The quote above was spoken by retired Army General Michael Flynn; this reported by a Reuters story.
According to a report replaced by Washington think tank, the Institute for Science and International Security, the Obama administration and other European governments acted in secret to let Iran keep more of its enriched uranium so that sanctions could be lifted on time. The Obama administration (of course) denies this.
Specifically the report says,
“Among the exemptions outlined in the think tank’s report were two that allowed Iran to exceed the deal’s limits on how much low-enriched uranium (LEU) it can keep in its nuclear facilities, the report said. LEU can be purified into highly enriched, weapons-grade uranium.”
The Reuters article also states,
“It’s now clear President Obama gave away the store to secure a weak agreement that is full of loopholes.”
If the nuclear deal was bad before, how much worse might it truly be? One of Iran’s touted pathways to the bomb that was “blocked” was limiting the amount of uranium and heavy water at its nuclear facilities.
Design from Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).
The article goes on to say that one senior US government official said that if the governments had not acted in secret, “Some of Iran’s nuclear facilities would not have been in compliance with the deal by Jan. 16, the deadline for the beginning of the lifting of sanctions.” So what if Iran doesn’t have its sanctions lifted “on time”?
This touches on, I believe, a major enabler for Iran to run out and invade the Middle East just like Daniel 8:3-4 says. Just as China and Russia will allow it because it benefits them, so too the West will allow it. Western leaders, especially the leader of the free world, have this delusional view of reality in their heads and so will orchestrate events commensurate with those erroneous views. Those who are to be destroyed really are made mad first.
The Second Signpost is likely coming. Get ready. Read about it. Prepare.
Categories: In The News, Signpost #2: Iran
THE FOUR SIGNPOSTS 
I know instinctively that you are right, Mark. I was watching retired General Jack Keane the other day, a military analyst, commentating on the nuclear deal with Iran and how deeply critical he was about the naiveté the US administration was regarding Iran’s good faith in abiding within the terms of this agreement. The last question the tv anchor asked him is how long Kean thought Iran had before Iran reached its goals. Keane said they likely could reach their goals within two years.
Two years? Personally, what we don’t know is even more concerning and it is possible it will be well before Kean’s estimation.
It is all a matter of when not if with praying and watching. There is nothing more we or I can do other than that I’ve warned my church’s pastoral leadership to be ready. Praying they are.
“Daniel Revisited” will be vindicated to those you have tried getting their attention by understanding the times. *Shaking my head*
Blessings!
As a photographer chooses different lenses and angles of perspective to capture a particular scene, I often use the lens of economic motivation to help me understand or frame events in the middle east. Because political power and economic wealth are always related, it’s interesting to attempt to ‘follow the money’ in observing the events regarding Iran. One question which we forget to ask sometimes is: ‘What is money? to a particular nation’. How is their political-economic power derived in terms of monetary currency? Many political power structures hedge their bets with investing in more than one type of currency. But the US$ continues to be the so-called ‘reserve’ currency of choice– and western political powers, especially in the US, intend to keep it that way. It appears to me the rather recent and apparently hurried lifting of sanctions against Iran (also the 400 million recently paid Iran) are a couple of big hints that the current US admin is intent on keeping the US$ as valuable as possible on the world stage– because that’s one key way power is being wielded in the mid-east. Russian and China, wishing to elevate their own political power in the region would therefore need to see a diminished role for the US$. When mid-east nations begin to use alternative currencies as the basis of trading commodities and implements of war, their political power is increased. My point is that US foreign policy will allow-if-not-secretly-smile-at a US$-supported war machine prospering in Iran, if they believe doing so will help maintain the role of the petro-dollar now prevalent in mid-east trade… and thereby inhibit trade between Russia, Turkey, Syria, China, etc. which could theoretically not need the US$ to do business. As I said, this is not the whole picture– but just one more angle from which the developments in the mid-east can be viewed. I believe this view further supports the case being made for the 2nd Signpost.
Okay, “Daniel”. But Iran is NOT to be trusted but for the gullibility of the current US administration in handling the Iran nuclear deal and their baseless motives in providing a “slush fund” to Iran. Why? Because I don’t see economic power as the primary motive to Iran, necessarily, though it might be a convenient by-product. Ever since the Iranian revolution in 1979, the Iranian regime has sought to somehow become the dominant regional power in the mid-east to spread their brand of Islam to the great neighbor-nations AND I also believe personally, to cripple the west economically so they would not retaliate against them when Iran in surprise, invades. The Iranian invasion is two-fold as I view it and according to the Prophet Daniel, they will succeed beyond their wildest dreams!
How will the role of the USD be greatly devalued and America will be crippled? The mid-east oil supply, the life blood of the west, particularly, America. When Iran captures the oil fields they will cease to use the USD as the rate of exchange for mid-east oil and perhaps use their own currency or that of their ally, Russia. Exactly which currency Iran chooses is yet to be determined, of course. But it will not be the USD, I assure you.
Just my opinion. God will sort it out when all of it happens, of course.
Blessings!
u haven’t proven the first “signpost” transpired…….
Kesme,
Did you read chapter 9 of Daniel Revisited? It makes the argument for the first horseman of Rev 6 and the first beast of Dan 7 being fulfilled by both Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Every word and phrase of those prophetic verses are compared in detail to the events in Iraq since Saddam came to power in 1979.
