Deal with Iran

[Jroc]

 

[Clementine]

Should the deal with Iran be considered a treaty and if it is a treaty is not Congress required to approve it?

It wasn't a deal, it was a concession by Obama to allow Iran to do as they wish and the biggest change is that there are no sanctions.

Congress should have been involved, but Obama indicated long ago that he intended to go around them whenever possible. Obama has his pen and phone and the constitution, congress and rule of law be damned. He sympathizes with radical Muslims and will never take a stand against them.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

No sanctions have been lifted yet.

You do know they're set to be...

Yes, they are set to be, that's the whole point of the deal. But it hasn't happened yet, and won't until IAEA inspectors say that Iran is compliant with the deal.

Of course it'll be years of hide and seek again but what the hell,who cares if they sneak in a nuclear device right?
I'll at least take solace that it will more than likely take place in one of the liberal cesspools.

You have quite an active imagination.

You realize that in order to do that, Iran would have to build a functioning device (which will be nearly impossible for them to do under scrutiny), test it (completely impossible to hide), and build a delivery system (which would also require testing that would be impossible to hide).

The idea of a "surprise" nuclear bomb from Iran is ludicrous.

Wow you're excited most all nuclear testing can be done by computer now. No actual nuclear detonation is required.

You can model weapons with a computer, but you can't test them.

There's no way to know if they'll work or not with blowing one up - North Korea is a good example of that.

 

[Jroc]

You do know they're set to be...

Yes, they are set to be, that's the whole point of the deal. But it hasn't happened yet, and won't until IAEA inspectors say that Iran is compliant with the deal.

Of course it'll be years of hide and seek again but what the hell,who cares if they sneak in a nuclear device right?
I'll at least take solace that it will more than likely take place in one of the liberal cesspools.

You have quite an active imagination.

You realize that in order to do that, Iran would have to build a functioning device (which will be nearly impossible for them to do under scrutiny), test it (completely impossible to hide), and build a delivery system (which would also require testing that would be impossible to hide).

The idea of a "surprise" nuclear bomb from Iran is ludicrous.

Wow you're excited most all nuclear testing can be done by computer now. No actual nuclear detonation is required.

You can model weapons with a computer, but you can't test them.

There's no way to know if they'll work or not with blowing one up - North Korea is a good example of that.

Most of the testing can be done by computer until the final test ,the actual detonation and Noth Korea doesn't have 100s of billions of dollars for advanced testing. They do it the old fashion way. Why are you so fond of the mullahs anyway?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The idea of a "surprise" nuclear bomb from Iran is ludicrous.

It doesn't have to be a "surprise" nuclear bomb. All they have to do is wait until they get their money and the sanctions are lifted, then start building one. What will the U.N. do then? NOTHING

P.S. Tell us how the nuclear deals with North Korea worked out...

The UN resolution to end the sanctions has an automatic "snap-back" provision that will re-introduce the sanctions within 30 days of any "unresolved issue" - and the only way to override that automatic snap-back would be a unanimous vote from the Security Council.

A so-called "Snap back" within 30 days is impossible You're not living in the real world

Iran knows snapback sanctions won t stop it from going nuclear - Business Insider

this guy is so excited that Iran will be a much stronger regional power. It's some kind of madness really

You're using a position paper from a neo-con think tank that was written before the the deal was released as your argument.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Yes, they are set to be, that's the whole point of the deal. But it hasn't happened yet, and won't until IAEA inspectors say that Iran is compliant with the deal.

Of course it'll be years of hide and seek again but what the hell,who cares if they sneak in a nuclear device right?
I'll at least take solace that it will more than likely take place in one of the liberal cesspools.

You have quite an active imagination.

You realize that in order to do that, Iran would have to build a functioning device (which will be nearly impossible for them to do under scrutiny), test it (completely impossible to hide), and build a delivery system (which would also require testing that would be impossible to hide).

The idea of a "surprise" nuclear bomb from Iran is ludicrous.

Wow you're excited most all nuclear testing can be done by computer now. No actual nuclear detonation is required.

You can model weapons with a computer, but you can't test them.

There's no way to know if they'll work or not with blowing one up - North Korea is a good example of that.

Most of the testing can be done by computer until the final test ,the actual detonation and Noth Korea doesn't have 100s of billions of dollars for advanced testing. They do it the old fashion way. Why are you so fond of the mullahs anyway?

The only test that matters is the detonation.

Doesn't matter what the computer says if the bomb doesn't work.

 

[Jroc]

The idea of a "surprise" nuclear bomb from Iran is ludicrous.

