• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Schumer to vote against Iran Deal

MrT said:
He is pursuing an executive agreement because 95% of all such agreements between the US and any other country over the past 50 odd years was an executive agreement.
Click to expand...

Not nuclear arrangements.
 
humbolt said:
Not nuclear arrangements.
Click to expand...

So when the US and Russia recently made an agreement to reduce their nuclear arsenal by roughly 1/3 each, that was a full treaty?
 
MrT said:
So when the US and Russia recently made an agreement to reduce their nuclear arsenal by roughly 1/3 each, that was a full treaty?
Click to expand...

Based on a previous treaty ratified by Congress.
 
"SELF APPOINTED "GUARDIAN OF ISRAEL" OR US CONGRESSMAN?"


While Congress' self proclaimed "Guardian of Israel" is busily working to further Netanyahu's frantic agenda, people a little closer to home are not so fond of placating blustering foreign despots.


“Americans back Iran deal by 2-to-1 margin: Reuters/Ipsos poll”
Americans back Iran deal by 2-to-1 margin: Reuters/Ipsos poll | Reuters

Most realists are willing to admit that Iran will get nuclear weapons with or without the blessings of AIPAC, the US & Israel. Even if they do, they are no more suicidal, irrational & unstable than existing Nuclear Powers.

It is important to realize that the US needs good relations with Iran more than the other way around; the West is not "the only game in town"

Conspicuously absent in Major US Media is the fact that Iranian leaders have repeatedly reached out to the US in many quiet ways only to be rebuffed by "Israel Firsters" in US government & elsewhere.

For example, during a recent deep water oil line rupture, Iranian specialists offered their expert experience & knowledge in repairing the break but their offer was rejected. Meanwhile millions of gallons of oil continued to leak into the Gulf of Mexico because Israelis ("Dual" Citizens) like Schumer don't want a mutually beneficial relationship to develop between Iran in the US.

Also:

“Over the Horizon: Iranian Rescue Validates U.S. Navy's Cooperative Strategy”
Over the Horizon: Iranian Rescue Validates U.S. Navy's Cooperative Strategy

The Iranian & US Navies have worked together in various rescue missions in the Persian Gulf just as Iranian & US sailors of all levels socialize & exchange gifts during informal meetings.

While strained relations & AIPAC supported Sanctions have existed between Iran & the US, Iran has established & currently solidifies Trade & Security Relations through out S. America & more significant World Powers that have caught the eye of the Pentagon:


“The Growing China-Russia-Iran Strategic Alliance Has Got the Pentagon Trembling”
The Growing China-Russia-Iran Strategic Alliance Has Got the Pentagon Trembling
EXCERPT "Iran is an observer at the CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization) and is bound to become a member of the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) by 2016.

So the multi-vector Russia-China-Iran strategic alliance is a go. Because whatever happens with the nuclear negotiations this summer, and as much as Tehran wants cooperation and not confrontation, Iran is bound to remain — alongside Russia"CONTINUED



Meanwhile, Iranian relations with Russia & China improve while at the same time, America's relations with Russia & China seem to worsen.

Without considering growing Iranian influence in S. America, wouldn't it be in America's best interests, both militarily & economically to have established, stable & mutually beneficial relations with Iran than to drive such a strategically located country into deeper, Military alliances with powerful & not-so-friendly World Powers?

We'll find out what Netanyahu's opinion is the next time Schumer opens his mouth.
 
Last edited:
MrT said:
Chuck Schumer to vote against Iran deal - CNNPolitics.com

New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, an influential Jewish Democrat who's poised to assume leadership of his party in the Senate, will oppose President Barack Obama's nuclear deal with Iran, he announced on Thursday evening.

"After deep study, careful thought and considerable soul-searching, I have decided I must oppose the agreement and will vote yes on a motion of disapproval," Schumer wrote in a 1,600-word post on the website Medium.

"I will vote to disapprove the agreement, not because I believe war is a viable or desirable option, nor to challenge the path of diplomacy," he added later. "It is because I believe Iran will not change, and under this agreement it will be able to achieve its dual goals of eliminating sanctions while ultimately retaining its nuclear and non-nuclear power."

While this news is unfortunate for supporters of the Iran deal and, indeed, diplomacy in general, there does appear to be some good news contained in this article as well.

A White House official suggested Thursday that Schumer's announcement of opposition came only after enough Democratic support was assured to keep the plan intact.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter what the whipped liberal vote count may be. This was Sen. Schumer doing what he thinks was necessary for him NOT to lose the Jewish vote in his district. That much is plainly clear.
MMC said:
Also, Steve Israel has come out against the Deal. Pelosi is trying to get feelers out and looking to get some more Demos to back BO peeps plan.



