ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Business and Employment»
  • Business Management & Leadership

Arms Behind Negotiations with the Iranian Adversary

Updated on April 8, 2014
Dropping the GBU
Dropping the GBU

Frederick the Great also stated that negotiating with the enemy without arms makes little impression on the outcome, Today, Putin is using the strategy as he lines up 50,000 combat troops along the Ukrainian border and negotiating with the West. Putin threatens to invade the area, a sovereign country since 1994, citing rebellion from within (although they are paid Russians instigating the rebellion!) and he must come to their aid.

In Syria, Assad has the weapons to punish the weakly armed rebels who will finally be getting America anti-tank TOW weapons. From day one of the negotiations, Assad negotiated from a state of power-he had Russia in his pocket, he had called Obama's bluff about tossing a few missiles when Assad used chemical weapons. Assad had Iranian troops helping, had Hezbollah helping him, and the West refused to flex any muscle at all out of the fear factor that it might get messy. Now, Turkey is assisting the rebels near the border providing them with artillery support and imposing a no-fly zone. with that, the rebels have now seized some of the coastal areas home to Assad. Even the deal Obama made with Syria about the chemical weapons has serious issues. Not all have been accounted for and what has, there is no place to remove the chemicals to. The countries considered have refused to allow it.

And then there is Iran and the nuclear weapon facade. Obama's one position of strength were the sanctions that brought Iran to the table. But, many of the severe ones have now been lifted in exchange to agree to continue negotiating? Negotiating that spins donuts in the dirt. Iran continues to deny inspectors at certain sites and have increased their centrifuge capability. Obama has been a fool, he is too much of a nice guy.

Israel is worried about the US foreign policy which has been failing left and right. But what The US should do is arm Israel. They have many 2000 and 5000 pound bunker busting bombs. However, they do not have the 30,000 GBU bomb, nor the capability to deliver it. It can detonate some 200 feet below the surface.

The US could provide several of the bombs and 10 B-52H bombers to delver them. The B-52H is the latest modernized version of this old 1950's bomber, over 740 were made. Instead of sending these aging aircraft to the graveyard, sell them to Israel on the condition they would not be used against Iran unless negotiations failed. Iran would get the message that Israel now has the power to do serious harm to the nuclear facilities and bolster Israeli confidence about American support there.

This move would reinforce Frederick's maxim of negotiating though strength, because as it is now, Iran is not serious and stalling.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • perrya profile image

      perrya 3 years ago

      I think he does but is an idealist.

    • lions44 profile image

      CJ Kelly 3 years ago from Auburn, WA

      I hope John Kerry reminds himself of this axiom everyday. He's been around the block a few times and should know better (and a combat vet). Idealistic diplomats "negotiating" usually spells trouble.