Senators try sabotage: Republicans Warn Iran Against Nuclear Deal With Obama

[Doc Savage Fan]

Have you found any Republican idea no matter how foolish you don't agree with?

I don't agree with this one. Thanks for asking.

 

[Jhhnn]

You wouldn't say that if the parties were reversed and you know it. You're nothing but an effing D shill. I have equal contempt for both parties.

Unlike Repubs, Democrats haven't offered the opportunity for such criticism. What I might say under such circumstances is pure speculation on your part.

Reality. Deal with it.

 

[ivwshane]

“I'm sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic. We need to stand up and say we're Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration.”

Hillary Rodham Clinton*

*Only applies when it's a R administration and the dissent is by Ds

Hey dumbass! Debating and disagreeing with the president about how to handle a foreign power is different than going around your opposition and talking to that foreign power. You'd understand this if you and the rest of the right wing morons had any intelligence at all.

 

[Jaskalas]

With this and the Netanyahu invitation it seems clear what the GOP strategy will be for the next two years to undermine Obama. This will be both entertaining and tragic at the same time.

Obama is paving the way for a nuclear Iran.
For anyone not willing to accept that, undermine and sabotage are their duty as they see it.

They do not want this peace agreement... and yet, they don't have the balls to go before the American people and ask for a war either.
No peace... no war... no plan... #gop2016?

 

[trenchfoot]

You know, if the GOP was an actual person, like how the GOP controlled USSC recognizes corporations as? Quite honestly, you could easily ascertain the fact that their behavior is akin to classic paranoid schizophrenia with a very healthy dose of OCD thrown in. And the object that they have come to focus all of that phobic mania on is that boogieman who by law is their leader, you know, the scary person that has control of their lives. The feared entity that they cannot escape from. The veritable recurring monster of their childhood nightmares that keeps coming back to them the moment the lights go out and their bedroom door gets closed on them.

At the very least, it's what the Repubs in Congress want their constituents to be indoctrinated with, if their behavior in Congress is any indication. And it seems to have worked quite well on a significant sector of their constituency.

They have created a monster of their very own by utilizing such tactics and that monster that has named itself the Tea Party has turned on its creator, gained control over it and now nurtures itself on the blood of its creator. Just ask Boehner, he'll admit it to you in private and then, being a victim of his creation, deny it all on FOX.

Can you imagine what will happen to the GOP if Hillary ever gets elected and has an eight year run to fuck around inside their heads? You think it's bad now.......damn.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Obama is paving the way for a nuclear Iran.
For anyone not willing to accept that, undermine and sabotage are their duty as they see it.

They do not want this peace agreement... and yet, they don't have the balls to go before the American people and ask for a war either.
No peace... no war... no plan... #gop2016?

Really? What specifically is in the agreement that makes you feel this way?

 

[thraashman]

Whitehouse.gov petition to file charges against the 47 traitors. I think anyone who supports our Constitution should sign this petition, even if nothing comes of it.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Oh, I understand it just fine, boys. Thing is, I don't believe any of you. This is all the BS politics that I loathe.

Bullshit. What the Republicans are doing here is not just irresponsible, it is potentially illegal/unconstitutional. When the situation is reversed in the future do you want Democratic congressmen attempting to sabotage international agreements like this?

This is bad behavior no matter who is in the White House. The mockery these clowns are getting for their stunt is richly deserved.

Unlike Repubs, Democrats haven't offered the opportunity for such criticism. What I might say under such circumstances is pure speculation on your part.

Reality. Deal with it.

Hey dumbass! Debating and disagreeing with the president about how to handle a foreign power is different than going around your opposition and talking to that foreign power. You'd understand this if you and the rest of the right wing morons had any intelligence at all.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Whitehouse.gov petition to file charges against the 47 traitors. I think anyone who supports our Constitution should sign this petition, even if nothing comes of it.

While the petition itself is pointless I can't say I can disagree with it's content relating to the Logan Act. It's language, and the USSC ruling in US v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. are pretty clear.

 

[BurnItDwn]

This is my favorite part "Numerous experts/analysts have been on every cable news channel saying the leaked Obama details allow Iranian nuke capability in 10 yrs"

Generally cable news channels make shit up and lie. I generally believe the opposite of whatever they speculate.

 

[Jaskalas]

Really? What specifically is in the agreement that makes you feel this way?

It's not a declaration of war and immediate invasion of Iran.
Ergo, Iran WILL continue to get whatever they want.

More specifically, Obama's own statements on Reuters where Iran gets to keep everything, with "maybe" a 5-10 year pause on the utilization of it. Nothing about this is stopping Iran from going nuclear. Right wing concerns abound.