As if on cue, Representative Eliot L. Engel of New York, the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who was widely expected to oppose the deal, announced his opposition Thursday night.

“I examined this deal in three parts: nuclear restrictions on Iran in the first 10 years, nuclear restrictions on Iran after 10 years, and nonnuclear components and consequences of a deal,” he wrote. “In each case I have asked: Are we better off with the agreement or without it?”

Mr. Schumer said that the inspection regime in the first 10 years of the agreement would be too weak, and that provisions to reimpose sanctions if Iran cheated were too onerous. He said his most serious concerns were with the freedom that Iran would have after 10 years to quickly build a nuclear weapon. “To me, after 10 years, if Iran is the same nation as it is today, we will be worse off with this agreement than without it,” he said.....snip~

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/07/u...ys-he-will-oppose-iran-nuclear-deal.html?_r=0
Click to expand...

Too onerous on whom? What country has said it would be too difficult for them to put the sanctions back in place should it be discovered that Iran cheated once this agreement took affect?

I have two words for Sen. SChumer's position here: COPE OUT!
 
Last edited:
ludin said:
So I wonder if Obama will start insulting schumer since now he is like one of those hard line Iranian leaders opposed to the bill.
things that make you go hmmmm.
Click to expand...

Heya Ludin. :2wave: Well to be honest there are quite a few Demos from NY he will have to include.
 
Objective Voice said:
Doesn't matter what the whipped liberal vote count may be. This was Sen. Schumer doing what he thinks was necessary for him NOT to lose the Jewish vote in his district. That much is plainly clear.
Click to expand...

Given what happened to Eric Cantor, that was probably the right call.
 
MrT said:
Given what happened to Eric Cantor, that was probably the right call.
Click to expand...

And what exactly was that? Did he get run out of office by the voters? Did his wealthy donors or House GOP members turn on him? Or did he simply decide he'd had enough of DC politics and decided to take his "talents" elsewhere (i.e., K-Street or some other political affiliated group of some sort)?
 
Objective Voice said:
And what exactly was that? Did he get run out of office by the voters? Did his wealthy donors or House GOP members turn on him? Or did he simply decide he'd had enough of DC politics and decided to take his "talents" elsewhere (i.e., K-Street or some other political affiliated group of some sort)?
Click to expand...

He did not pay attention to how much the issue of working with democrats on a bipartisan immigration plan would piss off his constituents and he lost his local seat to a candidate with no experience.
 
MrT said:
He did not pay attention to how much the issue of working with democrats on a bipartisan immigration plan would piss off his constituents and he lost his local seat to a candidate with no experience.
Click to expand...

Oh...

Sorry to hear that, but if his former constituents can't understand how important immigration (and procreation) are to this country's future, then it's their own fault for being so blinded by their own prejudices. Of course, I could understand if his area was having significant problems with illegal immigrants. However, wouldn't the proper immigration reforms (not to mention adherence to the rule of law) help to mitigate such issues?
 
Objective Voice said:
Doesn't matter what the whipped liberal vote count may be. This was Sen. Schumer doing what he thinks was necessary for him NOT to lose the Jewish vote in his district. That much is plainly clear.


Too onerous on whom? What country has said it would be too difficult for them to put the sanctions back in place should it be discovered that Iran cheated once this agreement took affect?

I have two words for Sen. SChumer's position here: COPE OUT!
Click to expand...

- - - - - - - - - -

Re: "This was Sen. Schumer doing what he thinks was necessary for him NOT to lose the Jewish vote in his district."



It looks like the majority of American Jews support the Nuclear Deal according to the two polls cited below:

“Jewish Americans support the Iran nuclear deal”
Jewish Americans support the Iran nuclear deal - The Washington Post

EXCERPT “The LA Jewish Journal survey*released Thursday found that 48 percent of Jews*support the deal while 28 percent oppose it and 25 percent*hadn't heard enough to form an opinion.

Jewish support for the deal was 20 percentage points higher than for Americans*overall, according to a side-by-side poll of the general public. A separate question found 54 percent of Jews saying Congress should approve the deal, while 35 percent want Congress to block it.”CONTINUED


The idea that most American Jews oppose the Deal may be because of 2 factors:

1. Israel's organized Right Wing advocates use a software tool called "Megaphone" that alerts all members of network of any Poll, News article etc relating to or critical of Israel. Hence, artificially inflated other Polls (simply Google "Megaphone software" for more)

2. Wealthy & influential, Right Wing Israeli lobbies already have the funds & established contacts with the Media to get their voice out.


