"IS IT INTENTIONAL?"
Yes, I believe it is.
EvangelistMParker asked this in the title to her article about Obama caving in to Iran on nuclear talks.
She writes that in dealing with Iran Western leaders like Obama "were more or less obliged to act with force – or acquiesce in Iran’s “right” to enrich uranium. Acquiesce they did until finally provoked to impose sanctions. They worked. Iran came to the negotiating table but failed to meet a deadline and last November got a reward for its intransigence – a seven month extension. And what more could we do to show goodwill? We relax the sanctions that underlay negotiations, having unwisely rejected a congressional vote to tighten them in the face of obduracy. We also give the Iranian theocracy access to $7 billion hard currency they will be able to use for their criminal purposes. Why do that when sanctions were demoralizing the country? Relaxation was a godsend for Iran’s staggering economy. It was the one pressure we had to force Iran to give up its pursuit of nuclear weapons and we have given it away.
Obama, who has more than once pledged we would do “what we must” to stop them, is now repositioned to doing what we must to keep them talking while they continue with their nuclear effort.
Since Obama led the 5+1 negotiating countries to the recent agreement in Geneva, nobody is very sure even what the U.S. wants. The president ignored the region’s alarm, leading to the strange new relationship between Israel and the Saudi and Gulf governments who are all threatened by Iran’s growing military force. Why does Obama want a detente with Tehran that risks upending America’s entire stance in the Middle East? His apparent belief in Iranian bona fides is astonishing, for he must recognize that once the matrix of sanctions starts to unravel, it will be hard, maybe impossible, to get it reinstated.
The only thing the Geneva agreement accomplished is to provide Iran with another six months to perfect its nuclear weapons program. In effect the U.S. military option has been taken off the table, leaving the sole burden for eliminating Iran’s nuclear capability to Israel."
What does Israel do in this situation?
EvangelisMParker continues: "As for the smiling [Iranian] President Hassan Rouhani he was in a “peace parade” with missiles bearing the inscription “death to Israel.” And yet we allow the Iranians to develop a nuclear program that would render Iran invulnerable to having their push for regional domination rolled back. Why should anyone wonder why Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accepts an invitation from the speaker of the House?"
At the bottom of her article she says "This has ever bit of the betrayal of an Anti Christ that I can think of in modern day terms. Obama very well could be setting up the destruction plans of Israel right before our eyes…"
I agree this is intentional and may very well be Bible prophecy unfolding.
consider reading - Antichrist 2016-2019: Mystery Babylon, Barack Obama & the Islamic Caliphate
http://www.amazon.com/Antichrist-2016-2019-Mystery-Babylon-Caliphate/dp/1501025392