• 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: Let Congress decide on Iran deal

Maybe so but the question now is whether the U.S will honor deals with Iran. You sound just like Cheney when the Bush administration broke off nuclear talks with N. Korea. How did that work out? I guess you are looking for a similar result with Iran.

Not a question to me. I don't doubt that the U.S. will honor its end of an agreement. If by that you refer to the re-imposition of sanctions when Iran sticks its tongue out at the agreement, then I suspect that will be more difficult than the government thinks. If they don't have the bomb now, they will have it soon. No agreement or sanction or even war is going to change that. It is inevitable in the true sense of the word and has been for more than a decade. All we can do is treat them like the enemy they are.
 
That's why there are rigorous inspections that are part of the deal. Even Reagan said of the USSR we must "trust but verify". To scuttle the deal before it is made is extremely stupid and will virtually guarantee a nuclear Iran. They will be forced to make a bomb or face invasion, just like the ultimatum that Bush gave N. Korea.

Where did you hear/read that the inspections are "rigorous"? I keep hearing that what was proposed were weak, unresolved and very unclear.
 
It could be a short term deal anyways. Considering their Ayatollah has terminal cancer.

If anything it may be a short term deal because the deal has flaws.

Our issue now is how the deal is characterized in terms of Constitutional application. Meaning no matter if we go down the Treaty path or Executive Order path there are clear longevity complications.

Those are all aside from whatever could happen on the Iran side of the fence.
 
How can they honor a deal that we won't make? Bush broke the N. Korean deal and instead decided that invadng Iraq was the way to prevent them from making nuclear weapons. N. Korea made a bomb soon after.

North Korea's road to nuclear weapons | MSNBC



Here is how that really played out. Do note how the N Korean military was never in on the deal. Left Unaddressed and left for someone else to handle, huh? Typical leftist methodology.



"This U.S.-North Korean agreement will help to achieve a long-standing and vital American objective: an end to the threat of nuclear proliferation on the Korean peninsula." -President Bill Clinton.

"The new accord ... outlines an elaborate timetable for steps by each side.... But American officials acknowledge that the agreement ... will require enormous patience and perseverance .... [T]hey concede that it poses a risk for much of the next decade that North Korea could change its mind, cast aside the accord and have the basic fuel in hand to produce nuclear weapons." -The New York Times

After 17 months of tumultuous negotiations over the Pyongyang government's nuclear program, the United States and North Korea signed a detailed agreement in Geneva on October 2 1. The pact is a highly complex, three-staged, multilateral arrangement whose terms will not be fulfilled for many years. For the most part, the deal appears "front loaded" in favor of Pyongyang. A consor- tium of nations, led by the United States, is responsible for constructing a modem nu- clear power infrastructure for the well-armed, repressive communist state. The same con- sortium will bolster the North's faltering economy by easing its immediate energy bur- dens with large quantities of free fuel oil. In an October 20 letter to North Korean strong- man Kim Jong Il, moreover, President Clinton vastly expanded America's commitments under the formal agreement. The U.S., said Clinton, would finance the fuel shipments and the reactors if the consortium fails to do so. The total value of the U.S. pledge is esti- mated conservatively at more than $4 billion. In addition to leading the international energy assistance consortium, Washington has pledged to ease its long-standing trade embargo and move toward first-ever diplomatic relations with the North. These concessions provide Pyongyang a degree of political rec- ognition by the U.S. and its allies that it long has sought. Left unaddressed is the immedi- ate threat posed by the North's formidable conventional military force, which includes a large stockpile of chemical and biological weapons and missiles capable of reaching South Korea and Japan. About 37,000 U.S. troops are stationed in South Korea to counter the North's military threat. The Clinton Administration's aim in all of this is, first, to freeze the North Korean nu- clear program and, ultimately, to assess the North's past efforts to build nuclear bombs and preclude any future weapons capabilities. U.S. intelligence and defense officials esti- mate that the North has enough enriched fuel to produce nuclear weapons. Secretary of Defense William Perry has stated, "it is possible they could make one or even two de- vices, perhaps even nuclear bombs."5 Even assuming smooth implementation of the Oc- tober 21 agreement, however, its goals cannot possibly be fulfilled completely for at least a decade.....snip~

The Clinton Nuclear Deal with Pyongyang: Road Map to Progress or Dead End Street?
 
80-11138153_810089155745322_124348755157366622_n_3f3d9a4642f74bbcf994afa051066283668c2dd7.jpg


Yeah, I think it's going to end up in the same place with Iran. Kinda works that way when you make deals with countries that don't honor the deals they make.

