Obama now has 34 Senators supporting the Iran Deal - GOP will not be able to block it

[whutTHEYsay]

. At no point did I suggest that the Aytoilets of Iran arranged the terrorism which muslims from Pakistan----in fact SUNNI muslims, enacted in Mumbai-----

I never said you did. You are hallucinating. I pointed out a fact that you failed to mention. You argue a case opposed to the nuclear deal based upon Iran's involvement in terrorist activity. Then you bring up a terrorist event four years prior to the nuclear negotiations and having nothing to do with the negotiations and deal made this year.

Why do you actually oppose the nuclear deal?

 

[irosie91]

. At no point did I suggest that the Aytoilets of Iran arranged the terrorism which muslims from Pakistan----in fact SUNNI muslims, enacted in Mumbai-----

I never said you did. You are hallucinating. I pointed out a fact that you failed to mention. You argue a case opposed to the nuclear deal based upon Iran's involvement in terrorist activity. Then you bring up a terrorist event four years prior to the nuclear negotiations and having nothing to do with the negotiations and deal made this year.

Why do you actually oppose the nuclear deal?

the nuclear deal INCLUDES ending of economic sanctions upon
Iran at a time when Iran is fomenting a war in the Levant---- as to
nuclear energy and weapons----nothing will stop Iran from developing
nuclear energy fueled weapons------the "agreement" simply obscures
the situation. I did not suggest that the Mumbai attack by sunni muslims
from Pakistan was orchestrated by Iran-------I mentioned TERRORISM
of the Islamic hue. Sunni or Shiite----the ways and means are the same---.
I will make a prediction. Iranian galvanized terrorism will now increase---
just as Pakistani terrorism increased when that country GOT DA BOMB

 

[whutTHEYsay]

irosie 12434313

nuclear energy and weapons----nothing will stop Iran from developing nuclear energy fueled weapons

Bombing their nuke facilities will stop them if they violate the deal. Sanctions surely wouldn't stop them. Now at least if they violate the deal they can be bombed with more legitimacy than before the deal when it's only based upon speculation.

It will cost them more than their sanctions relief to rebuild a bombed out nuclear infrastructure.

 

[irosie91]

irosie 12434313

nuclear energy and weapons----nothing will stop Iran from developing nuclear energy fueled weapons

Bombing their nuke facilities will stop them if they violate the deal. Sanctions surely wouldn't stop them. Now at least if they violate the deal they can be bombed with more legitimacy than before the deal when it's only based upon speculation.

It will cost them more than their sanctions relief to rebuild a bombed out nuclear infrastructure.

I do not believe that anyone is going to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities until and if and when Iran starts using nuclear stuff first

 

[whutTHEYsay]

irosie 12440177

I do not believe that anyone is going to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities until and if and when Iran starts using nuclear stuff first

Now I see why you do not have a logical or rational basis for your opposition to the nuclear deal.

Vote for Hillary. She will do it:


What Clinton Plans If Iran Cheats on Nuke Deal. By LIZ KREUTZ. Sep 9, 2015, 12:22 pm

.
Addressing Iran directly today, Hillary Clinton said unequivocally that she “will not hesitate to take military action” as president if the country attempts to obtain a nuclear weapon.

“The United States will never allow you to acquire a nuclear weapon,” Clinton said during remarks at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C Wednesday morning, in a message aimed directly at Iran’s leaders. “As president I will take whatever actions are necessary to protect the U.S. and its allies. I will not hesitate to take military action.”

The democratic presidential candidate, who says she supports the Iran nuclear deal as “part of a larger strategy” for dealing with Iran, explained that military action would only be a last resort after trying diplomatic routes first.

What Clinton Plans If Iran Cheats on Nuke Deal

 

[irosie91]

irosie 12440177

I do not believe that anyone is going to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities until and if and when Iran starts using nuclear stuff first

Now I see why you do not have a logical or rational basis for your opposition to the nuclear deal.

Vote for Hillary. She will do it:


What Clinton Plans If Iran Cheats on Nuke Deal. By LIZ KREUTZ. Sep 9, 2015, 12:22 pm

.
Addressing Iran directly today, Hillary Clinton said unequivocally that she “will not hesitate to take military action” as president if the country attempts to obtain a nuclear weapon.