I suspect that Iran will adhere this double-standard Nuclear Deal by which one Regional country is allowed to maintain a rogue, uninspected Nuclear Arsenal but Iran is under a Draconian microscope re: Nuclear Power.

During that period of compliance, Iran will have further solidified its alternative Military, Trade etc alliances & acquire a defensive Nuclear Arsenal of its own in 5 - 10 years if the frequent threats it receives continue.


What are your thoughts?


Thanks
 
B'smith said:
The idea that most American Jews oppose the Deal may be because of 2 factors:

1. Israel's organized Right Wing advocates use a software tool called "Megaphone" that alerts all members of network of any Poll, News article etc relating to or critical of Israel. Hence, artificially inflated other Polls (simply Google "Megaphone software" for more)

2. Wealthy & influential, Right Wing Israeli lobbies already have the funds & established contacts with the Media to get their voice out.


I suspect that Iran will adhere this double-standard Nuclear Deal by which one Regional country is allowed to maintain a rogue, uninspected Nuclear Arsenal but Iran is under a Draconian microscope re: Nuclear Power.

During that period of compliance, Iran will have further solidified its alternative Military, Trade etc alliances & acquire a defensive Nuclear Arsenal of its own in 5 - 10 years if the frequent threats it receives continue.


What are your thoughts?


Thanks
Click to expand...

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. I suspect Iran will continue trying to get its hands on nuclear bomb-making components throughout this 10-15 year non-proliferation period. This good part of this deal for the world, however, is Iran has a chance to go in a completely different direction. And if they are found to cheat the 6 industrialized nations involved will have the opportunity to reign them in. In the grand scheme of things, it's really incumbent upon us (America), England, France, Italy, Russia and China to step up to the plate and hold Iran accountable. Of course, if none do, my bet is Iran's neighbors (Saudi Arabia and Turkey, in particular) will.
 
MMC said:
Well one thing is certainly clear with Chucky. BO can't threaten him and or his spot. Schumer is smart and already has 19 mil in his coffers and no Repub Opponent even. I'll bet Chucky knows BO don't have any leverage over him. So add on Menendez and there are some top dog Democrats opposing BO peep and his deal. It should be enough to force BO to Veto. So that BO can show his true colors. Repubs need to start making him walk that walk and use up that ink.

Oh and for once in some time.....Schumer nails it with Europeans. As they already have proven they don't like to rock the boat with just themselves.



Key flaws in the agreement, Engel said: “After five years Iran can purchase regular armaments and after eight years can buy ballistic missiles;” Iran would be able to delay inspections of suspected nuclear development sites up to 24 days, and “in 15 years Iran is a full-fledged nuclear state.’’

In opposing the deal, Schumer cited “serious weaknesses” in the first 10 years, including the 24-day delay before an inspection. “While inspectors would likely be able to detect radioactive isotopes at a site after 24 days, that delay would enable Iran to escape detection of any illicit building and improving of possible military dimensions (PMD) – the tools that go into building a bomb but don’t emit radioactivity,’’ he said. It would hinder the U.S.’s “ability to determine precisely what was being done at that site.’’

“Even more troubling is the fact that the U.S. cannot demand inspections unilaterally,” Schumer said. “By requiring the majority of the eight-member Joint Commission, and assuming that China, Russia, and Iran will not cooperate, inspections would require the votes of all three European members of the P5+1 as well as the EU representative. It is reasonable to fear that, once the Europeans become entangled in lucrative economic relations with Iran, they may well be inclined not to rock the boat by voting to allow inspections.’’.....snip~

Schumer, Engel to oppose Iran deal
Click to expand...

I understood that any of the P5 or the IAEA could demand inspections.
What does the agreement say on this? And no I do not trust Engel as a source on anything.
 
WSUwarrior said:
I hate Schumers guts but I applaud his bravery on this issue that anyone with a brain would clearly be against. Its a bad deal, simple as that.
Click to expand...

He's not brave, a big lol. It's political expedience, AFTER he was sure the votes would still be there to go forward.
 
Montecresto said:
He's not brave, a big lol. It's political expedience, AFTER he was sure the votes would still be there to go forward.
Click to expand...

Point taken. I am glad you agree that Schumer is a piece of ****. Pushing gun control even after it was found that the guy didnt have a gun and such...
 
