US: GOP tries to undercut nuclear deal with warning to Iran

[Ulysses G.]

So basically you support nukes for Iran.

Yes I do

Then the lawless president is your man, but the American people do not agree with you.

65 percent say use force to stop Iran, 84 percent call possible deal 'bad idea'

Americans fear disaster if Iran gets nuclear weapons -- and support military force to stop it.

According to a new poll, voters feel:

- It would be “a disaster” if Iran obtains the capability to use nuclear weapons.

- The U.S. has not been aggressive enough in stopping Iran from getting nukes.

- U.S. military action is the right thing to do to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.

- A deal that just delays Iran’s nuclear time-table is a bad idea

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/04/fox-news-poll-65-percent-say-use-force-to-stop-iran-84-percent-call-possible/

Edited March 10, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[up-country_sinclair]

the Republican Congressmen. They are nuts!!! I think their actions border on Treason.

In my youth (and even middle age), this type of action by an allegedly loyal opposition would have been unthinkable. And the fact that the establishment of the party appears to have signed off on this is genuinely troubling.

From a purely domestic political standpoint, in my opinion this is a clear example of overreach, and McConnell and Republican senators up for re-election in blue states will likely regret it. In fact, they're probably already regretting it due to the fact that they'll never get the votes to override a veto.

By the way, it's clear Israel's fingerprints are all over this.

Edited March 10, 2015 by up-country_sinclair

[mania]

So basically you support nukes for Iran.

Yes I do

Then the lawless president is your man, but the American people do not agree with you.

Well that is odd as I am a American? So are all my family & friends yet they all think the same as me

meh..........That is why I never post links to some BS poll....We can always find one that agrees with us if we look

That aside we all have opinions & polls never include all of us

[phrodan]

So basically you support nukes for Iran.

Yes I do

Then the lawless president is your man, but the American people do not agree with you.

Well that is odd as I am a American? So are all my family & friends yet they all think the same as me

meh..........That is why I never post links to some BS poll....We can always find one that agrees with us if we look

That aside we all have opinions & polls never include all of us

The UK labour party had a major problem with a division called Militant Tendency. These people were left-wing, communists, a rag bag. But they knew how to play the local party system and they had a firm grip on some major cities in the UK, such as Liverpool.

Militant Tendency made Labour unelectable.

I regard the Tea Party as the Republican's equivalent.

Yes, they are noisy. Yes, they can pull funding rabbits out of the hat. Yes, they know how to win local campaigns.

The downside is, they alienate the floating voters. If the Democrats win the next Pres election, I'd put the blame firmly on the Tea Party.

They are making their own party unelectable.

[sdanielmcev]

We have deployable weapons that can penetrate 50 feet of cement . If you walk among terrine, don't be afraid to swing the bat. Kick ass and take Names. Strike when their weak not when they build up Nukes to us against us!

^^ If it weren't so serious it would be laughable.

15 years ago Bush was getting ready to come into the White House - why did he not prevent NK from building nukes?

Answer -

Because he couldn't.

Just the same way as no President will prevent Iran from building nukes.

Wake up.

Okay - so its war again.

Its been a while since that worked out well for the US, hasn't it?

US ain't been defeated yet. The peace...ah,well.

[sdanielmcev]

So basically you support nukes for Iran.

Yes I do

Then the lawless president is your man, but the American people do not agree with you.

Well that is odd as I am a American? So are all my family & friends yet they all think the same as me

meh..........That is why I never post links to some BS poll....We can always find one that agrees with us if we look

That aside we all have opinions & polls never include all of us

The UK labour party had a major problem with a division called Militant Tendency. These people were left-wing, communists, a rag bag. But they knew how to play the local party system and they had a firm grip on some major cities in the UK, such as Liverpool.

Militant Tendency made Labour unelectable.

I regard the Tea Party as the Republican's equivalent.

Yes, they are noisy. Yes, they can pull funding rabbits out of the hat. Yes, they know how to win local campaigns.

The downside is, they alienate the floating voters. If the Democrats win the next Pres election, I'd put the blame firmly on the Tea Party.

They are making their own party unelectable.

That would depend on what media you ascribe to.

[Chicog]

It's good to give a clear shot across the bows to Obama as well as the Iranian regime. I think it's worth remembering the Iranian embassy hostages were released the day Carter left office, I suspect any centrifuges left spinning would be stopped the day Obama leaves too.