It doesn't have to be a "surprise" nuclear bomb. All they have to do is wait until they get their money and the sanctions are lifted, then start building one. What will the U.N. do then? NOTHING

P.S. Tell us how the nuclear deals with North Korea worked out...

The UN resolution to end the sanctions has an automatic "snap-back" provision that will re-introduce the sanctions within 30 days of any "unresolved issue" - and the only way to override that automatic snap-back would be a unanimous vote from the Security Council.

A so-called "Snap back" within 30 days is impossible You're not living in the real world

Iran knows snapback sanctions won t stop it from going nuclear - Business Insider

this guy is so excited that Iran will be a much stronger regional power. It's some kind of madness really

You're using a position paper from a neo-con think tank that was written before the the deal was released as your argument.

Doesn't matter, the points are valid, you just choose to ignore them because to like the mullahs

 

[Jroc]

Of course it'll be years of hide and seek again but what the hell,who cares if they sneak in a nuclear device right?
I'll at least take solace that it will more than likely take place in one of the liberal cesspools.

You have quite an active imagination.

You realize that in order to do that, Iran would have to build a functioning device (which will be nearly impossible for them to do under scrutiny), test it (completely impossible to hide), and build a delivery system (which would also require testing that would be impossible to hide).

The idea of a "surprise" nuclear bomb from Iran is ludicrous.

Wow you're excited most all nuclear testing can be done by computer now. No actual nuclear detonation is required.

You can model weapons with a computer, but you can't test them.

There's no way to know if they'll work or not with blowing one up - North Korea is a good example of that.

Most of the testing can be done by computer until the final test ,the actual detonation and Noth Korea doesn't have 100s of billions of dollars for advanced testing. They do it the old fashion way. Why are you so fond of the mullahs anyway?

The only test that matters is the detonation.

Doesn't matter what the computer says if the bomb doesn't work.

Maybe you'd like wherever it is that to you live to be the test area..they'll work

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The idea of a "surprise" nuclear bomb from Iran is ludicrous.

It doesn't have to be a "surprise" nuclear bomb. All they have to do is wait until they get their money and the sanctions are lifted, then start building one. What will the U.N. do then? NOTHING

P.S. Tell us how the nuclear deals with North Korea worked out...

The UN resolution to end the sanctions has an automatic "snap-back" provision that will re-introduce the sanctions within 30 days of any "unresolved issue" - and the only way to override that automatic snap-back would be a unanimous vote from the Security Council.

A so-called "Snap back" within 30 days is impossible You're not living in the real world

Iran knows snapback sanctions won t stop it from going nuclear - Business Insider

this guy is so excited that Iran will be a much stronger regional power. It's some kind of madness really

You're using a position paper from a neo-con think tank that was written before the the deal was released as your argument.

Doesn't matter, the points are valid, you just choose to ignore them because to like the mullahs

The "points" are meaningless, because they discuss an entirely hypothetical deal, since the real one didn't exist at the time it was written - and neo-con think tanks don't exactly have a great track record in their recommendations for the middle east.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Jroc]

Secret Iran Deals Cover Military Site, Other Past Arms Work
Lawmakers demand congressional access to two IAEA accords

The Iran nuclear agreement includes two secret side deals covering a key Iranian military site and other past arms activities, according to two lawmakers who are demanding that Congress be granted access to the documents.

The secret agreements were reached between Iran and the International Atomic Energy (IAEA) on Tehran’s past nuclear arms work and are a central component of the Vienna accord reached by Iran, the United States, and five other states.

A key part of the nuclear agreement requires Iran to disclose all military nuclear arms work before international sanctions are lifted. The IAEA has until December to report on the past military activities.

Rep. Mike Pompeo, (R., Kan.), a member of the House Permanent Select Committee, said in an interview he first learned of the secret side deals by questioning IAEA officials.

Pompeo, who first revealed the agreements along with Sen. Tom Cotton, (R., Ark.), said there may be additional secret pacts the Obama administration has not disclosed to Congress as required by legislation covering congressional review of the Iran nuclear agreement.

The agreements deal with access to Iran’s military facility at Parchin, a military site that was excluded from the public text of the Vienna agreement reached July 14. A second secret accord outlines how past nuclear arms work by Iran will be addressed.

“It’s outrageous,” said Pompeo of the secret agreements, noting that other members of the six-nation agreement may already have been briefed on the side deals.

“We have asked for information from the intelligence community and the State Department about these agreements,” Pompeo said

Secret Iran Deals Cover Military Site Other Past Arms Work Washington Free Beacon
.

 

[Jroc]

It doesn't have to be a "surprise" nuclear bomb. All they have to do is wait until they get their money and the sanctions are lifted, then start building one. What will the U.N. do then? NOTHING

P.S. Tell us how the nuclear deals with North Korea worked out...

