chuckd Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 If you don't have anything to add to the discussion, you can stop posting. Well tell us how Congress will "put a stop to it" then. Do they have legal authority over the P4+1? Of course not. All they can do is wail and gnash their teeth like they usually do. I have already done it once but will do so again for the learning impaired. Congress can refuse to pass legislation removing any sanctions from Iran that were put on by legislative action. Obama does not have the authority to remove sanctions, other than those put on by previous Executive Orders from any Administration or his own. Sanctions that were put on by Acts of Congress can only be removed by an act of Congress. What he can and probably is planning to do, is refuse to enforce the laws on the books and stop enforcing sanctions. What this would do is place him in violation of Article II, Section 3, of the US Constitution which he has sworn to uphold. Certainly a blatant impeachable offense. Impeachment is a possibility, requiring only a majority vote in the House of Representatives. Conviction is another matter, requiring a 2/3rds vote to convict in the Senate. Thirteen Democrats would never vote to convict another Democrat so a conviction isn't going to happen. An impeachment trial might be fun to watch, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Some of the details of those little side deals between the IAEA and Iran are coming to daylight. Makes one wonder what will be discovered next. Here is another one. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Jul 30, 1:07 PM EDT IRAN SAYS WILL BAN US EXPERTS FROM UN NUCLEAR INSPECTIONS TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran will not allow American or Canadian inspectors working for the U.N. nuclear watchdog to visit its nuclear facilities, an official said in remarks broadcast by state TV on Thursday. Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran will only allow inspectors from countries that have diplomatic relations with it. The previously undisclosed remarks were made during a Sunday meeting with parliamentarians. "American and Canadian inspectors cannot be sent to Iran," said Araghchi. "It is mentioned in the deal that inspectors should be from countries that have diplomatic relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran." http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAN_NUCLEAR_INSPECTORS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-07-30-12-26-06 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 I failed to mention another action Congress can take to try and thwart this back room deal. Congress can pass legislation to be attached to the deal that would be a game changer to Iran, Obama would then veto the legislation, which would require a 2/3rd vote of both Houses of Congress to override his veto. An override is possible but unlikely. It would take 13 Democrats to vote against the deal and override his veto. However, the French seem to be weighing in on the drama going on in Washington: ------------------------------------------------------------------- Top French Official Contradicts Kerry on Iran Deal JUL 30, 2015 3:28 PM EDT By Josh Rogin Secretary of State John Kerry has been painting an apocalyptic picture of what would happen if Congress killed the Iran nuclear deal. Among other things, he has warned that “our friends in this effort will desert us." But the top national security official from one of those nations involved in the negotiations, France, has a totally different view: He told two senior U.S. lawmakers that he thinks a Congressional no vote might actually be helpful. Article here: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/843832-obama-calls-gop-criticism-of-iran-deal-ridiculous-sad/page-7#entry9683359 ------------------------------------------------------------------- The article further went on to explain...if Congress votes this down, there will be some saber-rattling and some chaos for a year or two, but in the end nothing will change and Iran will come back to the table to negotiate again and that would be to our advantage,” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 The attached link is very interesting because there is only a small amount of presumptions and speculation binding a series of facts. For example: musing on what Iran might do with the estimated $150 billion dollars is clearly opinion. So sure, there is a point the author makes, but then all news is packaged with a point; it is the facts that matter. In this case the facts are glaring, hardly requiring great analysis. The facts presented are sufficient to itself make an argument- all on their own. The author could have just supplied a bullet list and skipped the personal take on developments. His opinion does not detract from the facts, but they also do not add to what is overwhelmingly frightening, and self-evident. The facts, presented in an order that leads inexorably to one's own conclusion (the same as the author), leaves little to imagination. It takes an incredible willpower to read these facts regarding Iran and this "deal" and not reach the conclusion that the "deal" is fatally flawed at best, and woefully negligent at worst. Just the facts! http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6225/iran-150-billion-dollars Not as sweet as it seems.... Iran needs $100 billion to rebuild its gas industry and has met with European energy giants as an end to decades of international sanctions looms, according to the state-run company in charge of discussions. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-12/iran-seeks-100-billion-for-gas-as-world-fixates-on-nation-s-oil Nice theory, until facts intervene, in reality the Iranian top priority is military spending. No surprises there. Note the indecent haste in firming orders so sanctions can never reverse them, which was another intended outcome of Obama's indecent haste in going to the security council. http://app.debka.com/p/article/24771/Iran-orders-from-China-150-J-10-fighter-jets-that-incorporate-Israeli-technology- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arjunadawn Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 The attached link is very interesting because there is only a small amount of presumptions and speculation binding a series of facts. For example: musing on what Iran might do with the estimated $150 billion dollars is clearly opinion. So sure, there is a point the author makes, but then all news is packaged with a point; it is the facts that matter. In this case the facts are glaring, hardly requiring great analysis. The facts presented are sufficient to itself make an argument- all on their own. The author could have just supplied a bullet list and skipped the personal take on developments. His opinion does not detract from the facts, but they also do not add to what is overwhelmingly frightening, and self-evident. The facts, presented in an order that leads inexorably to one's own conclusion (the same as the author), leaves little to imagination. It takes an incredible willpower to read these facts regarding Iran and this "deal" and not reach the conclusion that the "deal" is fatally flawed at best, and woefully negligent at worst. Just the facts! http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6225/iran-150-billion-dollars Not as sweet as it seems.... Iran needs $100 billion to rebuild its gas industry and has met with European energy giants as an end to decades of international sanctions looms, according to the state-run company in charge of discussions. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-12/iran-seeks-100-billion-for-gas-as-world-fixates-on-nation-s-oil Nice theory, until facts intervene, in reality the Iranian top priority is military spending. No surprises there. Note the indecent haste in firming orders so sanctions can never reverse them, which was another intended outcome of Obama's indecent haste in going to the security council. http://app.debka.com/p/article/24771/Iran-orders-from-China-150-J-10-fighter-jets-that-incorporate-Israeli-technology- As I lay to sleep last night something disturbed me about the Bloomberg article selling the fantasy of 100 billion requirement to invest in gas infrastructure. Why did it bother me, I wondered. Why did it sound so familiar? Then I remembered, Iran never had a meaningful gas infrastructure, let alone LNG. I am pretty certain that all previous opportunities to invest in gas was not availed and Iran instead choose to be an importer of refined petro products, and use their money elsewhere. This speaks to my previous concern that history should guide where we muse Iran will spend its Obama-phone windfall. I was actually disarmed initially by the infrastructure reply above because I was tired. However, it does not begin to mitigate the concerns of how Iran will spend windfalls when the only estimation can be based on the past- and this was the point to which the Bloomberg post spoke. In any event, those who think this massive transfer of power, legitimacy, and wealth into the hands of an islamic theocracy bent on apocalyptic world confrontation will be proven correct sooner rather than later. You see, Iran knows that any affronts to this absurd deal will be initially if not consistently papered over first by the West itself. Later, Iran can continue to dodge, obfuscate and restart feigns and mouth-speak. Once Iran possesses a nuclear weapon the clock is reset to zero with a very different set of strategic circumstances, and Iran then knows the playing field levels, and they can act with relative impunity. Yes, they will race to the bomb. It remains to be seen whether the fairly certain road Iran will now take to accelerating its nuclear program was actually intended by the west for further casus belli. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 If you don't have anything to add to the discussion, you can stop posting. Well tell us how Congress will "put a stop to it" then. Do they have legal authority over the P4+1? Of course not. All they can do is wail and gnash their teeth like they usually do. I have already done it once but will do so again for the learning impaired. Congress can refuse to pass legislation removing any sanctions from Iran that were put on by legislative action. Obama does not have the authority to remove sanctions, other than those put on by previous Executive Orders from any Administration or his own. Sanctions that were put on by Acts of Congress can only be removed by an act of Congress. What he can and probably is planning to do, is refuse to enforce the laws on the books and stop enforcing sanctions. What this would do is place him in violation of Article II, Section 3, of the US Constitution which he has sworn to uphold. Certainly a blatant impeachable offense. Impeachment is a possibility, requiring only a majority vote in the House of Representatives. Conviction is another matter, requiring a 2/3rds vote to convict in the Senate. Thirteen Democrats would never vote to convict another Democrat so a conviction isn't going to happen. An impeachment trial might be fun to watch, though. You can keep your sanctions on. It won't make a jot of difference as everyone else will remove theirs. Do you think they are dumb enough to start an economic war with Russia, China and Europe just to spite Obama? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Some of the details of those little side deals between the IAEA and Iran are coming to daylight. Makes one wonder what will be discovered next. Here is another one. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Jul 30, 1:07 PM EDT IRAN SAYS WILL BAN US EXPERTS FROM UN NUCLEAR INSPECTIONS TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran will not allow American or Canadian inspectors working for the U.N. nuclear watchdog to visit its nuclear facilities, an official said in remarks broadcast by state TV on Thursday. Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran will only allow inspectors from countries that have diplomatic relations with it. The previously undisclosed remarks were made during a Sunday meeting with parliamentarians. "American and Canadian inspectors cannot be sent to Iran," said Araghchi. "It is mentioned in the deal that inspectors should be from countries that have diplomatic relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran." http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAN_NUCLEAR_INSPECTORS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-07-30-12-26-06 That's hardly a deal breaker, is it? Or do you think North America is the only place that understands nuclear technology? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 I failed to mention another action Congress can take to try and thwart this back room deal. Congress can pass legislation to be attached to the deal that would be a game changer to Iran, Obama would then veto the legislation, which would require a 2/3rd vote of both Houses of Congress to override his veto. An override is possible but unlikely. It would take 13 Democrats to vote against the deal and override his veto. However, the French seem to be weighing in on the drama going on in Washington: ------------------------------------------------------------------- Top French Official Contradicts Kerry on Iran Deal JUL 30, 2015 3:28 PM EDT By Josh Rogin Secretary of State John Kerry has been painting an apocalyptic picture of what would happen if Congress killed the Iran nuclear deal. Among other things, he has warned that “our friends in this effort will desert us." But the top national security official from one of those nations involved in the negotiations, France, has a totally different view: He told two senior U.S. lawmakers that he thinks a Congressional no vote might actually be helpful. Article here: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/843832-obama-calls-gop-criticism-of-iran-deal-ridiculous-sad/page-7#entry9683359 ------------------------------------------------------------------- The article further went on to explain...if Congress votes this down, there will be some saber-rattling and some chaos for a year or two, but in the end nothing will change and Iran will come back to the table to negotiate again and that would be to our advantage,” As if France aren't going to be diving straight in there as soon as Russia and China lift sanctions. Don't trust the garlic munching surrender monkeys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Some of the details of those little side deals between the IAEA and Iran are coming to daylight. Makes one wonder what will be discovered next. Here is another one. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Jul 30, 1:07 PM EDT IRAN SAYS WILL BAN US EXPERTS FROM UN NUCLEAR INSPECTIONS TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran will not allow American or Canadian inspectors working for the U.N. nuclear watchdog to visit its nuclear facilities, an official said in remarks broadcast by state TV on Thursday. Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran will only allow inspectors from countries that have diplomatic relations with it. The previously undisclosed remarks were made during a Sunday meeting with parliamentarians. "American and Canadian inspectors cannot be sent to Iran," said Araghchi. "It is mentioned in the deal that inspectors should be from countries that have diplomatic relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran." http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAN_NUCLEAR_INSPECTORS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-07-30-12-26-06 That's hardly a deal breaker, is it? Or do you think North America is the only place that understands nuclear technology? What I think is nearly as immaterial as what you think. What counts is what Congress and their constituents think. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Corker: IAEA Head Declined to Appear Before Committee to Discuss Secret Side Deals By Patrick Goodenough | July 31, 2015 | 4:34 AM EDT (CNSNews.com) – The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has refused to appear before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in an open or classified hearing, to discuss issues including concerns about secret “side agreements” to the Iran nuclear deal, committee chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) revealed Thursday. Members of the committee expressed concern about the development, given the crucial role the IAEA is meant to have in verifying Iranian compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). “It’s amazing to me,” said Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), asking how one could reach a conclusion on the JCPOA without getting an understanding from the agency responsible for its “most critical element.” http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/corker-iaea-head-declined-appear-committee-discuss-secret-side-deals --------------------------------------------------------------------- ...and... -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Iran Nuke Documents Obama Doesn’t Want You to See Scattered around the U.S. Capitol complex are a series of Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facilities, or SCIFs, which are typically used to hold Top Secret information. But today in these deeply secure settings are a series of unclassified documents—items dealing with the Iran nuclear deal that are not secret, but that the Obama administration is nevertheless blocking the public from reading. The Obama administration delivered 18 documents to Congress on July 19, in accordance with legislation requiring a congressional review of the nuclear deal. Only one of these documents is classified, while the remaining 17 are unclassified. Yet many of these unclassified documents cannot be shared with the public or discussed openly with the press. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/30/the-iran-nuke-documents-obama-doesn-t-want-you-to-see.html --------------------------------------------------------------------- ...finally... --------------------------------------------------------------------- Support for Iran deal slides as lawmakers head home By CHARLES HOSKINSON • 7/31/15 12:01 AM Support for the agreement signed July 14 is declining at a critical time. Lawmakers head home next week for the August recess and will have to face voters' concerns head-on before a September vote on whether to approve or disapprove of it. Most of those who were polled as talks were going on and a deal was still undefined supported the idea of a peaceful solution to Iran's nuclear ambitions, though most also did not trust Tehran to keep any bargain. That mistrust of Iran seems to have developed into mistrust of the deal itself since its details were announced. In a Pew Research Center survey of 2,002 adults taken July 14-20, only 38 percent of the 79 percent of those who had heard of the deal approved, while 48 percent disapproved. The margin of error was plus or minus 2.7 percentage points. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2569308/?utm_campaign=Examiner%20Today%20PMI&utm_source=Examiner%20Today%20PMI&utm_medium=email Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boon Mee Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Stop with all the platitudes to whomever. What we got is Appeasment In Our Time and if any of the brain-dead appoligists for I-Ran or Choomboy want to get their dander up, well, facts are facts, man... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 The propaganda bombast against the Agreement is fierce, which is nothing new in the broad front and long term campaign of the far out right. Right wing media that have taken control of the Republican party are going all out no holds barred. Ordinary routine processes and practices are instead presented as scandalous subterfuge which reiterates that the hostile antagonism of the far right is as routine as it is ordinary. Next we may begin hearing about Agreement death panels and death spirals, brought to us by the same people who gave us the Iraq war. Did I say, the same people who gave us the Iraq war. Yes, those very people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Stop with all the platitudes to whomever. What we got is Appeasment In Our Time and if any of the brain-dead appoligists for I-Ran or Choomboy want to get their dander up, well, facts are facts, man... Spoken like a true redneck. "I-ran"? "choomboy"? What are you, 12? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdanielmcev Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Stop with all the platitudes to whomever. What we got is Appeasment In Our Time and if any of the brain-dead appoligists for I-Ran or Choomboy want to get their dander up, well, facts are facts, man... Spoken like a true redneck. "I-ran"? "choomboy"?What are you, 12? This from a guy with curlers in his hair? This agreement is very similar to Chamberlains' agreement with Hitler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdanielmcev Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Some of the details of those little side deals between the IAEA and Iran are coming to daylight. Makes one wonder what will be discovered next. Here is another one. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Jul 30, 1:07 PM EDT IRAN SAYS WILL BAN US EXPERTS FROM UN NUCLEAR INSPECTIONS TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran will not allow American or Canadian inspectors working for the U.N. nuclear watchdog to visit its nuclear facilities, an official said in remarks broadcast by state TV on Thursday. Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran will only allow inspectors from countries that have diplomatic relations with it. The previously undisclosed remarks were made during a Sunday meeting with parliamentarians. "American and Canadian inspectors cannot be sent to Iran," said Araghchi. "It is mentioned in the deal that inspectors should be from countries that have diplomatic relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran." http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAN_NUCLEAR_INSPECTORS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-07-30-12-26-06 That's hardly a deal breaker, is it? Or do you think North America is the only place that understands nuclear technology? For the US, it should have been a deal-breaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arjunadawn Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 (edited) Time is always the enemy of Obama & Company. This is evident in nearly everything they do. There is always a reason to act quickly. Things are always dire. Apocalyptic talk is constantly the alternative to every effort Obama et al propose. Indeed, time is the enemy because in the fullness of time we have come to realize that there is never a pressing reason for anything he alleges lies around the corner. The Obama et al always seeks to capitalize on momentum and rhetoric. As we see here in these absurdly styled "agreements" the string binding it unravels already at every turn. They raced to the UN to create an air of momentum, to pressure the agreement as already a done deal, and by this means manipulate Americans. The "deal" is not even known to Americans. Like so much other Banana Republic noise generated by this buffoon and sideshow the "deal" is shrouded in secrecy to protect... whom? Who does this deal protect? Obama is supposed to be protecting Americans! This Don Knotts-like executive is packaging pure feces into a bag and setting it on fire on America's porch! Before even waiting to see if the spirit of the deal will even be kept by Iran we are discovering that the words of the deal do not even support the rhetoric of the supposed spirit. This deal is only a transfer of wealth and power and legitimacy. (Every single thing this executive has touched results in the transfer of power, money, and legitimacy to radical islam- no exceptions). This fiasco called the Iran talks will be an object lesson in history classes and diplomacy for countless years to come. When the class section on "History's Great Blunders" begins their will be a sidebar picture of an Obama-Chamberlain picture morphed and below it a picture with a wooden horse and drunken revelers. Edited August 1, 2015 by arjunadawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Stop with all the platitudes to whomever. What we got is Appeasment In Our Time and if any of the brain-dead appoligists for I-Ran or Choomboy want to get their dander up, well, facts are facts, man... Spoken like a true redneck. "I-ran"? "choomboy"?What are you, 12? This from a guy with curlers in his hair? This agreement is very similar to Chamberlains' agreement with Hitler. Do I judge your posts on the fact that you purport to be some immature Thai bird doing gang signs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran will not allow American or Canadian inspectors working for the U.N. nuclear watchdog to visit its nuclear facilities, an official said in remarks broadcast by state TV on Thursday. That's hardly a deal breaker, is it?Or do you think North America is the only place that understands nuclear technology? For the US, it should have been a deal-breaker. Why? Do you not trust the rest of the worlds nuclear experts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 The fringe political right places itself on the margins because it believes only it has truth and that only the right learns from history. The Chamberlain folly in Munich is the great lesson learned by everyone from the disastrous lead up to WW2 in Europe, which is why Nato was created after the war and why Nato presently opposes Putin's land grab in Europe. Neither are the ayatollahs nor the ISIS the Trojans. The Agreement establishes rules concerning strategic nuclear weapons status, posture; positioning. Sanctions were the means to the Agreement and the Agreement itself is a part of an overall process that presents a time line and schedule of ways, means, monitoring. So it is highly unlikely we can expect any one single significant event to occur from the Agreement or in relation to it, which is the great letdown to the warmongering right. In respect of nuclear weapons physics and technologies, if some in Congress want to be informed, they can call in Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz of MIT who was at the P5+1 negotiating table during the entirety of the post-April 30 final phase, and who has personally sat in the negotiations since January. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHP87 Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 This deal is lunacy. Imagine Ronald Reagan giving Iran nukes. No, I can't. Of course, the Obama apologists' will say something ridiculous like "Reagan would have started WW3 by now!" Same as we heard all through out the 1980's. If this goes thru, it will go down as one of the biggest Foreign Policy blunders in History. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHP87 Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Stop with all the platitudes to whomever. What we got is Appeasment In Our Time and if any of the brain-dead appoligists for I-Ran or Choomboy want to get their dander up, well, facts are facts, man... Spoken like a true redneck. "I-ran"? "choomboy"? What are you, 12? That's what Obama called his "gang" and referred to himself as. Choomgang/Choomboy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 If you don't have anything to add to the discussion, you can stop posting. Well tell us how Congress will "put a stop to it" then. Do they have legal authority over the P4+1? Of course not. All they can do is wail and gnash their teeth like they usually do. I have already done it once but will do so again for the learning impaired. Congress can refuse to pass legislation removing any sanctions from Iran that were put on by legislative action. Obama does not have the authority to remove sanctions, other than those put on by previous Executive Orders from any Administration or his own. Sanctions that were put on by Acts of Congress can only be removed by an act of Congress. What he can and probably is planning to do, is refuse to enforce the laws on the books and stop enforcing sanctions. What this would do is place him in violation of Article II, Section 3, of the US Constitution which he has sworn to uphold. Certainly a blatant impeachable offense. Impeachment is a possibility, requiring only a majority vote in the House of Representatives. Conviction is another matter, requiring a 2/3rds vote to convict in the Senate. Thirteen Democrats would never vote to convict another Democrat so a conviction isn't going to happen. An impeachment trial might be fun to watch, though. Obama does not have the authority to remove sanctions What he can and probably is planning to do, is refuse to enforce the laws on the books and stop enforcing sanctions. What this would do is place him in violation of Article II, Section 3, of the US Constitution which he has sworn to uphold. Certainly a blatant impeachable offense. That is quite the OTT construct. The Executive Branch has the Constitutional discretionary authority to implement legislation produced by it and the Congress, to set priorities of budget, policy, schedule of implementation and the like. The Executive Branch makes the rules and regulations to implement legislation, as it is mandated to do by each new or amended law. The president has Constitutional discretion over the rules and regs in their daily or long term application. Few people of any balance or rationality are still talking about impeaching Pres Obama and even fewer would want to take a divergent point of view to the SCOTUS given the couple of years it would take to get a ruling. The right needs to get a grip here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHP87 Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 In a negotiation, both sides give up something to reach a compromise. What is Iran giving up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaibeachlovers Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 While it is true Congress does not have the authority to stop an Executive Agreement, the President does not have the authority to act unilaterally by changing existing law. Linky, Chicog, anybody? I'm of the opinion that Congress can throw a spanner in the works. But as I've already said, it is cutting off their nose to spite their face. Because the P4+1 will go ahead with the agreement anyway. So it's up to them if they want to take their congressional ball and go home, it's not going to stop anyone else playing. Added: Unless they want to put sanctions on the P4+1 of course..... That's the best answer you could come up with on my post? You shouldn't have bothered. Of course it's a done deal as far as the UN is concerned. Why else do you think Russia and China were even in the meetings? They were never going to approve anything that might have put a halt to anything Iran wanted to do. This entire deal was a set-up and the vaudeville team named Obama & Kerry were led to the slaughter. Hopefully Congress will put a stop to some of it and limit the damage. Obama and Kerry were not lead to the slaughter! lol They were the leaders of this fiasco. It was the Iranians who made Obama and Kerry look like idiots, Russia and China, were happy to watch from the sidelines. Interesting while this was going on Russia decides to move against the Ukraine, and China, in the South Seas! I am sure Obama's negotiating skills were noted and Russia and China could see they too could run rings around Obama too. That he was a "nothing" politician. It probably is too late to save the sanctions, Because Obama was more concerned about having any deal, he did not want to walk away without one! So he went to the UN to validate it before the ink was dry and his own government could review the treaty. So it has become more about internal politics than stopping Iran getting nukes. Obama was looking for a way to stop the GOP from vetoing his treaty. So He goes to the UN, so what ever the GOP does won't effect any outcome, it would just leave the US as the piggy in the middle having negotiated the deal but not being able to enjoy any benefits from it. Obama has strengthened both Russia and China's view of America as not being a threat to their own ambitions. And Obama probably thinks he has saved the world. The guy is a complete and utter "£$%&******* If this was an actual real deal, the GOP would support it openly. It is so typical of polies nowadays that rather than try and convince the GOP that the treaty is a good deal based on the content, Obama attempts to smear the opposition instead. Hasn't Obama in the past denigrated such behaviour himself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaibeachlovers Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 (edited) No need for all this huffing and puffing anyway. The US just has to tell Iran that if a nuke that is traced to them is detonated anywhere in the world, they will be obliterated themselves. However, it would take a stronger leader than Obama to convince them he was serious. Russia and China disregard Obama as a talking talking talking but do nothing president, which is why they are doing whatever they want in Ukraine and the south China sea.. Edited August 1, 2015 by thaibeachlovers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaibeachlovers Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran will not allow American or Canadian inspectors working for the U.N. nuclear watchdog to visit its nuclear facilities, an official said in remarks broadcast by state TV on Thursday. That's hardly a deal breaker, is it?Or do you think North America is the only place that understands nuclear technology? For the US, it should have been a deal-breaker. Why? Do you not trust the rest of the worlds nuclear experts? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdanielmcev Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Stop with all the platitudes to whomever. What we got is Appeasment In Our Time and if any of the brain-dead appoligists for I-Ran or Choomboy want to get their dander up, well, facts are facts, man... Spoken like a true redneck. "I-ran"? "choomboy"?What are you, 12? This from a guy with curlers in his hair? This agreement is very similar to Chamberlains' agreement with Hitler. Do I judge your posts on the fact that you purport to be some immature Thai bird doing gang signs? That's my girlfriend as my avatar. Anything else you want to say? You put up an avatar you think is humorous. Then can't handle the laughter. Sad. I know this is off topic, but I hope the !odd leave it up long enough to see if he apologizes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdanielmcev Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran will not allow American or Canadian inspectors working for the U.N. nuclear watchdog to visit its nuclear facilities, an official said in remarks broadcast by state TV on Thursday. That's hardly a deal breaker, is it?Or do you think North America is the only place that understands nuclear technology? For the US, it should have been a deal-breaker. Why? Do you not trust the rest of the worlds nuclear experts? No. They wouldn't have Americas' best interest at heart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Publicus Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 No need for all this huffing and puffing anyway. The US just has to tell Iran that if a nuke that is traced to them is detonated anywhere in the world, they will be obliterated themselves. However, it would take a stronger leader than Obama to convince them he was serious. Russia and China disregard Obama as a talking talking talking but do nothing president, which is why they are doing whatever they want in Ukraine and the south China sea.. If it isn't a bang-boom war going on somewhere the right doesn't know it exists. Because of its aggression in Ukraine, Russia and Putin are hurting, which is putting the squeeze on the Brics and their stillborn New Development Bank and also Beijing's new Asia Investment and Infrastructure Development Bank. Putin has since sanctions on him gone largely quiet in Ukraine. Tehran is looking apprehensively over its shoulder at Beijing's grandiose design of a new Silk Road to include through the northern half of Iran. The CCP Dictators in Beijing suddenly announced their island expansion in the South China Sea is btw finishing, this just after US Naval and Air Force craft arrived to the relief of Asean. The clamor and commotion over the nuclear agreement with Iran sounds eerily like the Cold War agreements and treaties by the USA and USSR. The Cold Warriors of the right did back then the same as now, i.e., the US is stupid and we got suckered, taken to the woods by the clever Russians/Iranians/Fill In The Blank who are crafty, sly, so much smarter than us....that the US agreement with its adversary was nothing more than lambs going to the slaughter blah blah blurp blurp. It is rather astounding how the right has always or consistently found a way to be wrongheaded and just plain wrong. Couldn't trust or believe 'em then, can't do it now either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDGRUEN Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Obama's Claim of War If Congress Rejects Iran Deal Doesn't Pass Laugh Test http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamas-claim-war-if-congress-rejects-iran-deal-doesnt-pass-laugh-test_992618.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDGRUEN Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Obama making backhanded antisemitic comments in his frustration over opposition to the Iran Scam http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/31/blue-state-blues-barack-obamas-antisemitic-rant-on-the-iran-deal/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now