Yes, they were released because Reagan did a dirty deal with the Iranians to undermine Carter.

I wouldn't be crowing about that if I were you.

[RKASA]

No need to remind Iran that a treaty over nukes must be voted on in the Senate - they know that better then Obama does in spite of the fact he is proclaimed to be a constitutional lawyer. Iran also knows they will never really make a treaty or a deal that they would keep anyway - they want King Obama to think he can call it a deal and pretend he can sign it himself - seems three branches of government is just to much for him to get his head around.

Obama does not care he is just pushing everything to the limit - it is his plan just to cause political trouble and motivate the base which on his side is made up mostly of entitlement morons that buy into anything he says and really don't care themselves to much about the rule of law ether as long as they get what they want which is mostly other peoples money.

Iran does not want a deal or a treaty - they want nukes - they are buying time just like the the issue of the size and shape of the table in Paris circa 70's. If Obama really thinks he has anything in the works with Iran - well lets just say if he does, then I would have to say he is dumber then even I thought he is - I am vary sure Kerry does think so, but then all that botox is probable gone to his brain.

[Chicog]

U.S. Senate reiterates that there are laws in the United States some of which Obama must obey. Putting him on a leash is not a bad idea. prior to him giving away the store

The leash needs to be on the animals of the Republican Congressmen. They are nuts!!! I think their actions border on Treason. What a bunch of racist!!

The amusing bit is that by trying to stir it up with the Iranian Hardliners to screw up the negotiations, Tom Cotton, the freshman author of this piece of tripe, has earned himself the nickname "Tehran Tom".

[RKASA]

It's good to give a clear shot across the bows to Obama as well as the Iranian regime. I think it's worth remembering the Iranian embassy hostages were released the day Carter left office, I suspect any centrifuges left spinning would be stopped the day Obama leaves too.

Yes, they were released because Reagan did a dirty deal with the Iranians to undermine Carter.

I wouldn't be crowing about that if I were you.

Carter didn't need any help with that he was the best thing the Rep had going for themselves. The biggest deal Reagen made with Iran was to not blow them up if they let the hostages go.

[baboon]

^^ If it weren't so serious it would be laughable.

15 years ago Bush was getting ready to come into the White House - why did he not prevent NK from building nukes?

Answer -

Because he couldn't.

Just the same way as no President will prevent Iran from building nukes.

Wake up.

I think you will find the 1994 Agreed Framework was doing just that until being ripped up by Bush administration hawks.

[phrodan]

^^ If it weren't so serious it would be laughable.

15 years ago Bush was getting ready to come into the White House - why did he not prevent NK from building nukes?

Answer -

Because he couldn't.

Just the same way as no President will prevent Iran from building nukes.

Wake up.

I think you will find the 1994 Agreed Framework was doing just that until being ripped up by Bush administration hawks.

Well, there you go. At least this time they are giving advance notice they have no intention of abiding by any agreement.

[snarky66]

So I guess to liberal buffoons nuclear weapons are not WMD.

[tw25rw]

From the OP:

Republican lawmakers warned the leaders of Iran on Monday that any nuclear deal they cut with President Barack Obama could expire the day he leaves office.

I think the leaders of Iran would like that....they would probably be highly motivated about that.

However and to the contrary, I'd expect the ayatollahs might know more about American government and politics than the Republicans in the Senate give 'em credit for, because they seem to be planning and preparing for a woman in the White House who this time will be the commander in chief.

President Ballbricker.

I expect a number of the Iranian delegation studied the US political system as part of their university education and some of them might have studied in the US. To send them a letter explaining how the system works is like sending them an alphabet primer. They're just clowns making fools of themselves and undermining their own electoral hopes and the president, who is their president whether they like it or not.

[jdinasia]

U.S. Senate reiterates that there are laws in the United States some of which Obama must obey. Putting him on a leash is not a bad idea. prior to him giving away the store

Next story may well be "Special Prosecutor to investigate senators for violation of the Logan Act"

[up-country_sinclair]

24 Republican Senators are up for re-election in 2016, and at least 8 are very vulnerable. It doesn't take great deal of imagination to foresee the 30 second attack ads from Democrats: A photoshopped image with the faces of one of these Republican Senators and Khameni. Persian music in the background as a solemn voice over begins: "Why did Senator xxxx xxxxx sign a letter which offered advice to Iran". Shouldn't OUR Senator be thinking about US?