Isn't it already well documented that Iran is already cheating on the already existing inspection regimes? <sarcasm> Yeah, that's sure got a bright future. </sarcasm>


Uh oh EB.....I think BO just told on himself.



Obama: Yeah, This Iran Deal Doesn't Actually Stop The Regime From Getting a Bomb.....


During an interview today with NPR, President Obama admitted the framework outlined in a State Department "fact sheet" and released last week only delays Iran's non-peaceful nuclear program. More from Fox News:

The stark admission -- after his energy secretary even claimed the deal was a "forever agreement" -- came as the president seeks to quiet a growing chorus questioning whether the deal he and world leaders have negotiated merely delays the certainty of a nuclear-armed Iran. Obama has insisted confidently that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon on his watch, which ends in roughly 20 months, but has made no similar assurances about his successor.....snip~

Obama: Yeah, This Iran Deal Doesn't Actually Stop The Regime From Getting a Bomb - Katie Pavlich
 
Uh oh EB.....I think BO just told on himself.



Obama: Yeah, This Iran Deal Doesn't Actually Stop The Regime From Getting a Bomb.....


During an interview today with NPR, President Obama admitted the framework outlined in a State Department "fact sheet" and released last week only delays Iran's non-peaceful nuclear program. More from Fox News:

The stark admission -- after his energy secretary even claimed the deal was a "forever agreement" -- came as the president seeks to quiet a growing chorus questioning whether the deal he and world leaders have negotiated merely delays the certainty of a nuclear-armed Iran. Obama has insisted confidently that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon on his watch, which ends in roughly 20 months, but has made no similar assurances about his successor.....snip~

Obama: Yeah, This Iran Deal Doesn't Actually Stop The Regime From Getting a Bomb - Katie Pavlich

Greetings, MMC. :2wave:

It is getting to be repetitious - everything that can have negative consequences seems to be delayed until after he leaves office. This can happen to any deal, I know, but in his case it seems to be deliberately done so he doesn't have to be held accountable. Win-win for him - he looks good at the time, and the after-effects are left for someone else to handle. On those occasions when he is criticized for something he's done, and he can't escape being blamed, it's always someone else's fault. What a guy! :thumbdown:
 
Greetings, MMC. :2wave:

It is getting to be repetitious - everything that can have negative consequences seems to be delayed until after he leaves office. This can happen to any deal, I know, but in his case it seems to be deliberately done so he doesn't have to be held accountable. Win-win for him - he looks good at the time, and the after-effects are left for someone else to handle. On those occasions when he is criticized for something he's done, and he can't escape being blamed, it's always someone else's fault. What a guy! :thumbdown:



Well, at least Corker can force BO to experience that override. I think they will have like 2 extras votes over and the Demos will have been the ones that finally stepped up and actually thought about their job.

More and more are getting tired of him just doing what he wants.
 
Uh oh EB.....I think BO just told on himself.



Obama: Yeah, This Iran Deal Doesn't Actually Stop The Regime From Getting a Bomb.....


During an interview today with NPR, President Obama admitted the framework outlined in a State Department "fact sheet" and released last week only delays Iran's non-peaceful nuclear program. More from Fox News:

The stark admission -- after his energy secretary even claimed the deal was a "forever agreement" -- came as the president seeks to quiet a growing chorus questioning whether the deal he and world leaders have negotiated merely delays the certainty of a nuclear-armed Iran. Obama has insisted confidently that Iran will not get a nuclear weapon on his watch, which ends in roughly 20 months, but has made no similar assurances about his successor.....snip~

Obama: Yeah, This Iran Deal Doesn't Actually Stop The Regime From Getting a Bomb - Katie Pavlich

Can never get a straight and consistent answer from this administration, the same way that you can never trust what they are telling you, the same way that Obama is always surprised at nearly any situation that come up from his administration, which he always learned about from the news.

:yawn:
SOS DD (Same of ****, different day).
 
Here is how that really played out. Do note how the N Korean military was never in on the deal. Left Unaddressed and left for someone else to handle, huh? Typical leftist methodology.



"This U.S.-North Korean agreement will help to achieve a long-standing and vital American objective: an end to the threat of nuclear proliferation on the Korean peninsula." -President Bill Clinton.

