Do you wonder why it is that
the world sees America roll nonchalantly inside the pipe of a Jewish sewer?
Well, wonder no more because someone will now explain to you why this is happening.
He is Daniel DePetris who
wrote: “Shortsightedness of US foreign policy exposed with UN and Iran,” an
article that was published on August 21, 2020 in The Washington Examiner.
When you read the article, the
image of two patterns immediately come to mind; one that exists at the
microcosmic level, the other at the macrocosmic level. The remarkable thing
about these two, is that they show an uncanny resemblance between them. So,
let's begin by describing the two patterns.
Pattern number one: This is
the microcosmic pattern that Daniel DePetris did not bother discussing in the
current article. He is not discussing it because the pattern has been out there
for decades, and everyone that's interested in such matters, should be familiar
with it. Nevertheless, the pattern must be described here to better illustrate
the resemblance it has with the macrocosmic pattern that DePetris later
discusses in detail.
The first pattern has to do
with the repeated Israeli demand that the Palestinians must negotiate the end
of their country's occupation by offering something for when Israel will offer
package A. Believing they see honesty in such offer, the Palestinians offer
package B in exchange for the Jewish package A. But instead of going ahead with
the exchange, the Israelis who use America as leverage, take the Palestinian
offering of B, and never give A in return in defiance of the deal. On the
contrary, the Jews of Israel ask the Palestinians for something more if they
really want to see package A that should have been theirs by now.
Pattern number two: This is
the macrocosmic pattern, discussed in the Daniel DePetris article. It has to do
with the deal that America and 4 other world powers negotiated with Iran
concerning the Iranian nuclear program. Things went well as far as everyone was
concerned until a Jewish administration with a neocon head and two neocon
hands, moved into the White House and reshuffled the deck.
The first thing that the
neocons did was pull America out of the Iran nuclear deal, a move that was
reluctantly accepted by the world, but with trepidation, because of the
negative consequences that were feared will result, even if America had the
legal right to do so.
The trouble is that America
did not stop there. Wishing to repeat the pattern that the Jews of Israel
played when dealing with the Palestinians at the microcosmic level, the Jews of
America tried to play the same game with the Iranians and with the whole world
at the macrocosmic level. In effect, having pulled America out of the Iran
nuclear deal, which means they discarded America's responsibilities as well as
it rights under the terms of the deal, the Jews of America said: No, no, no.
Things don't work that way in Jewish logic. There is another way to deal with
such matters.
And so, in the same way that,
on a microcosmic level, the Israelis got all the rights while the Palestinians
got all the responsibilities, what must happen now at the macrocosmic level,
say the Jews of America, is that America should gain the advantages that accrue
to the act of reneging on the nuclear deal while maintaining the advantages
America used to have when it was in the deal. And so, the world including
America's closest friends, told it to go fly a kite.
This is what Daniel DePetris
calls shortsightedness of US foreign policy. And here is how he put it:
“Secretary of State Mike
Pompeo made it official, outlining why the United States was invoking the
sanctions snapback provision in the Iran nuclear deal. The US is claiming to
remain a party to the deal after it publicly withdrew from it in 2018. The
administration's legal rationale reveals its shortsightedness: If they wanted
to invoke snapback sanctions, they shouldn't have left the deal”.
This kind of behavior is
indicative of a neoconish character that is primitive, savage and cowardly. It
is slowly being absorbed by America, thoroughly digested by its personnel, and
openly displayed by them when operating on the world stage. In addition, the
behavior represents a grave danger to the world as observed by DePetris who
wrote: “Germany, France and the UK, three allies of the US, dismissed
Washington's attempt as a danger to the entire UN system”.
This kind of situation might
have been palatable to some people if America were seen to be in the driver's
seat and leading the world––through savage times but––to an ultimate nirvana
that will make it all worth it when we get there. But that's not the case here,
because the world now sees America the way that DePetris aptly describes it,
which is the following:
“More concerning than
Washington's arguments, is the policy on Iran. Every industry has been
sanctioned, meaning that a country transacting with Iran in those industries
will be shut out of the US financial system. The architects of the campaign
promised that this would compel Tehran to give away the store in a new
negotiation. None of that has gone according to plan. Moving Iran's foreign
policy in a different direction has been a failure of immeasurable proportions.
The story is that the US is willing to degrade its standing at the Security
Council, make a mockery of US diplomacy, and spend much political capital to
engage in a staring contest with a mid-tier power”.