The UN resolution to end the sanctions has an automatic "snap-back" provision that will re-introduce the sanctions within 30 days of any "unresolved issue" - and the only way to override that automatic snap-back would be a unanimous vote from the Security Council.

A so-called "Snap back" within 30 days is impossible You're not living in the real world

Iran knows snapback sanctions won t stop it from going nuclear - Business Insider

this guy is so excited that Iran will be a much stronger regional power. It's some kind of madness really

You're using a position paper from a neo-con think tank that was written before the the deal was released as your argument.

Doesn't matter, the points are valid, you just choose to ignore them because to like the mullahs

The "points" are meaningless, because they discuss an entirely hypothetical deal, since the real one didn't exist at the time it was written - and neo-con think tanks don't exactly have a great track record in their recommendations for the middle east.

Reality is meaningless to people like you. any person who believes any kind of"snap back" is even possible is delusional. Iran will have 100s of billions of dollars to fund and spread it's radial influence around the world while keeping it's nuclear program intact, and you're excited about it. you are a well know Israel hater on this board, so we know why you like the deal so much...Lets call this deal a "deal for oil" China, Europe what that Iranian oil, businesses want to make money there. "Snap back" is a joke

 

[TooTall]

Should the deal with Iran be considered a treaty and if it is a treaty is not Congress required to approve it?

"Should" doesn't mean anything. It's not a "treaty", and Congress doesn't have to approve it.

This has already been determined.

Not according to Congress...

And if Obama ticked off another half-dozen Democrats by going to the UN, the Senate can override a veto.

Iran deal in hand Obama must face Congress - CNNPolitics.com

You're not understanding what happened.

If this were a "treaty", it would need 2/3s of a vote to pass, rather than 2/3s to reject it, and Congress wouldn't have had to pass a law in order to give them the chance to approve it at all.

There's really no chance of Obama's veto being overturned, and that's only if it doesn't pass in the first place.

I'm still awaiting your definition of what a treaty is.

Since you like wikipedia as a source so much, here's what they have to say about it:

Treaty Clause - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

In the United States, the term "treaty" is used in a more restricted legal sense than in international law. U.S. law distinguishes what it calls treaties from congressional-executive agreements and sole-executive agreements.[1] All three classes are considered treaties under international law; they are distinct only from the perspective of internal United States law. Distinctions among the three concern their method of ratification: by two-thirds of the Senate, by normal legislative process, or by the President alone, respectively.

Here are the high points from the Clinton 'agreement' (not a treaty) with North Korea. Tell me how that worked out.

Joint U.S.-North Korean Obligations:

• The United States and North Korea committed to move toward normalizing economic and political relations, including by reducing barriers to investment, opening liaison offices, and ultimately exchanging ambassadors.

The Clinton administration made some progress on fulfilling this aspect of the framework toward the end of its second term, most notably when then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright visited Pyongyang in October 2000. Additionally, in June 2000, Washington eased longstanding sanctions against North Korea under the Trading with the Enemy Act, the Defense Production Act, and the Export Administration Act, clearing the way for increased trade, financial transactions, and investment. Pyongyang is still prohibited, however, from receiving U.S. exports of military and sensitive dual-use items and most related assistance.

• Both sides commit not to nuclearize the Korean Peninsula. The United States must "provide formal assurances" not to threaten or use nuclear weapons against North Korea. Pyongyang is required to "consistently take steps" to implement the 1992 North-South Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

• Reactor Freeze and Dismantlement: The framework calls for North Korea to freeze operation of its 5-megawatt reactor and plutonium-reprocessing plant at Yongbyon and construction of a 50-megawatt reactor at Yongbyon and a 200-megawatt plant at Taechon. These facilities are to be dismantled prior to the completion of the second light-water reactor.

• Inspections: North Korea must come into "full compliance" with IAEA safeguards when a "significant portion of the [light-water reactor] project is completed, but before delivery of key nuclear components." Full compliance includes taking all steps deemed necessary by the IAEA to determine the extent to which North Korea diverted material for weapons use in the past, including giving inspectors access to all nuclear facilities in the country. The CIA estimates that Pyongyang has not accounted for one to two nuclear weapons worth of plutonium from the Yongbyon reactor.

 

[TooTall]

Why build it when they will have BILLIONS of U.S. dollars to buy one from Pakistan, or N. Korea?....Ever hear of immediate gratification?

North Korea doesn't have a working bomb to sell, and Pakistan has no love for Iran and would never sell them one.

Pakistan is probably going to sell nukes to Saudi Arabia, though.