Breaking ::: Google this and read the NEWS section —>>> Iranians are not muslims <<<—
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/millions-attend-hajj-in-saudi-arabia-just-not-the-iranians/
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-37287434
https://newrepublic.com/minutes/127214/iranians-no-longer-allowed-make-pilgrimage-mecca
Sorry for posting this here – you need to make a new post about this subject – big trouble brewing now….
Good4u1,
“…Iran is not to be trusted…” –I agree.
“…the gullibility of the US Admin…” –I’m more interested in what’s motivating the US Admin than in whether they’re gullible (which they certainly seem to be in major respects). There’s a verse in the book of Rev which indicates God has power to put it in the hearts (or minds or motives) of certain rulers to act as they do, which ultimately is worked by Him to accomplish His will and exalt His kingdom (Rev 17.17). Their motives often seem irrational and baseless to us, especially since we are Americans who don’t see benefit from them. But their madness– or whatever we may label it– is unsurprising to the Almighty. Prov 21.30> There is no wisdom, no insight, no plan that can succeed against the LORD.
“…don’t see economic power as the primary motive to Iran…” –I see economic ‘power’ as a vehicle or means to an end for the politically powerful– and not ultimately an end in itself. But they do need an economic vehicle to empower themselves at least in the short run. Islam itself politically empowers a relatively small elite class or rulers. They certainly believe in it strongly– whether as belief system presumed to be true– or as a vehicle for power, or both. The offspring of Ishmael is prophetically predisposed to be in perpetual disagreement within themselves– which is very apparent in the never ending strife we see between factions within the Mid-East. This certainly strengthens the case for Iran to go ballistic at some point.
Iran may be motivated toward domination of other nations through a particular ‘brand of Islam’. I don’t suppose that alone would push them into a regional war; but it certainly is a big factor. it seems likely– at some point in the biblical fulfillment of prophecy– that a type of antichrist will be capable of persuading several nations to follow his own brand– and maybe even change the brand after achieving power.
The strengthening of the US$ relative to other currencies is typically bad for the US economy in terms of overseas trade and mercantilism. Relative economic values are an interesting topic. The US has lots of it’s own crude oil in the ground (a huge new field was just discovered in Texas). But it remains to be seen how the ‘price’ of gasoline, etc. will be effected longer term by a regional Mid-east war. There are so many variables in economics. But we can at least prepare by taking practical measures in terms of food supply.
Steve,
I saw those stories – they’re much like what happened in this post a year ago. When things repeat, sometimes I sit for a little bit to see if anything else happens. It just did with Zarif.
Daniel,
Well your asking me to tell you the unknowable i.e., the true motivation of the Obama Administration’s policy of non-engagement in muslim nations. Of course, God is behind the scenes working out his purpose within the Mideast and that is a given. We are in the process of it, I presume and America’s decline global influence among the nations is just accelerated by his utterly weak leadership.
Blessings!
What is the true motivation of the Obama administration?
The answer might be in the following two links:
http://www.wnd.com/2014/08/cia-expert-obama-osama-share-mideast-goal/
http://www.wnd.com/2014/08/cia-expert-obama-switchedsides-in-war-on-terror/
These links are now two years old, but when I read them for the first time yesterday I thought they were recent – so much of them has come true and worse these two years. They are still to-the-point.
My summary & interpretation:
There are two factors involved in how the Obama administration acts, the second has made the first possible:
1. Policy: Give Islam back the power over the Muslim world. After all, Islam is at the root a religion of peace. Ultimately they will sort things out, if only we withdraw all our troops out of the Muslim world
a. Take the Sunni and the Shia worlds equally serious.
b. Give each of them the amount of support (or lack of it) to make them a match for each other
c. Leave/Give to the Shia the power over Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, allow them to be armed by Russia and allow them to become a nuclear power.
d. Leave/Give to the (much larger) Sunni the power over the Arabic peninsula and North-Africa, and do not help them too much against Iran. Through Pakistan, the Sunni world already is a nuclear power.
Perhaps the “rationale” for this is:
– Hope that both branches of Islam will keep each other in check in a balance of power
– Hope that jihadists will leave the US alone when the US no longer “provokes” them in their homelands
– Hope that the influence of Saudi Arabia on American politics will also be mitigated by growing Iranian influence
– Even those in the administration that have little love for Islam might support all this in the hope that both branches will destroy or severely weaken each other (a very cynical hope.)
2. Growing Sunni influence/power on several US administrations: The Muslim Brotherhood has after long, slow and thorough infiltration got so much influence in the US that US administrations have become more and more convinced at heart that Islam is at its root a religion of peace. And that only the the presence of the American Military (and Israel?) in the Muslim world is the fuel for “extremism” and terrorism.
The policy they made possible partially backfires on the Muslim Brotherhood too: They do not like it at all that Sunni’s fall under the yoke of Iran. Probably they are not glad with the Russian and Chinese support for Iran either.
All of this meddling fits very well to the signpost perspective:
1. Iran at a certain point feels strong enough to conquer a great part of the Middle East, with support of Russia and China
2. The Sunni world will strike back, probably with support of the US (NATO, Europe) after pressure from the enraged Muslim Brotherhood.
That is a great summation and very likely how many US administrations view Islam to the determent of the country. Well stated, Adamant.
Blessings!