"The new accord ... outlines an elaborate timetable for steps by each side.... But American officials acknowledge that the agreement ... will require enormous patience and perseverance .... [T]hey concede that it poses a risk for much of the next decade that North Korea could change its mind, cast aside the accord and have the basic fuel in hand to produce nuclear weapons." -The New York Times

After 17 months of tumultuous negotiations over the Pyongyang government's nuclear program, the United States and North Korea signed a detailed agreement in Geneva on October 2 1. The pact is a highly complex, three-staged, multilateral arrangement whose terms will not be fulfilled for many years. For the most part, the deal appears "front loaded" in favor of Pyongyang. A consor- tium of nations, led by the United States, is responsible for constructing a modem nu- clear power infrastructure for the well-armed, repressive communist state. The same con- sortium will bolster the North's faltering economy by easing its immediate energy bur- dens with large quantities of free fuel oil. In an October 20 letter to North Korean strong- man Kim Jong Il, moreover, President Clinton vastly expanded America's commitments under the formal agreement. The U.S., said Clinton, would finance the fuel shipments and the reactors if the consortium fails to do so. The total value of the U.S. pledge is esti- mated conservatively at more than $4 billion. In addition to leading the international energy assistance consortium, Washington has pledged to ease its long-standing trade embargo and move toward first-ever diplomatic relations with the North. These concessions provide Pyongyang a degree of political rec- ognition by the U.S. and its allies that it long has sought. Left unaddressed is the immedi- ate threat posed by the North's formidable conventional military force, which includes a large stockpile of chemical and biological weapons and missiles capable of reaching South Korea and Japan. About 37,000 U.S. troops are stationed in South Korea to counter the North's military threat. The Clinton Administration's aim in all of this is, first, to freeze the North Korean nu- clear program and, ultimately, to assess the North's past efforts to build nuclear bombs and preclude any future weapons capabilities. U.S. intelligence and defense officials esti- mate that the North has enough enriched fuel to produce nuclear weapons. Secretary of Defense William Perry has stated, "it is possible they could make one or even two de- vices, perhaps even nuclear bombs."5 Even assuming smooth implementation of the Oc- tober 21 agreement, however, its goals cannot possibly be fulfilled completely for at least a decade.....snip~

The Clinton Nuclear Deal with Pyongyang: Road Map to Progress or Dead End Street?

Clintons agreement kept the N. Koreans from making a bomb for 9 years. It wasn't until the Bush administration refused to negotiate that they kicked out the inspectors and resumed their nuclear program. That is what happened. In fact Bush rushed them into building the bomb to prevent a threatened invasion. Cheney even said we don't negotiate with evil...we destroy it. Remember that Bush invaded Iraq because he said it was important to do BEFORE they got a bomb. N. Korea needed to get a bomb quick to prevent us from invading them too. That was the Bush doctrine for you.
 
Clintons agreement kept the N. Koreans from making a bomb for 9 years. It wasn't until the Bush administration refused to negotiate that they kicked out the inspectors and resumed their nuclear program. That is what happened. In fact Bush rushed them into building the bomb to prevent a threatened invasion. Cheney even said we don't negotiate with evil...we destroy it. Remember that Bush invaded Iraq because he said it was important to do BEFORE they got a bomb. N. Korea needed to get a bomb quick to prevent us from invading them too. That was the Bush doctrine for you.

Oh really.....here is how it happened.


With tensions rising, U.S. and North Korean officials began negotiations in 1993, which led what was called the Agreed Framework in 1994. By this time, Kim Il Song had died and his son, Kim Jong Il, had taken over. In exchange for abandoning its nuclear weapons program, the United States would provide the North Koreans with nuclear reactors that would produce lower-grade plutonium that couldn't be weaponized. Despite the agreement, and floods and famine gripping North Korea in the mid- to late-1990s, the country continued developing its medium- to long-range missile technology. The DPRK, claiming they were launching a satellite, even test-fired a rocket that flew over Japan and into the Pacific Ocean.

In 2002, the DPRK acknowledged the existence of its weapons program, which was in violation of its agreement with the United States. The following year the DPRK formally withdrew from the NPT and began producing weapons-grade plutonium from its reactors once again.

Diplomacy, foreign aid and sanctions all proved fruitless in trying to bring North Korea to officially stop pursuing nuclear weapons. By mid-2006, the DPRK has produced as much as 60 kilograms (27.3 pounds) of plutonium fuel, enough to create as many as 13 nuclear bombs. And that same year, the North Koreans finally tested one of them.....snip~

How North Korea Got the Bomb : Discovery News
 
Clintons agreement kept the N. Koreans from making a bomb for 9 years. It wasn't until the Bush administration refused to negotiate that they kicked out the inspectors and resumed their nuclear program. That is what happened. In fact Bush rushed them into building the bomb to prevent a threatened invasion. Cheney even said we don't negotiate with evil...we destroy it. Remember that Bush invaded Iraq because he said it was important to do BEFORE they got a bomb. N. Korea needed to get a bomb quick to prevent us from invading them too. That was the Bush doctrine for you.

