• 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!

Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won't Last[W:159]

Re: Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won't Last

Umm no, this is about limiting enrichment and lifting sanctions, your assertions are pure nonsense and not even the White House is making this argument, they're just calling it an agreement/deal as if it's not a treaty, tell us sport if this is not a separate treaty then why does the agreement need to be made in the first place? :roll:

that's just it
the treaty has already been negotiated
the terms of enforcement/compliance are now being revisited regarding the actions of a singular NPT member
 
Re: Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won't Last

I don't think an open letter to the Iranians is a particularly good idea. I think it would have been a better idea to do an op-ed or a senate resolution. But Obama has decided to bypass congress for the last two years of his term, so he and his dem allies cant get too outraged if the congress decides to bypass him.

that's pretty much it in a nutshell... though I would categorize the letter as " pretty ****ing stupid".
 
Re: Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won't Last

that's just it
the treaty has already been negotiated
the terms of enforcement/compliance are now being revisited regarding the actions of a singular NPT member

Tell me where in the NPT does it deal with limiting nuclear enrichment and number of centrifuges? Hey but if you're right then Iran doesn't need to be involved in the negotiations whatsoever, they don't need to sign anything and we don't need to offer them anything since they've already ratified the NPT, hell these negotiations are all superlative so they might as well be dropped right now.
 
Re: Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won't Last

If you're going to go that route you can't omit Nixon and his actually treasonous intervention into Vietnam negotiations, and interventions that might have killed many thousands of U.S. soldiers. We've recently been blessed with the tapes of LBJ explaining that to Dirksen. Or that Reagan was negotiating with Iran to keep the hostages until after the 1980 elections.

Wasn't going any "route". Just pointing out that there is indeed a history to this type of thing - it's not unprecedented at all, and it's not all glorious on the other side of things.
 
Same old anti-Semitic "Jooz control the worlds governments" canard just another day.

I ask again. Please tell us--what does AIPAC have to do w/"JOOZ" ?
 
AIPAC, where? Here! From someone who's been there, done that.

How We Know AIPAC Wrote The GOP’s “Treason” Letter To Iran.

"...Because the letter seems at least borderline treasonous–senators telling a foreign power not to bother negotiating with the President–some question whether AIPAC was involved in drafting it. After all, the 47 Republican senators will, we know from experience, do anything to harm President Obama’s initiatives without regard to niceties like the law or the Constitution.
But AIPAC? Would they go that far?

The answer is simple. ..."

How We Know AIPAC Wrote The GOP’s “Treason” Letter To Iran | MJ Rosenberg On Everything
 
Re: Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won't Last

I was unaware that explaining the Constitution to a foreign government equates to undermining US foreign policy, oh wait I guess it does if the POTUS thinks he's a king.

This whole "Obama thinks he's a king" meme is simply bizarre with zero relationship to reality but never mind -- those 47 Senators are the "real Amurricans" even though old man McCain is now blaming a snowstorm for signing the letter.

A retired General doesn't think the 47 Senators are "traitors" but he does have another adjective to describe them
The open letter to the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran signed by 47 senators and instigated by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) was a stunning breach of protocol. One so outrageous that my former colleagues at the New York Daily News dubbed the signers “traitors.”
<snip>
“I would use the word mutinous,” said (Major Gen. Paul D. Eaton, USA-Ret.)Eaton, whose long career includes training Iraqi forces from 2003 to 2004. He is now a senior adviser to VoteVets.org. “I do not believe these senators were trying to sell out America. I do believe they defied the chain of command in what could be construed as an illegal act.” Eaton certainly had stern words for Cotton.

“What Senator Cotton did is a gross breach of discipline, and especially as a veteran of the Army, he should know better,” Eaton told me. “I have no issue with Senator Cotton, or others, voicing their opinion in opposition to any deal to halt Iran’s nuclear progress. Speaking out on these issues is clearly part of his job. But to directly engage a foreign entity, in this way, undermining the strategy and work of our diplomats and our Commander in Chief, strains the very discipline and structure that our foreign relations depend on, to succeed.”
 
