According to Leftist Propaganda Tool MSNBC, "Six world powers, including the United States and Russia, have reached a deal to seek a new U.N. resolution on Iran's nuclear program, European officials said Friday.
Does anyone REALLY think that Iran will fulfill the terms of said "deal?"
Of course the Left does. Furthermore, look at how faithful North Korea was regarding its "deal." The international community, in six-party talks, purportedly struck a deal with the rogue Kim Il Jung regime whereby his country would disband his nuclear weapons program.
"North Korea had agreed in February 2007 to begin dismantling its nuclear program in exchange for aid and other concessions.
Scientists began disabling its reactor in November, and in June blew up the Yongbyon cooling tower in a dramatic show of its commitment to the pact. Eight of the 11 steps needed to disable the reactor were completed by July, North Korean officials said."
Now they've "reversed course."
"North Korea barred U.N. nuclear inspectors from its main nuclear plant on Wednesday, and within a week, it plans to reactivate the plant that once provided the plutonium for the explosive test two years ago, a senior U.N. nuclear inspector said. The North ordered the removal of the U.N. seals and surveillance equipment from the Yongbyon reactor, a sign it is making good on threats to restart its nuclear program."
And now the international community believes rogue nation #2, that being Iran, will fulfill the terms of its deal?
Not bloody likely.
Here's the "teeth" of the deal: "The proposed new resolution is a compromise — no new sanctions but a tough statement to Iran that Security Council resolutions are legally binding and must be carried out."
I'm sure Iran is shaking in their boots. That will show 'em!!!
I had a conversation with quasi-radical liberal co-worker discussing the flashpoint topic of Iraq; I had queried said co-worker, pondering why it was okay for the Clinton Administration to insist to the world that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction while engaging in a low-intensity war with Iraq for eight years, but yet when George W. Bush ENFORCED the 14 resolutions that Saddam violated, he became a pariah.
Smugly, the aforementioned liberal stated that Clinton's "actions" were acceptable because he used the United Nations as a vehicle to halt Saddam's weapons program. Of course, as I replied, this is the same United Nations that engaged in the Oil-for-Food scandal, allowed Security Countil member countries (Russia, France, and Germany) to engage in clandestine business opportunities with Saddam, and hosts such purveyors of human rights, Saudia Arabia, Libya, etc. on its United Nations Human Rights council.
That's a bundle of credibility, if I do so say myself.
And now we really think the new "League of Nations" will actually enforce an Iranian weapons resolution?
Haven't we been down this road before?