“The United States will never allow you to acquire a nuclear weapon,” Clinton said during remarks at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C Wednesday morning, in a message aimed directly at Iran’s leaders. “As president I will take whatever actions are necessary to protect the U.S. and its allies. I will not hesitate to take military action.”

The democratic presidential candidate, who says she supports the Iran nuclear deal as “part of a larger strategy” for dealing with Iran, explained that military action would only be a last resort after trying diplomatic routes first.

What Clinton Plans If Iran Cheats on Nuke Deal

it is clear to me that you are not capable of "seeing" anything

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Irosie 12444810

it is clear to me that you are not capable of "seeing" anything

Why? I see what Sec Hillary Clinton said and you apparently don't want to see it.

 

[irosie91]

Irosie 12444810

it is clear to me that you are not capable of "seeing" anything

Why? I see what Sec Hillary Clinton said and you apparently don't want to see it.

Hillary Clinton is not commander in chief----nor is she honest

 

[theHawk]

Obama secures Iran nuclear deal with Barbara Mikulski vote - CNNPolitics.com

In a major victory for President Barack Obama, Democratic Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland announced support for the Iran nuclear deal Wednesday, providing the White House the votes it needs to prevent Republicans from scuttling the agreement.

The announcement means that at least 34 senators -- the number required by the Constitution to sustain a veto -- will back Obama's expected veto of a Republican resolution to disapprove of the deal. Mikulski is retiring at the end of her term.

While majorities of both the GOP-controlled House and Senate are poised to vote against the agreement, supporters of the multinational accord that aims to curb Iran's nuclear weapons program are also hoping to get the 41 votes needed to filibuster the bill and prevent it from even getting to a final vote in the Senate.

Secretary of State John Kerry said the administration will continue to try and push support for deal past the 34 votes they now have "until the last moment."

"Thirty-four votes are obviously enough votes for the president's veto to be upheld," Kerry told CNN's Christiane Amanpour. "That is not satisfactory for us. We do want to try to go further. We'll continue to persuade."

Obama's expected veto of the GOP effort to derail the Iran deal will therefore be sustained.

The GOP has lost this battle.

Traditionally, once the 34th vote comes on board, a couple of others do as well, so I expect this will climb to at least 36.

End of story.

Being able to veto a resolution made by Congress isn't the same as ratifying a treaty made by the President. He doesn't have a two-thirds Congressional approval so it means nothing.

 

[JoeB131]

Being able to veto a resolution made by Congress isn't the same as ratifying a treaty made by the President. He doesn't have a two-thirds Congressional approval so it means nothing.

well, yeah, it does. The sanctions will be lifted and the agreement will go into place.

Now, if the Country has a collective brain fart and elects a Republican in 2016, I guess these guys will go out and say, "Well, I want to put sanctions back into place." Good luck doing that after a bunch of big corporations have already set up shop in Iran and the other partner countries are already all in.

A great day for America. We finally stood up to the Zionists.

 

[Jroc]

Being able to veto a resolution made by Congress isn't the same as ratifying a treaty made by the President. He doesn't have a two-thirds Congressional approval so it means nothing.

well, yeah, it does. The sanctions will be lifted and the agreement will go into place.

Now, if the Country has a collective brain fart and elects a Republican in 2016, I guess these guys will go out and say, "Well, I want to put sanctions back into place." Good luck doing that after a bunch of big corporations have already set up shop in Iran and the other partner countries are already all in.

A great day for America. We finally stood up to the Zionists.

You hate big corporations ,but you hate Jews more. You're sick in more ways than one.... Sickly boy

You've been brainwashed by the Jewish media and are too stupid to realize it.

After the JEWS manipulated us into a war over a LIE.

You do get this, right? Those Americans would be alive today of the Jews hadn't lied about Iraq having WMD's to start with.

 

[JoeB131]

You hate big corporations ,but you hate Jews more. You're sick in more ways than one.... Sickly boy

I would say that the evil of the Corporations is more reasonable than the evil of the Zionists.

As Voltaire said, the world is full of scoundrels and fanatics, but you can reason with a scoundrel.

The corporations are scoundrels, to be sure. If not regulated and watched and held to account, they will rip you off every time. But you can still reason with them.

The Zionists are fanatics. They live next to people who want to kill them because an imaginary Fairy in the Sky said so. They are willing to involve the rest of the world into truly pointless wars to keep doing so.