This may be a bit of old news regarding the topic of this thread, but Iran's foreign minister actually responded to the letter written by 47 GOP senators.

Republican senators' letter to Iran about ongoing nuclear talks has prompted a lengthy response from Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who delivered an overview of international law as he critiqued the letter.

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 comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy," according to Iran's Foreign Ministry.

But that is only the tip of the iceberg.

Zarif, noting that negotiations are ongoing and haven't yielded an agreement, said the U.S. lawmakers' "unconventional methods" show that they "are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content."

Saying he hopes to "enrich the knowledge of the authors," Zarif said:

"I should bring one important point to the attention of the authors and that is, the world is not the United States, and the conduct of inter-state relations is governed by international law, and not by US domestic law. The authors may not fully understand that in international law, governments represent the entirety of their respective states, are responsible for the conduct of foreign affairs, are required to fulfill the obligations they undertake with other states and may not invoke their internal law as justification for failure to perform their international obligations."

Zarif also noted that many previous international agreements the U.S. has been a party to have been "mere executive agreements," and not full treaties that received Senate ratification.

He said any deal on sanctions and Iran's nuclear program would not be bilateral; would require approval by the U.N. and the U.N. Security Council; and would not be subject to modification by Congress.

He added, "I wish to enlighten the authors that if the next administration revokes any agreement with the stroke of a pen, as they boast, it will have simply committed a blatant violation of international law."

Iran Calls GOP Letter 'Propaganda Ploy,' Offers To 'Enlighten' Authors : The Two-Way : NPR
 
I ask again. Please tell us--what does AIPAC have to do w/"JOOZ" ?

You can shift "zionist" and "AIPAC" with Jews in your classic anti-Semitic "JOOZ control the government" canards all you want, and that **** might actually fly at stormfront but not amongst educated peoples, try again.
 
Re: Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won't Last

This whole "Obama thinks he's a king" meme is simply bizarre with zero relationship to reality

How does trying to shred the Constitution and signing treaties into law without the ratification not have a relationship to reality? But hey way not to address the subject at hand whatsoever, but I guess it's impossible to argue against when the Constitution is in plain English.



[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur...


Facts are stubborn things.
 
do you agree with the Iranian that international law supersedes the Constitution?

The US Constitution is not international law.


And a a representative of a foreign government lecturing US Senators about our own Constitution, about international law, and about the United Nations should be a warning about the sorts of people we're electing to represent us.

But, alas, voters will vote for the party, regardless of the person running.
 
do you agree with the Iranian that international law supersedes the Constitution?

No it does not, the Iranian speaker is a fascist propagandist that doesn't have the slightest iota of knowledge regarding international law:

Article 46

Provisions of internal law regarding competence to conclude treaties

1) A State may not invoke the fact that its consent to be bound by a treaty has been expressed in violation of a provision of its internal law regarding competence to conclude treaties as invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and concerned a rule of its internal law of fundamental importance.

2) A violation is manifest if it would be objectively evident to any State conducting itself in the matter in accordance with normal practice and in good faith.



So now the fascist pigs in Iran have been taught a lesson about the US Constitution and basic international law.
 
Re: Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won't Last

You can shift "zionist" and "AIPAC" with Jews in your classic anti-Semitic "JOOZ control the government" <remaining tirade snipped>

Please cite when I said "JOOZ control the government."

And FYI, it's considered anti-Semitic to make generalizations about Jews, i. e. lumping all Jews w/AIPAC or "zionist". . .

Orthodox Jews protest against Zionism

Campaigns | Tell Congress: AIPAC Doesn't Speak for Me! | Jewish Voice for Peace

--
Advice: consider at least partially unbolting your cranium from netanyahu's bigoted anus and educating yourself about the world and about religious groups (such as Jews) before making such stupid comments.