JANFU said:
I understood that any of the P5 or the IAEA could demand inspections.
What does the agreement say on this? And no I do not trust Engel as a source on anything.
Click to expand...


What about these other New Yorkers JF? :2wave:

They join Democratic Reps. Nita Lowey of Westchester County, ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, and Steve Israel from Long Island, who is No. 6 in the House Democratic leadership, among the growing number of New York Democrats who will vote against the deal in September.

New York Democratic Reps. Kathleen Rice of Long Island and Grace Meng of Queens have also announced opposition to the deal.....snip~
 
Fortunately, Schumer realizes whose side Obama is on.
 
Objective Voice said:
Doesn't matter what the whipped liberal vote count may be. This was Sen. Schumer doing what he thinks was necessary for him NOT to lose the Jewish vote in his district. That much is plainly clear.


Too onerous on whom? What country has said it would be too difficult for them to put the sanctions back in place should it be discovered that Iran cheated once this agreement took affect?

I have two words for Sen. SChumer's position here: COPE OUT!
Click to expand...



He explained it out with that bit about the Europeans becoming entangled ,and not having the heart to make a stand on any inspections.




Obama is making a hard-sell to build public and Congressional support for the Iran nuclear deal. But he’s facing far stiffer resistance than he or his political team expected.

◾The latest polls show the American people oppose the deal 2 to 1 — and the more they learn of the details, the more opposed they become.
◾Key Democrats in in the House and Senate are suddenly breaking with the President and declaring their opposition to the deal.
◾The Canadian government has come out against the deal.
◾Israeli leaders — both the government and the head of the opposition — are against the deal, as are 74% of the Israeli people.
◾Arab leaders are speaking out against the deal, as well......snip~
 
MMC said:
What about these other New Yorkers JF? :2wave:

They join Democratic Reps. Nita Lowey of Westchester County, ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, and Steve Israel from Long Island, who is No. 6 in the House Democratic leadership, among the growing number of New York Democrats who will vote against the deal in September.

New York Democratic Reps. Kathleen Rice of Long Island and Grace Meng of Queens have also announced opposition to the deal.....snip~
Click to expand...

Not familiar with them- with Engel I am. Crooked as a dogs hind leg.
But the question I posed was - I understood that any of the P5 or the IAEA could demand inspections.
 
JANFU said:
Not familiar with them- with Engel I am. Crooked as a dogs hind leg.
But the question I posed was - I understood that any of the P5 or the IAEA could demand inspections.
Click to expand...

They can demand and Iran can appeal. China, Russia, and Iran wont be demanding them. Then once the Euros are into trade they wont rock the boat.



◾80 percent oppose giving Iran $150 billion in early sanctions absent congressional approval of the deal
◾72 percent said that Congress shouldn’t approve an agreement that does not allow independent U.S. inspections of Iran’s military laboratories
◾68 percent don’t believe that inspections overseen by the United Nations that allow up to a 24-day notification period before will prevent Iran from cheating....snip~
 
WSUwarrior said:
Point taken. I am glad you agree that Schumer is a piece of ****. Pushing gun control even after it was found that the guy didnt have a gun and such...
Click to expand...

I'm no fan of his.
 
Erod said:
Fortunately, Schumer realizes whose side Obama is on.
Click to expand...

We know whose side Israeli citizen ("Dual" citizen) Schumer was on even BEFORE he declared himself "the Guardian of Israel"


Iranian leaders have reached out to the US for warm relations only to be rebuffed by Schumer's fellow Israeli Congressmen & Israel First crowd

Unmentioned in Major US Media are other ways in which offered to help Americans only to have those offers rejected at the cost of more misery to US citizens during the worst environmental disaster in US History:


“Iran offers help in fighting Gulf of Mexico oil leak”
Iran offers help in fighting Gulf of Mexico oil leak - Israel News, Ynetnews

EXCERPT “Iranian company included in recent round of sanctions against Tehran offers to send experts to help clean up largest environmental disaster in US history, saying that US, Britain can send request for aid from Iran.
"Despite the sanctions, the Revolutionary Guards are prepared for the humanitarian mission to send forces to the Gulf of Mexico," noted Qasemi. "Iranian experience in dealing with oil spills in the Persian Gulf countries, like Kuwait, has proven its abilities." CONTINUED


The US Government needs more "Guardians of America" & America's best interests in mind and normalized relations with Iran are in America's best interests. Just ask the oil soaked residents around the Gulf of Mexico.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom