Was that Sarcasm?!

Submitted by Barry Black (United States), Aug 22, 2015 at 09:35

If it was meant to be sarcasm, it was lacking because sarcasm contains an element of humour and there is no humour in this agreement. It should be obvious to all serious students of the ME that Iran's strategy is not the immediate development of nuclear weapons (maybe defensive in the future), but rather the continuation of proxy wars to achieve their endgame, while providing an improved economy to the populace. Isreal has nothing to fear from a nuclear Iran, but much to be concern about a reinforced Hezbollah.

With additional funds, Iran can further support the Assad regime and allow it to raise it's own army to hold the rebels at bay, while regrouping Hezbollah for the next war with Israel. There are currently thousands of extended range missiles, furnished by Iran, aimed at the heart of Israel with most deployed within populated areas of southern Lebanon. The next war won't result in a bloody statemate, which Israel cannot afford, as was the case the last time. The next war will see missiles landing in Tel Aviv, with the resultant Israeli barrage causing the complete devastation of southern Lebanon and a blow to Hezbollah. It is possible Israel may have to reoccupy Southern Lebanon. The Iranian victory will come when Isreal is once again accused of war crime when hundreds, if not thousands of Lebanese civilians are killed.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".