Thank you.
 
Yes, indeed.

Well then you admit that Putin is a war criminal who needs to be put on trial for crimes against humanity.

But hey Montey I'll educate you one more time:


Article 46

Provisions of internal law regarding competence to conclude treaties

1) A State may not invoke the fact that its consent to be bound by a treaty has been expressed in violation of a provision of its internal law regarding competence to conclude treaties as invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and concerned a rule of its internal law of fundamental importance.

2) A violation is manifest if it would be objectively evident to any State conducting itself in the matter in accordance with normal practice and in good faith.

 
Re: Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won't Last

Please cite when I said "JOOZ control the government."

Yes yes, "JOOZ don't control the government...but AIPAC does", same classic anti-Semitic canard with a transparent veneer, you're not fooling anyone.



And FYI, it's considered anti-Semitic to make generalizations about Jews, i. e. lumping all Jews w/AIPAC or "zionist". . .

Orthodox Jews protest against Zionism

Was this before or after they went to Ahmadinejad's holocaust denial summit in Tehran? :roll:
 
Re: Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won't Last

here is the text of that letter signed by 47 (of 54) republican senators:

Text of GOP Senators’ Letter to Iran’s Leaders on Nuclear Talks - Washington Wire - WSJ

The letter mirrors what John Kerry has said publicly. If the letter has destroyed any hope of a one and only Obama foreign policy victory, the libs should be calling for Kerry's head as well.

There is nothing more dangerous than an incompetent narcissist desperate to create a legacy for himself.
 
Well then you admit that Putin is a war criminal who needs to be put on trial for crimes against humanity.

But hey Montey I'll educate you one more time:


Article 46

Provisions of internal law regarding competence to conclude treaties

1) A State may not invoke the fact that its consent to be bound by a treaty has been expressed in violation of a provision of its internal law regarding competence to conclude treaties as invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and concerned a rule of its internal law of fundamental importance.

2) A violation is manifest if it would be objectively evident to any State conducting itself in the matter in accordance with normal practice and in good faith.


I'm talking about international law, not treaties. When a nation operates outside its own borders/territories, it's bound by international law. But of course if one has the economic, political and military will and strength to flaunt it, or choose to not recognize it, or IJC/ICC which might prosecute violations thereof, the point is rather moot.

Having rejected your opinions in the past I haven't received any education from you as yet.
 
I'm talking about international law, not treaties.

Yes because treaties don't have the force of international law. :roll:

When a nation operates outside its own borders/territories, it's bound by international law.

You mean like by invading a peaceful neighbor and annexing its territory? Touche.

But of course if one has the economic, political and military will and strength to flaunt it, or choose to not recognize it, or IJC/ICC which might prosecute violations thereof, the point is rather moot.

So when will the Iranians be brought before the ICC for their numerous unprovoked acts of war against Israel?
 
Re: Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won't Last

Yes yes, "JOOZ don't control the government...but AIPAC does", same classic anti-Semitic canard

Uh, no. Jews are individuals whose religious affiliation is Judaism, and Judaism, you see, is a religion. And religion is not a political lobby/organization, such as AIPAC or RIAA or NRAILA, etc.

Two different things: religion, political organization.

with a transparent veneer, you're not fooling anyone.

Don't need to, considering you're doing an excellent job of making a complete fool of yourself, as evidenced by your ignorant, anti-Semitic generalizations.
 
Re: Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won't Last

Uh, no. Jews are individuals whose religious affiliation is Judaism, and Judaism, you see, is a religion. And religion is not a political lobby/organization, such as AIPAC or RIAA or NRAILA, etc.

Two different things: religion, political organization.



Don't need to, considering you're doing an excellent job of making a complete fool of yourself, as evidenced by your ignorant, anti-Semitic generalizations.

You got me, AIPAC controls the US government, yep, and those dirty Zionists control the media, the banks, and killed Jesus too. :roll:
 
Back
Top Bottom