Sure they can try to explain it, but the damage will have already been done.

Edited March 10, 2015 by up-country_sinclair

[Pinot]

So basically you support nukes for Iran.

Yes I do

Then the lawless president is your man, but the American people do not agree with you.

65 percent say use force to stop Iran, 84 percent call possible deal 'bad idea'

Americans fear disaster if Iran gets nuclear weapons -- and support military force to stop it.

According to a new poll, voters feel:

- It would be “a disaster” if Iran obtains the capability to use nuclear weapons.

- The U.S. has not been aggressive enough in stopping Iran from getting nukes.

- U.S. military action is the right thing to do to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.

- A deal that just delays Iran’s nuclear time-table is a bad idea

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/04/fox-news-poll-65-percent-say-use-force-to-stop-iran-84-percent-call-possible/

Wait...a link to Fox News?

The GOP is doing an incredible job so far with the new congressional majority. Not happy with just trying to create economic havoc at home, they've gone International. This is an unprecedented, stunningly traitorous move. Sheldon Adelson and the Koch boys are sharing ownership of the Republican party and it's really paying off. The clown bus is completely out of control, and...oh no, here come the clift!

46 Senators signed this ridiculous POS. I can't wait to see what happens next. What a bunch of tools.

[jdinasia]

Trending now on Twitter

#47Traitors and #LoganAct

[NeverSure]

24 Republican Senators are up for re-election in 2016, and at least 8 are very vulnerable. It doesn't take great deal of imagination to foresee the 30 second attack ads from Democrats: A photoshopped image with the faces of one of these Republican Senators and Khameni. Persian music in the background as a solemn voice over begins: "Why did Senator xxxx xxxxx sign a letter which offered advice to Iran". Shouldn't OUR Senator be thinking about US?

Sure they can try to explain it, but the damage will have already been done.

Bomb

BY CARRIE DANN - NBC News.

Most Americans believe that a nuclear deal with Iran would not make a real difference in preventing that country's production of a nuclear weapon, according to a new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll.

Seventy-one percent of Americans say that the nuclear negotiations, which are backed by the Obama administration and strongly opposed by most Republicans, will not make a real difference in affecting Iran's potential production of a nuclear weapon. About a quarter of respondents - 24 percent - disagree.

The new numbers come as all but seven GOP senators penned a letter to the Iranian government warning them that Congress could undo any deal negotiated by the Obama administration.

First published March 9th 2015, 9:00 am

[lanny]

It is amazing to me that no one has made what should be an obvious historical analogy. Does any one else see the similarity of Nevile Chamberlain getting off his airplane, after meeting Hitler in Munich, back in the 1930s, waving a piece of paper and proclaiming, "Peace in ort time"?

[Publicus]

The UK labour party had a major problem with a division called Militant Tendency. These people were left-wing, communists, a rag bag. But they knew how to play the local party system and they had a firm grip on some major cities in the UK, such as Liverpool.

Militant Tendency made Labour unelectable.

I regard the Tea Party as the Republican's equivalent.

Yes, they are noisy. Yes, they can pull funding rabbits out of the hat. Yes, they know how to win local campaigns.

The downside is, they alienate the floating voters. If the Democrats win the next Pres election, I'd put the blame firmly on the Tea Party.

They are making their own party unelectable.

Yeah for sure but this is 90% of a major political party and in the United States, almost all of the Republican party itself so there's nobody bigger to pick up the pieces.

This year alone the Republican party welcomed a bunch of new Republican Senators to include Bibi Netanyahu (L-Israel; R-USA).

And now 47 or the 54 Republican Senators have aligned themselves with the ayatollahs and the Guardian Council of the Islamic Republic of Iran to include the hardest of the hardliners, the Revolutionary Guard. I've heard the Guard are even more whacko than Bibi and Boehner may be combined.

Meanwhile no one in the Republican party anywhere in the United States is objecting. In fact Fox is only stepping up its schemes to outfox us with polls that say the Republican party is doing exceedingly well in all of this, and that a huge majority of Americans support Congress appointing John Boehner ambassador to Israel and also ambassador extraordinaire to the Bank of New York.

In UK Labour had to deal with Militant Tendency within its ranks. In the US, America itself is being confronted with Militant Obsession Compulsion Driven By the Tea Party And Other Assorted Fringe Maniacs Against Obama, which is of a much greater scale and intensity that involves mountains more bucks than anything that happened over across the pond some time ago.

