Republican Senators send a letter to Iran. Wow. Damn!

[PaintMyHouse]

Since there is no valid reason to negotiate, don't. Just let them act like any other nation and build whatever they damn well please eh?

The sanctions are from the UN Security Council... Not the US President.
If you think the President has no business negotiating with Iran ... Then fine, he can shut up for all I care.

.

Good, now we're getting somewhere. Iran, build your bomb and tell the US and Israel to go **** themselves, it's none of their business.

The security council still has the sanctions on them ... And if you want to fight the UN over Iran's ability to make the bombs ... Knock yourself out.

.

Not my fight. My fight is with Americans who think they can tell the whole ******* world what to do when they can't even fix their own roads and bridges.

 

[orogenicman]

The inspectors have been in Iran for at least a year, and have full access to their program. No one has access to Israel's.

Your NYT article is three years old, dude.

They have full access to where they allowed to go ... Same as it has always been.
You are welcome to provide an opposing link.

.

Monitoring and Verification in Iran International Atomic Energy Agency

 

[Wyatt earp]

Iran is not North Korea. NK is the most closed nation on the planet. And they abdicated the NNPT, while Iran has not, and is still being monitored by international inspectors. Unlike NK, we know full well on the ground what Iran is doing.

The inspectors have been thrown out of Iran twice after locating secret facilities the Iranians were hiding.
That only goes to show that negotiating with the Iranians isn't a good idea.

Even the New York Times (hardly a "conservative rag") ... Indicates Iran is unwilling to participate in forthright negotiations that allow inspectors to actually inspect something.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/04/w...hreatens-retaliation-against-attack.html?_r=0

Quit living in la-la land ... And at least get on the same page with reality.

.

The inspectors have been in Iran for at least a year, and have full access to their program. No one has access to Israel's.

Your NYT article is three years old, dude.

Iran signed the UN non nuclear pack (or what ever it is called)
Israel never signed if

 

[Statistikhengst]

If it is a treaty, the President must submit it to the Senate for consideration, advice, and ratification.

Yes. But he signs it first. The EXECUTION of said treaty first commences when the legislative bodies of the respective governments ratify. See: Bush / Gorbachev 1991, Bush / Putin 2003.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Look Iran is trolling the 47 percent (Heh heh heh a key %) traitor Senators

Iran Calls GOP Letter 'Propaganda Ploy,' Offers To 'Enlighten' Authors
- Zarif said he was astonished by the letter, saying it suggests the U.S. lawmakers "not only do not understand international law" — a subject in which he is a professor — "but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it co ... (NPR)

 

[Dot Com]

Mann & Ornstein were right, The repubs are no longer just "the opposition" they have gone beyond that. Sad part is their voters (94% white BTW) still run interference for their heinous actions

 

[Wyatt earp]

I get your problem, you can not comprehend there is three branches of government, the president is not the executive of all people, he/she never was

And you prove the point. You don't get it. Yes, the president is the tribune, the executive, of all the people. That's your problem, your ODS.

All you just posted says you are a ignorant asshat about the constitution

It means I understand American political philosophy and the Constitution whereas you don't.

Again you are still posting like a ignorant fool.

What you are telling me the president is king or dictator, no he/she is not

We have three branches of government and if you count the Supremes that can and did in the past overturn a presidents Executive order we have four

The SCOTUS is part of the judicial branch.

Since there is no valid reason to negotiate, don't. Just let them act like any other nation and build whatever they damn well please eh?

The sanctions are from the UN Security Council... Not the US President.
If you think the President has no business negotiating with Iran ... Then fine, he can shut up for all I care.

.

Good, now we're getting somewhere. Iran, build your bomb and tell the US and Israel to go **** themselves, it's none of their business.

The security council still has the sanctions on them ... And if you want to fight the UN over Iran's ability to make the bombs ... Knock yourself out.

.

Not my fight. My fight is with Americans who think they can tell the whole ******* world what to do when they can't even fix their own roads and bridges.

We will continue to do so

Unless you build a 12 aircraft carrier battle fleet, state of the art, sorry you have only one vote

 

[Dot Com]

Look Iran is trolling the 47 percent (Heh heh heh a key %) traitor Senators

Iran Calls GOP Letter 'Propaganda Ploy,' Offers To 'Enlighten' Authors
- Zarif said he was astonished by the letter, saying it suggests the U.S. lawmakers "not only do not understand international law" — a subject in which he is a professor — "but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it co ... (NPR)

lol I know right? Republitraitors.

 

[Statistikhengst]

If it is a treaty, the President must submit it to the Senate for consideration, advice, and ratification.

And if it is not a treaty, and just a gentlemen's agreement, then it is a waste of time.

What is President Obamas plan with these negotiations? Does anyone know as fact whether or not he will seek senatorial ratification?

If it is a treaty, he has to submit it to the Senate. On the other hand, if it is negotiations to get Iran back on track with the NNPT, he doesn't need the Senate's approval because the treaty was signed in the 1970s, and he's simply enforcing it.

Yepp.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[Wyatt earp]

I get your problem, you can not comprehend there is three branches of government, the president is not the executive of all people, he/she never was

And you prove the point. You don't get it. Yes, the president is the tribune, the executive, of all the people. That's your problem, your ODS.

All you just posted says you are a ignorant asshat about the constitution

It means I understand American political philosophy and the Constitution whereas you don't.