Yes, the Bush administration made them do it. Now that reminds me of "The devil made me do it!" Please tell me more. I love stories. I'll check back at bed time.
 
Yes, the Bush administration made them do it. Now that reminds me of "The devil made me do it!" Please tell me more. I love stories. I'll check back at bed time.

What would you do as a leader if your only hope to avoid an invasion was to build a atom bomb?
 
What would you do as a leader if your only hope to avoid an invasion was to build a atom bomb?

I'd quit acting like an asinine jerk - starving my people and oppressing them, threatening the countries around me - and thereby avoid the possibility of an invasion to start with. But that's just me.
 
Oh really.....here is how it happened.


With tensions rising, U.S. and North Korean officials began negotiations in 1993, which led what was called the Agreed Framework in 1994. By this time, Kim Il Song had died and his son, Kim Jong Il, had taken over. In exchange for abandoning its nuclear weapons program, the United States would provide the North Koreans with nuclear reactors that would produce lower-grade plutonium that couldn't be weaponized. Despite the agreement, and floods and famine gripping North Korea in the mid- to late-1990s, the country continued developing its medium- to long-range missile technology. The DPRK, claiming they were launching a satellite, even test-fired a rocket that flew over Japan and into the Pacific Ocean.

In 2002, the DPRK acknowledged the existence of its weapons program, which was in violation of its agreement with the United States. The following year the DPRK formally withdrew from the NPT and began producing weapons-grade plutonium from its reactors once again.

Diplomacy, foreign aid and sanctions all proved fruitless in trying to bring North Korea to officially stop pursuing nuclear weapons. By mid-2006, the DPRK has produced as much as 60 kilograms (27.3 pounds) of plutonium fuel, enough to create as many as 13 nuclear bombs. And that same year, the North Koreans finally tested one of them.....snip~

How North Korea Got the Bomb : Discovery News

LOL That piece left out alot of the details.

In the fall of 2002, Donald Gregg, former ambassador to South Korea during the Bush I presidency, and Donald Oberdorfer, former Washington Post reporter, delivered a message from Kim Jong IL to the White House: “If the United States recognizes our sovereignty and assures non-aggression, it is our view that we should be able to find a way to resolve the nuclear issue …. If the United States makes a bold decision, we will respond accordingly.”

Not only did the administration ignore this and other overtures, but shortly thereafter it persuaded South Korea and Japan to join in stopping the delivery of fuel oil to North Korea as required by the 1994 Agreed Framework. Signed in October 1994, the Agreed Framework required Pyongyang to stop its nuclear weapons program in return for two nuclear power reactors and fuel oil from the United States until the reactors were completed. Soon after the message was ignored and deliveries of fuel oil terminated, North Korea ordered the International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors to leave the country, announced abrogation of the Agreed Framework and withdrawal from the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and began separating plutonium from its spent fuel rods. Inexplicably, the Bush administration did next to nothing in response to these actions.

http://armscontrolcenter.org/issues/northkorea/articles/negotiating_with_north_korea_on_its_nuclear_program/
 
Is he right?

<snip>


Washington (CNN)—A key Senate Democrat is throwing his weight behind a proposal that would allow Congress to reject the Iran nuclear deal, complicating President Barack Obama's efforts to dodge Republican opposition and lock in the pact on his own.

New York Sen. Chuck Schumer said Monday that he is backing legislation introduced by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) to give Congress the ability to halt the implementation of the deal once the United States and five other world powers finalize the details in the coming months.

"This is a very serious issue that deserves careful consideration, and I expect to have a classified briefing in the near future. I strongly believe Congress should have the right to disapprove any agreement and I support the Corker bill which would allow that to occur," Schumer told Politico on Monday.


Schumer: Congress should OK Iran deal - CNN.com

If he disagrees with Obama, of course he's right.
 
Mornin Lady P.
hat.gif
Well As you can see Corker will have the votes to override BO this time. It is something that BO needs to experience. Another first for him and with more to come.

Is it not in the Presidents power to do this?
Would it take more than a law from Congress to limit this?
 
Point here being that Iran is already cheating, as listed below, and we continue to believe that they won't.

