Connect with us

World

Iran Nuclear deal, Good or Bad for The United States?

Alex Louk

Published

on

Ever since the Obama Administration has made this deal with Iran I have tried to figure out exactly how they believe this was a good deal. First let’s talk about the facts of the entire deal before jumping into what the impact of this deal means for The United States. The Obama administration’s main goal was to prevent Iran from being nuclear capable sooner rather than later. Also another major part of this deal was to limit the amount of centrifuges that Iran could have. According to the White House’s official press release Iran has over 20,000 at this time. With this deal it reduces the amount of centrifuges they can have down to 6,104. Also what we know from this deal is for the next 15 years Iran will not be able to enrich uranium past 3.67%. In year 16 Iran will be able to enrich uranium past 3.67% which could allow them to start mass producing uranium for nuclear weapons. keeping with the Obama administration’s goals it seems they have achieved them in the short term.

The next aspect of the deal was we would be allowed to send United nations officials and our own officials in too inspect their nuclear sites. However Iran has a 24 day inspection delay which means we have to notify them 24 days in advance before we can go in and investigate their nuclear sites. Now since I’ve started researching the facts behind this deal this has been the one thing that I believe the liberal media has tried too slide under the rug. This part of the deal has been hidden because I have searched multiple different places and they barely mention it all. The white house’s original response to this deal gives you some insight to the 24 day waiting period but in my opinion just gives excuses to why they are giving Iran 24 days notice before inspecting.

The last part of this deal is the strict economic sanctions on Iran would be lifted if they comply with cutting back on their stock pile of uranium and also not mass producing it. As of right now the United States and European countries have strict sanctions on Iran’s ability to grow their economy. The strict sanctions right now prevent them from exporting the mass amounts of oil and natural gas they have in their country. The good news is if Iran breaks any part of the deal all sanctions will be snapped right back on. When these sanctions are lifted however this will allow Iran to export these resources which in turn would bring billions of dollars of economic growth to their country. This would grow Iran’s economy to twice possibly even three times the size it is right now and the question now becomes what would Iran do with all this new income?

Now we all know that Iran is probably the number one sponsor of terrorism in the world which would make me raise the question of why are we making any deals with them at all? As I stated earlier lifting these sanctions are going to allow Iran’s economy to boom and then the question becomes what will they do with this new money? I understand that this deal should prevent Iran from being able to mass produce uranium but you combine the waiting time that inspectors have too give them. Then you also combine the billions of dollars Iran’s economy will be getting, this could potentially make it easier for Iran to create nuclear weapons instead of prevent it. In a perfect world Iran would agree to this deal and we wouldn’t have any issues right? Well, it’s still early to tell but Iran has a very long track record of not exactly following deals they have made with other countries. So I’m sorry when I say don’t exactly trust Iran in following the things they have agreed too in this deal.

As of right now this deal still has to go through congress and be approve but it appears it is going to get pushed through despite republican opposition. Today John Kerry and other Obama administration officials went before the senate committee of armed services to speak in favor of the deal. With a lot of republicans worried this could be a deal similar to that of the deal they made with North Korea in the 90’s under the Clinton presidency. In hopes of not allowing them to be nuclear capable now, they didn’t take into account long term and now there is a nuclear capable North Korea because of that. We will see in the coming weeks how this deal will pan out in congress but for right now please leave a comment and let us here at Cowgernation know what you think about the deal.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
3 Comments

3 Comments

  1. James

    July 31, 2015 9:11 pm at 9:11 pm

    Clearly, Caiden’s newest columnist is his classmate in Remedial English. Could we chip in and buy the guy a bag of commas? Or maybe he’s hoarding them. Not to mention “too” for “to”, “aloud” for “allowed”. What’s the indigenous language in West Virginia?

  2. Wedding Organizers

    February 12, 2018 4:13 am at 4:13 am

    147079 898187so considerably good data on here, : D. 14585

  3. amazon guaranteed roi consultant

    February 15, 2018 8:05 pm at 8:05 pm

    659961 359063Yay google is my king helped me to locate this outstanding web site! . 952218

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

World

Muslim inbreeding dragging Britain back to the 19th century

Bryan Fischer

Published

on

Britain is seeing an alarming spike in birth defects, defects they have not seen since the end of the 19th century. There is a one-word explanation: Islam.

The resurgence of these birth defects is due to the prevalence of first cousin marriages in the Muslim community, particularly among immigrants from Pakistan. Such marriages are legal in Britain, to be sure, but by the late 1800s the risk of birth defects in the children of such unions had become so common and so widely known that the practice virtually vanished. (First cousin marriages, which are not specifically banned in Scripture, are illegal in about half the states in the U.S., which is the only country in which such marriages are prohibited anywhere.)

An article in the London Telegraph (which doesn’t use the word “Islam” anywhere in the article, and waits til the 12th paragraph to mention the word “Pakistani”) opens this way (emphasis mine):

Bradford coroner Mark Hinchliffe spoke out after being told how two-year-old Hamza Rehman died as a result of a brain disorder.

An inquest heard how the child suffered from daily fits and vomiting as a result of a condition probably arising from his parents being too closely related.

The boy’s father, Abdul, broke down and wept as the court heard that if he had lived he would have suffered severe learning difficulties.

Through a translator, Mr Rehman, from Bradford, West Yorks, explained that he and his wife, Rozina, were first cousins.

“We were very anxious whether to have more children,” he told the court. “We have recently had another baby with the same problems again.”

After expressing his “profound sympathy to the family” Mr Hinchliffe said the cause of death “arose as a direct consequence of the neurological developmental disorder.”

He said the family had lost another child through a similar disorder and a third child born had now “presented with difficulties.”

Recording a verdict of death by natural causes, Mr Hinchliffe added: “On the face of it this case highlights a cultural and religious issue relating to first cousin marriages and the potential risk of medical difficulty that some medical experts say can result from such unions.”

Pakistani parents in Britain are responsible for 3.4% of all births in England, yet shockingly account for 30% of all children born with recessive gene disorders. This is because the acceptability of first-cousin marriages is engrained in Muslim culture. In Bradford, 55% of all Pakistanis are married to their first cousins.

Even though Pakistanis represent just 15% of Bradford’s population, Bradford has the second highest number of infant deaths in England, and Pakistani parents are 13 times more likely than the general  population to have children with birth disorders. (This according to a study by St. Luke’s Hospital in Bradford.)

According to The Guardian, intermarriage between first cousins doubles the risk that children will be born with birth defects. The difficulty of purging this harmful practice will be especially difficult because it is an established religious as well as cultural practice in the Muslim community.

In Norway, the incidence of first-cousin Pakistani unions is slowly declining, but this is due only to a concerted campaign to inform Muslims of the risk.

There are no quick fixes, which means the U.K. will continue to labor under this burden for decades to come. With Britain’s socialized medicine, the excessive costs of providing lifetime care for patients with birth defects will fall entirely on British taxpayers. And this doesn’t account for the enormous social costs associated with providing education and employment opportunities for this demographic group.

In the worldwide Muslim community, first-cousin marriage rates routinely run as high as 50%, while the rate is about 1% in Europe and 0.2% in the U.S. With unrestrained Muslim immigration the trend du jour, Europe is about to be hit with a medical tsunami which would be entirely avoidable with sensible immigration policies. Alas, the Western world is likely to awaken only after it is too late.

Winston Churchill presciently said 120 years ago, “[T]he influence of the religion (i.e., Islam) paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.” (Emphasis mine.)

Islam is pulling British society in a backwards direction. Apart from a spirited revival of the Christian faith and some severe, Donald-Trump style restrictions on Muslim immigration, the United States will be next.

Continue Reading

World

THE UNITED STATES OFFICIALLY RECOGNIZES JERUSALEM AS ISRAEL’S CAPITAL

George Lujack

Published

on

On Wednesday, December 06, 2017, President Donald Trump declared that the United States officially recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. President Trump also indicated that the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv would be moved to Jerusalem.

Israel had declared Jerusalem as its capital since its founding in 1948. Previous U.S. presidents have remained neutral on recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, to appease Israel’s Arab neighbors, but Trump declared that every sovereign nation has the right to declare the location of its own capital.

 

There are a few notable observations of Scripture prophetic significance concerning the historic announcement by President Trump recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital

2017 represents a jubilee (50-year) time period since Israel’s Six Day War of 1967, and before that another jubilee (50-year) time period since the Balfour Declaration of 1917 by the British government announcing support for a homeland for the Jewish people in the land of Israel.

President Trump’s Jerusalem announcement on December 6th was declared just six days before Hanukkah, the 12-day Feast of Dedication (John 10:22), which begins December 12th.

The United States’ official recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital brings Israel one political step closer to fulfilling the rebuilding of their Third Temple, on the Temple Mount site, where the Dome on the Rock and Al Aqsa Mosques currently sit. In the decades to come these mosques will come down and be relocated by Muslims. Israel’s Third Temple will be erected on its Temple Mount site and Scripture prophecy will be fulfilled, as it is written (2 Thessalonians 2:4; Revelation 11:1).

Israel’s Temple Mount site, where the Dome of the Rock Mosque (gold dome), the Al Aqsa Mosque (silver dome), and other minor Muslim shrines currently sit.

 

The Temple Institute of Jerusalem has the plans and resources already in place to construct Israel’s Third Temple. This golden menorah, encased in security glass near the Temple Mount site, will be placed inside the Temple after it is rebuilt.

 

Continue Reading

World

TRUMP TO UN ON NORTH KOREA: We will “totally destroy” them if they attack us or our allies.

Caiden Cowger

Published

on

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump addressed the United Nation, discussing one of the most recent conflicts pertaining to U.S. national security. President Trump discussed the North Korea nuclearization situation, and threatened to “totally destroy” them if the United States is forced to defend itself or its allies.

“The United States has great strength and patience,” Trump continued, “but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea.”

He also told the assembly that the country is operated by a “depraved regime.”

The President called upon other nations to work together, striving to cease doing business with and isolate the country, until it decides to discontinue its nuclear program and aggressive threats.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Most Popular