Again you are still posting like a ignorant fool.

What you are telling me the president is king or dictator, no he/she is not

We have three branches of government and if you count the Supremes that can and did in the past overturn a presidents Executive order we have four

The SCOTUS is part of the judicial branch.

Yea but they can and have in the past overturned a presidents EO I think one of ikes was the last one, but that Don't mean the president has to abide by it.

 

[orogenicman]

And you prove the point. You don't get it. Yes, the president is the tribune, the executive, of all the people. That's your problem, your ODS.

All you just posted says you are a ignorant asshat about the constitution

It means I understand American political philosophy and the Constitution whereas you don't.

Again you are still posting like a ignorant fool.

What you are telling me the president is king or dictator, no he/she is not

We have three branches of government and if you count the Supremes that can and did in the past overturn a presidents Executive order we have four

The SCOTUS is part of the judicial branch.

Yea but they can and have in the past overturned a presidents EO I think one of ikes was the last one, but that Don't mean the president has to abide by it.

That's their job, to interpret the constitutionality of things. That doesn't make them a fourth branch. That was my point.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Only, we DO care what our allies think.

Do we? Your Party Leadership just spent a MONTH Crying about our most relevant ally SPEAKING TO CONGRESS.

So where "WE" is defined as the people of the United States, "WE" know that your position is BS.

And where "WE" is defined as "Americans" and those who are aligned with American Principle... YOU and those aligned with YOUR REASONING, are irrelevant.

So which 'WE' are you using?

 

[Statistikhengst]

I disagree. The President is genuinely trying to stave off a wider, more dangerous and deadly war. Full stop. What happens if the Senate Republicans stop his efforts is fair game.

Then you should read the article in the Daily News where they indicate the GOP members were Traitors even though the President's efforts have been irresponsible, ineffective, worthless or incompetent.

.

If the Daily News is writing this, then the GOP is screwed, for the Daily News is an extreme RWNJ rag. Wow. ..

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Tom Cotton on the defensive over effort to 'make common cause with the hardliners in Iran'

It seems like Sen. Tom Cotton's open letter to Iran is not getting the reception he expected, and now the Arkansas Republican is on the defensive. President Obama and Vice President Biden both condemned the letter—predictably enough—with Obama suggesting that the letter showed the 47 Senate Republicans who signed on "wanting to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran" and Biden calling it "beneath the dignity of an institution I revere."

Cotton had to expect that. But he may not have expected the public pushback he's getting from the seven Senate Republicans who did not sign onto his letter:

“It’s more appropriate for members of the Senate to give advice to the president, to Secretary Kerry and to the negotiators,” [Sen. Susan] Collins said. “I don’t think that the ayatollah is going to be particularly convinced by a letter from members of the Senate, even one signed by a number of my distinguished and high ranking colleagues.”

 

[Statistikhengst]

We do not even have a negotiated agreement with Iran and Republican Senators are attempting to sabotage negotiations

Republicans would rather side with the radicals in Iran than Obama

Scary, nööö?

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

We do not even have a negotiated agreement with Iran and Republican Senators are attempting to sabotage negotiations

Republicans would rather side with the radicals in Iran than Obama

Scary, nööö?

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

Last time I saw something that scary was when Sara Palin was a candidate for VP

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Tom Cotton on the defensive over effort to 'make common cause with the hardliners in Iran'

It seems like Sen. Tom Cotton's open letter to Iran is not getting the reception he expected, and now the Arkansas Republican is on the defensive. President Obama and Vice President Biden both condemned the letter—predictably enough—with Obama suggesting that the letter showed the 47 Senate Republicans who signed on "wanting to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran" and Biden calling it "beneath the dignity of an institution I revere."

Cotton had to expect that. But he may not have expected the public pushback he's getting from the seven Senate Republicans who did not sign onto his letter:

“It’s more appropriate for members of the Senate to give advice to the president, to Secretary Kerry and to the negotiators,” [Sen. Susan] Collins said. “I don’t think that the ayatollah is going to be particularly convinced by a letter from members of the Senate, even one signed by a number of my distinguished and high ranking colleagues.”

That jerk slit his own throat, and that of everyone who signed this on this issue issue, hopefully for life. It's time for him to learn there's a big dog in the room, and it ain't him. Punk-ass POS.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

now Cotton has Obama "picking" on him...woooooo hooooo...Cotton picking Prez

It seems like Sen. Tom Cotton's open letter to Iran is not getting the reception he expected, and now the Arkansas Republican is on the defensive. President Obama and Vice President Biden both condemned the letter—predictably enough—with Obama suggesting that the letter showed the 47 Senate Republicans who signed on "wanting to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran"

 

[Statistikhengst]

What at a kick. We have some on the far right discussing this issue as if they understand it. The President is the branch of government who negotiates treaties, without help of Congress before it is submitted to Congress. The Senate is responsible for ratifying the treaty.

The Senate is responsible for ratifying the execution of a treaty. There is a subtle but important difference.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[paulitician]

The American Muslim President is just helping his Muslim brothers out again. Nothing surprising there. But that being said, Iran already has Nuclear capabilities. It's just playing the UN and the West now. Much like North Korea has. It's gonna get a nice sweetheart deal. You can bet American Tax Dollars will end up in Iran. But keep in mind, this isn't a done-deal yet. Congress does have a say in it.