Obama does not work to secure a victory against nuclear proliferation... he merely works to sketch out whatever benefits we may find in lifting sanctions and allowing nukes. This is a peace deal, we're going to play nice with Iran.

The GOP OTOH, neither wants a peace deal or an invasion. They simply want the status quo... and like immigration they can wave their hands, beat their chests, and cry "whoa is me, how did it get out of control!?" They have no plan, no commitment to stop Iranian nukes any more than Obama does. Yet they remain dead set on stopping Obama's peace deal.

Moreover... however much I condemn the GOP for this act of stupidity, you ignore everything but the heartfelt need to protect the facade of Obama's deal. It would be useful to ditch the PR, to skip the lies and get to the heart of the matter.

This is a peace deal to allow nukes, it is the best alternative to war.
If we wanted to stop the nukes, war is the only solution.

 

[thraashman]

While the petition itself is pointless I can't say I can disagree with it's content relating to the Logan Act. It's language, and the USSC ruling in US v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. are pretty clear.

I agree that the petition won't actually do anything. At least it'll require an official response from the President about it. And I feel as many people as possible need to voice their distaste for the behavior of the GOP here. They've stepped so far over the boundary here it's unprecedented.

 

[Jhhnn]

It's not a declaration of war and immediate invasion of Iran.
Ergo, Iran WILL continue to get whatever they want.

More specifically, Obama's own statements on Reuters where Iran gets to keep everything, with "maybe" a 5-10 year pause on the utilization of it. Nothing about this is stopping Iran from going nuclear. Right wing concerns abound.

Obama does not work to secure a victory against nuclear proliferation... he merely works to sketch out whatever benefits we may find in lifting sanctions and allowing nukes. This is a peace deal, we're going to play nice with Iran.

The GOP OTOH, neither wants a peace deal or an invasion. They simply want the status quo... and like immigration they can wave their hands, beat their chests, and cry "whoa is me, how did it get out of control!?" They have no plan, no commitment to stop Iranian nukes any more than Obama does. Yet they remain dead set on stopping Obama's peace deal.

Moreover... however much I condemn the GOP for this act of stupidity, you ignore everything but the heartfelt need to protect the facade of Obama's deal. It would be useful to ditch the PR, to skip the lies and get to the heart of the matter.

This is a peace deal to allow nukes, it is the best alternative to war.
If we wanted to stop the nukes, war is the only solution.

How you could get that conclusion from the article you linked is beyond comprehension.

The most telling part of the right wing argument is the contention that Iran will automagically be allowed to produce nukes at the end of the proposed time period.

Perhaps you'd care to explain exactly how that would work. Will inspections cease, or will Iran merely have license to expand their centrifuge farms to produce more fuel for their proposed nuclear power expansion?

Lay it out.

Oh, wait- you can't, because you're merely presenting speculation as fact.

The alternatives being continued sanctions that other nations will ignore, putting American business at an extreme disadvantage, or War with incalculable consequences. I really don't think that our allies will support war at all because they depend on Persian Gulf oil. It'd be a war zone, & nobody will insure ships in a war zone.

 

[emperus]

It's not a declaration of war and immediate invasion of Iran.
Ergo, Iran WILL continue to get whatever they want.

More specifically, Obama's own statements on Reuters where Iran gets to keep everything, with "maybe" a 5-10 year pause on the utilization of it. Nothing about this is stopping Iran from going nuclear. Right wing concerns abound.

Obama does not work to secure a victory against nuclear proliferation... he merely works to sketch out whatever benefits we may find in lifting sanctions and allowing nukes. This is a peace deal, we're going to play nice with Iran.

The GOP OTOH, neither wants a peace deal or an invasion. They simply want the status quo... and like immigration they can wave their hands, beat their chests, and cry "whoa is me, how did it get out of control!?" They have no plan, no commitment to stop Iranian nukes any more than Obama does. Yet they remain dead set on stopping Obama's peace deal.

Moreover... however much I condemn the GOP for this act of stupidity, you ignore everything but the heartfelt need to protect the facade of Obama's deal. It would be useful to ditch the PR, to skip the lies and get to the heart of the matter.

This is a peace deal to allow nukes, it is the best alternative to war.
If we wanted to stop the nukes, war is the only solution.

You may be right in everything you say. But what are the alternatives? Another war? Probably on our own with some ME countries (maybe)? And if we do that what are the repercussion in the ME.

I just don't see an alternative stance especially since we don't have a moral leg to stand on. What sanctions can we muster without the support of the other countries? And what is our moral basis for our argument Iran can't have Nuclear know how or even Nuclear weapons. We have nuclear weapons, Israel has nuclear weapons that they won't let anyone verify.