It's anyway encouraging that you also mention that in UK Militant Tendency made Labour unelectable for four straight elections.....

Backfire is on.

Edited March 10, 2015 by Publicus

[englishoak]

I dont think the rest of the P5 +1 are going to be too bothered about what a few republican warmongering loons want.

[NeverSure]

I dont think the rest of the P5 +1 are going to be too bothered about what a few republican warmongering loons want.

Would that be wimp countries who've already put up the white flag to muslims and had 1400 kids molested without complaint? Would that be the countries who are so PC they will be muslim within 30 years?

Would that be the same countries which have given up their sovereignty to a group called the EU and have their borders overrun with islamists?

I don't care what China or Russia thinks because their desires are adverse to the West. I care about why W. Europeans countries keep putting up the white flag to extremists, see themselves getting messed up and then keep whining this PC shit about sponsors of terrorism.

[Scott]

Off-topic, inflammatory posts and replies have been removed.

[englishoak]

I dont think the rest of the P5 +1 are going to be too bothered about what a few republican warmongering loons want.

Would that be wimp countries who've already put up the white flag to muslims and had 1400 kids molested without complaint? Would that be the countries who are so PC they will be muslim within 30 years?

Would that be the same countries which have given up their sovereignty to a group called the EU and have their borders overrun with islamists?

I don't care what China or Russia thinks because their desires are adverse to the West. I care about why W. Europeans countries keep putting up the white flag to extremists, see themselves getting messed up and then keep whining this PC shit about sponsors of terrorism.

Unlike you most Europeans arnt racists any more we grew up, get over yourself, the hatred and the Xenophobia dosnt become you.

Oh and I wouldnt worry about Europe too much, its seen much worse extremism over the Millennia and religious dogma, and so what if in a few generations nearly everyone is just brown/Asian/White mix and all that are still religious ( if any ) are muslim ? it wont bother me ill be long dead and the world will keep on turning.

Besides Islam will burn itself out like Christianity, Catholicism and Judaism and become assimilated and moderate for those left following it, the world is moving beyond what god matters complex, None of the religions see it and thats just great because its been happening for centuries, a few more wont make any difference in the direction, unless god pops up somewhere and then just as likely to be an alien....

I repeat the rest of the P5+1 is going ahead and wants managed stability and trade not war, get used to it and more countries with nuclear power projects. Its called......growing civilization and meeting its ever increasing less polluting power needs in the 21st century... The dinosaur republicans had better wake up and adapt before they find themselves a party of the last century with no future in the present.

[wabothai]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

So basically you support nukes for Iran.

alt=thumbsup.gif>

Yes I do

I should add the obvious...

I prefer none have them but if folks like Israel has them in that region then

100% yes Iran should also have them.

The talks should be about Israel getting rid of them.

Big daddy US won't allow that however.

[Jingthing]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

So basically you support nukes for Iran.

alt=thumbsup.gif>

Yes I do

I should add the obvious...

I prefer none have them but if folks like Israel has them in that region then

100% yes Iran should also have them.

The talks should be about Israel getting rid of them.

Big daddy US won't allow that however.

That would certainly please Israel demonizers who are rooting for Israel to cease to exist. Iran directly threatens Israel's existence. Israel only threatens Iran's nukes program. NOT the same.

[phrodan]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

So basically you support nukes for Iran.

alt=thumbsup.gif>

Yes I do

I should add the obvious...

I prefer none have them but if folks like Israel has them in that region then

100% yes Iran should also have them.

The talks should be about Israel getting rid of them.

Big daddy US won't allow that however.

That would certainly please Israel demonizers who are rooting for Israel to cease to exist. Iran directly threatens Israel's existence. Israel only threatens Iran's nukes program. NOT the same.

Just being nosy - and it's a serious question. Have you ever been to Israel?

[Bangkok Herps]

I don't trust Obama to get a good deal with Iran.

I don't trust the republicans are acting in the best interests of the U.S. either messing with Obama.

But I really, really, really do not trust Iran.

They are heading towards nukes weapons.

Who is going to stop them?

Anyone?

I remember plenty of voices saying, "If Obama is elected, Iran will have the bomb by 2010!"

It's 2015...and now we're worried that Iran might get the bomb...10 years from now?

Also, keep pretending that Stuxnet never happened.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed. Continue at your own peril.