I think trusting Iran, expecting Iran to comply with something they are already cheating at now, isn't a wise course.

Sure, trust buy verify, not much verify there (or trust for that matter) when verification is already being thwarted, and is only likely to get worse, right?

There are alot of very knowlegable people that disagree.

The framework agreement announced by the P5+1 and Iran is--from a nuclear nonproliferation and security standpoint--a vitally important step forward. When implemented, it will put in place an effective, verifiable, enforceable, long-term plan to guard against the possibility of a new nuclear-armed state in the Middle East.

The agreement comprehensively addresses the key routes by which Iran could acquire material for nuclear weapons. Among other steps, the framework agreement will:

significantly reduce Iran's capacity to enrich uranium to the point that it would take at least 12 months to amass enough uranium enriched to weapons grade for one bomb;
require Iran to modify its Arak heavy water reactor to meaningfully reduce its proliferation potential and bar Iran from developing any capability for separating plutonium from spent fuel for weapons;
put in place enhanced international inspections and monitoring that would help to deter Iran from attempting to violate the agreement, but if Iran did, increase the international community's ability to detect promptly and, if necessary, disrupt future efforts by Iran to build nuclear weapons, including at potential undeclared sites; and
require Iran to cooperate with the IAEA to conclude the investigation of Iran's past efforts to develop a nuclear warhead and provide transparency sufficient to help ensure that any such effort remains in abeyance.
The agreement will strengthen U.S. security and that of our partners in the region.
The P5+1 Nuclear Agreement With Iran: A Net-Plus for Nonproliferation | Arms Control Association
 




It didn't leave out that part about the N Koreans having a weapons Program the entire time with Clinton. :lol: Despite inspections and up to the day they turned off the cameras and said no more inspections. All the while gaining enough plutonium for their first couple of Nukes and then some. All under Bilbo's very eyes while he gave them money and Food. Plus Fuel that was alleged couldn't be turned into weapons grade.

Moreover you don't have much concerning China and their involvement when Bush stepped in.
 
Is it not in the Presidents power to do this?
Would it take more than a law from Congress to limit this?

Heya JF. :2wave: To do what? He can't get around Congress.
 

Cool!

(Washington, D.C.)--A group of 30 leading nuclear nonproliferation specialists, primarily from the United States, issued a joint statement today assessing the framework deal announced by the P5+1 and Iran on April 2 as a "vitally important step forward" for nonproliferation and international security.

But the "DP experts" disagree!!!!
 
Heya JF. :2wave: To do what? He can't get around Congress.
The President does have the power-authorial to sign this deal does he not? It has to come from some precedent that provides any President this authority?
Then the kicker- If refused does anyone think the other countries will keep their sanctions in place?
The reputation of the US takes a **** kicking then does it not for future issues such as this?
 
The President does have the power-authorial to sign this deal does he not? It has to come from some precedent that provides any President this authority?
Then the kicker- If refused does anyone think the other countries will keep their sanctions in place?
The reputation of the US takes a **** kicking then does it not for future issues such as this?


He can't remove the sanctions imposed by Congress.....despite his signing this deal. When he actually has one.

What he has Right now is what Clinton came up with. That Framework understanding.

Even if they don't keep their sanctions in place. Will they go ahead and conduct business and then lose money with the US? Can the Europeans afford to lose business with the US?

As that can be a response too.
 
He can't remove the sanctions imposed by Congress.....despite his signing this deal. When he actually has one.

What he has Right now is what Clinton came up with. That Framework understanding.

Even if they don't keep their sanctions in place. Will they go ahead and conduct business and then lose money with the US? Can the Europeans afford to lose business with the US?

As that can be a response too.

I understand about the sanctions Congress imposed- they have to approve lifting them.
You refer to Clinton and framework?? Have no idea of what this is based upon.
As to the EU- Can the US economy afford to push it that far?
 
I understand about the sanctions Congress imposed- they have to approve lifting them.
You refer to Clinton and framework?? Have no idea of what this is based upon.
As to the EU- Can the US economy afford to push it that far?


Post 29 shows what Clinton came up with. You can note how BOs arrangement mirrors Clinton's. To top it off Bo has the same woman who dropped the ball with the North Koreans working this deal.

Oh, and just like the North Koreans. Iran is not discussing anything concerning their Military programs and ballistics.
 
Post 29 shows what Clinton came up with. You can note how BOs arrangement mirrors Clinton's. To top it off Bo has the same woman who dropped the ball with the North Koreans working this deal.

Thanks- hard to keep up at times.
 
Back
Top Bottom