It's a tough sell and I can see why Obama is trying to get an agreement. So the Republicans should be honest about it and let the country have a real discussion about whether War with Iran is what we want being that is the only option if we don't want a potentially Nuclear Iran.

 

[glenn1]

In an earlier time (i.e. anytime before Obama) a senior GOP elder would have stepped in and stopped Cotton from committing a blatant act of sedition. But in the Obama era nothing is sacred for the GOP. They will do and say anything to discredit this President. You can bet that if this were a republican president negotiating with foreign powers and the democrats would have created such a "letter", the republicans would be shouting treason.

They didn't shout treason but did create a political storm at the time and it's happened more than once. Both sides should knock off this type of behavior, starting with the GOP who I blame more since theirs is the more recent and relatively blatant.

 

[Jhhnn]

They didn't shout treason but did create a political storm at the time and it's happened more than once. Both sides should knock off this type of behavior, starting with the GOP who I blame more since theirs is the more recent and relatively blatant.

I love the false equivalency. Dems letter to Ortega followed the Reagan Admin line entirely- to open up free elections, which the Sandinistas ultimately did. It's not like they told Ortega that he couldn't trust Reagan, that they'd reverse Reagan policy the first chance they got.

The Kennedy letter is pure hearsay- where's the original?

 

[glenn1]

I love the false equivalency. Dems letter to Ortega followed the Reagan Admin line entirely- to open up free elections, which the Sandinistas ultimately did. It's not like they told Ortega that he couldn't trust Reagan, that they'd reverse Reagan policy the first chance they got.

The Kennedy letter is pure hearsay- where's the original?

Whatever dude. You might want to step outside your echo chamber for some fresh air once in a while because you're starting to lose brain cells.

 

[fskimospy]

Whatever dude. You might want to step outside your echo chamber for some fresh air once in a while because you're starting to lose brain cells.

Congress has contacted foreign leaders many times in the past. That's not controversial in the slightest.

This is the first time I'm aware of that Congress has contacted a foreign leader to articulate a different policy than that of the White House. That's why this is potentially illegal and unconstitutional.

 

[cubby1223]

They didn't shout treason but did create a political storm at the time and it's happened more than once. Both sides should knock off this type of behavior, starting with the GOP who I blame more since theirs is the more recent and relatively blatant.

Hahaha! It's all normal partisan politics both sides engage in, just as I fully suspected.

 

[cubby1223]

Congress has contacted foreign leaders many times in the past. That's not controversial in the slightest.

This is the first time I'm aware of that Congress has contacted a foreign leader to articulate a different policy than that of the White House. That's why this is potentially illegal and unconstitutional.

Partisan much?

 

[fskimospy]

Partisan much?

How is that partisan in any way?

Can you explain all the conservative newspapers, etc, that are also condemning this if it's simply partisan politics?

There must be some misinformation going around about this, because absent that it's impossible for me to fathom how anyone would defend this. Aren't you supposed to be a fan of the Constitution? This is, at a minimum, bordering on unconstitutional.

 

[senseamp]

Bobby Jindal gone said something stupid again:
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/bobby-jindal-joe-biden-tom-cotton-iran-letter-115938.html

 

[cubby1223]

This subject matter is actually getting quite comical to follow

The Republicans have pretty much just written a set of facts onto a piece of paper, facts that already are a part of the public knowledge.

"This is treasonous sabotage against U.S. foreign policy! Why? Because Republican, that's why!"




Here's the dirty little secret - both parties engage in the same behavior. You cannot stop the behavior by elevating one party up as morally superior to the other party, and have one side shamed into submission. The only solution is to break the party system. I'm not holding my breath for that to happen. So, in the meantime, if Republicans want to state known facts on a piece of paper, I'm not getting my panties in a bunch over this situation.

 

[thraashman]

Bobby Jindal gone said something stupid again:
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/bobby-jindal-joe-biden-tom-cotton-iran-letter-115938.html

I like how if you look at the original tweet that literally EVERY single response is telling Jindal that he's wrong and an idiot.

 

[glenn1]

I love the false equivalency. Dems letter to Ortega followed the Reagan Admin line entirely- to open up free elections, which the Sandinistas ultimately did. It's not like they told Ortega that he couldn't trust Reagan, that they'd reverse Reagan policy the first chance they got.

The Kennedy letter is pure hearsay- where's the original?

The Republicans didn't either. They said (stupidly and redundantly) that an agreement has a different status than a treaty approved by the Senate. It's a pointless truism, not some vast treasonous act and would apply no matter who was President or in the Congress. And as the people who wrote the Dear Commandante letter said; ''our rights to oppose foreign policy are protected by the Constitution and our responsibility as members of Congress.''