If I may say BULLSHIT! We have NO WAY of knowing what N.Korea has, just as we have no IDEA what MONEY spent by Iran can buy!

Perhaps this can help you, but I doubt it, although others will understand!

Of course we do. Any time there's a nuclear explosion anywhere in the world, the US knows about it within seconds - how big its yield is, etc etc.

NK has tested 3 bombs, ever. The first test was a clear fizzle, and the second two also likely fizzles, since neither had a yield of more than 4 kilotons.

(For reference, the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was 10 kT, and the biggest bomb ever tested was 75,000 kT)

They've ALREADY tested SEVERAL, they need not TEST anymore!...Even a SMALL ONE, on one of the ICBM's would cause havoc. You apparently don't understand this, and they don't have to land to do their damage! EMP, is more of a bitch than the actual physical damage!

That's not how it works. Every time you build a new type of bomb, you have to test it - hence the reason that the US has performed thousands of nuclear tests, as opposed to NK's 3.

If you don't test it, you don't know if it works - and so far, the tests that NK has done have shown that their bombs don't work very well.

The biggest bomb that NK has built is less than half the size of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

All US underground nuclear tests have all been between 1 and 2 kilotons with one exception. The last test was a 5 kiloton bomb.

 

[TooTall]

If I may say BULLSHIT! We have NO WAY of knowing what N.Korea has, just as we have no IDEA what MONEY spent by Iran can buy!

Perhaps this can help you, but I doubt it, although others will understand!

Of course we do. Any time there's a nuclear explosion anywhere in the world, the US knows about it within seconds - how big its yield is, etc etc.

NK has tested 3 bombs, ever. The first test was a clear fizzle, and the second two also likely fizzles, since neither had a yield of more than 4 kilotons.

(For reference, the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was 10 kT, and the biggest bomb ever tested was 75,000 kT)

They've ALREADY tested SEVERAL, they need not TEST anymore!...Even a SMALL ONE, on one of the ICBM's would cause havoc. You apparently don't understand this, and they don't have to land to do their damage! EMP, is more of a bitch than the actual physical damage!

That's not how it works. Every time you build a new type of bomb, you have to test it - hence the reason that the US has performed thousands of nuclear tests, as opposed to NK's 3.

If you don't test it, you don't know if it works - and so far, the tests that NK has done have shown that their bombs don't work very well.

The biggest bomb that NK has built is less than half the size of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

And in your qualified estimation, and since we do know N.K. HAS ICBM's, what would a TINY, LITTLE, FUCKING bomb like that do to our electrical systems?

North Korea does not have any ICBMs that can reach the US, but if they did, a bomb of the size they have would deal significant damage to about 30 or so blocks of Manhattan. It's yield would be too small to have a significant EMP effect, which requires much larger weapons and high-altitude rockets, neither of which North Korea possesses, or is capable of building.

Can you say not quite yet?

WASHINGTON — US intelligence believes North Korea is capable of miniaturizing a nuclear weapon and putting it on its KN-08 intercontinental ballistic missile, the head of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) said Tuesday.

It has been widely assumed that North Korea would look to develop the technology to place a nuclear warhead on top of the KN-08, a mobile intercontinental ballistic missile. But the statement by Adm. Bill Gortney is further confirmation that the US believes the Kim regime has that capability at hand.

"Our assessment is that they have the ability to put a nuclear weapon on a KN-08 and shoot it at the homeland," Gortney told reporters during a Pentagon briefing. "That is the way we think, and that's our assessment of the process.

US N. Korean Nuclear ICBM Achievable

 

[paulitician]

There is no opposition. Republican supporters have been duped for years. Barack Hussein Obama has gotten every single thing he's ever proposed. How could that be possible without Republican collaboration? Can you think of anything on his agenda that he hasn't gotten through?

Boehner and McConnel are old corrupt assholes. They feign outrage and opposition, then they go along. That's been the predictable pattern for years. They all play on the same team. Its just one small elite private club. So don't expect any opposition on this either. It's a done-deal. Bet on that. Republican supporters need to clean house. Till they do, they'll continue to get screwed.

 

[jwoodie]

You are welcome to hold whatever opinions you like, but they won't change reality.

It's a done deal.

You just forfeited any intellectual credibility with that remark.

Your opinion on my "intellectual credibility" is even less relevant to reality than your opinion on world affairs.

Your tacit admission is duly noted. In the self-delusional world of left-wing politics, might does make right.

 

[maxblankfeld]

Should the deal with Iran be considered a treaty and if it is a treaty is not Congress required to approve it?

What I have to say is here: A Message To Our Members of Congress Max Blankfeld The Blogs The Times of Israel