’ll be just as insanely and stupidly smug about how wonderful things are at that time.

    Now get lost.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: