Should Congress attempt to stop Obama's Nuclear Agreement with Iran?

2015-04-02T16:56:41-04:00

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/02/president-obama-hails-historic-understanding-with-iran-warns-congress/

President Obama Hails ‘Historic Understanding’ With Iran; Warns Congress - Breitbart

Days after the deadline for nuclear talks with Iran, President Obama hailed a breakthrough reached by Secretary John Kerry and his team in Switzerland. “Today, the United States, together with allies and partners, have reached a historic understanding with Iran,” Obama s Obama admitted that the agreement was “a long time coming” but praised his leadership of the negotiations and the results of the lengthy discussions.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 2 at 2015 11:40 PM

2015-04-02T23:40:37-04:00

I voted for full transparency. I heard an interview on CNN earlier today with the White House Press Secretary, and he addressed just this issue. Although I'm not a fan of this administration, I liked what this fellow (Mr. Josh Earnest) had to say. Namely, that Congress holds a lot of power when it comes to this deal with Iran regarding nuclear weapons. Mr. Earnest suggested that we wait and see if the deal gets us where we want to be in regards to Iran and its nuclear aspirations. If it does - many months (or even years) down the road - then we (Congress) can ease up on the crippling sanctions. And if it doesn't, then Congress can keep the sanctions in place and keep Iran on its knees.

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made Apr 2 at 2015 11:45 PM

2015-04-02T23:45:32-04:00

The essential people on the congressional oversight committee already know every aspect of the deal and are kept apprised of it on a regular basis...
We do remember this from civics class, don't we? As a matter of fact, several of the Patriot Acts introduced legislation increasing oversight on several areas, including War Powers and other executive responsibilities.

Response by LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow made Apr 3 at 2015 1:03 AM

2015-04-03T01:03:59-04:00

I am very concerned about what the Iranian people will do. They are being starved and cut off from the world, because of the actions of the Ayatollahs and the elite class rulers. The boycott doesn't hurt the elite - they get their fancy stuff anyway.

If a revolution occurs because of people starving (that's never happened before, now has it?) how will they feel about the US, the main country pushing the boycott.

I have heard that the Iranian populace doesn't hate us so much right now, but will things stay that way? What happens if they over-run a nuclear facility and take control of it...

It's not quite as simple as people think; cut them off and the leaders will cave. They won't, because Russia keeps the leaders fat, dumb and happy.

Do we need to worry about Iran's nukes? Of course we do. But there are a lot of other countries in the area who already have nukes, and who already hate Israel. So, I am not convinced that this is the Doomsday toll that everyone is making it out to be.

After all, think about all the suitcase nukes that Russia lost control of with the breakup of the USSR. What happened to them? Who has them now?

The general rule of warfare is to make the other poor schlub die for his country; I think everyone knows that if you nuke Israel, the US, UK, etc, you'll be a parking lot in a couple minutes. MAD has kept the world from shooting off nukes so far (outside of Nagasaki and Hiroshima...).

Response by SSG Dwight Amey MSA, MSL, BS, AS made Apr 3 at 2015 8:46 AM

2015-04-03T08:46:15-04:00

This is hard for me because I don't have all the facts on what Congress knows or does not know. I know that in principle we are a United States and if we appear divided to the world that is one thing. But when we operate like we are divided then it leaves a huge crack for other countries to affect our governance credibility.

I think Russia has a lot to benefit from our divided government and will do their best to destroy our way of life like I believe we worked hard to do prior to 1989. We should be very careful.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 3 at 2015 8:57 AM

2015-04-03T08:57:10-04:00

Congress' role (specifically, the Senate's) is to "advise and consent" on matters concerning treaties. The issues that Senators may have with this bill are appropriately raised in the Foreign Relations Committee and questions posed to appropriate administration officials. Done properly, issues that affect the quality and terms of an agreement can be identified and addressed through supplementary diplomatic exchanges.
In short, the process is there to make a deal better, not necessarily kill it.

Having said that, I don't know what the HE-double hockey sticks we are doing here. This deal, in my humble opinion, concedes plenty and the only win is monitoring through the IAEA... which was doing that anyway.
The only thing I can figure is that this opens the door to dialogue and perhaps more substantive conversations at a later date, a la Cuba.

Maybe I am missing something, but I just don't see much substantive at all about this agreement. I'm left wondering if this deal is just diplo-speak for "hey world, look how we worked together" to write up a note that is not worth the paper it is printed on.

Somewhere in a British cemetery, Neville Chamberlain is glad to be forgotten.

Response by BG David Fleming III made Apr 3 at 2015 10:07 AM

2015-04-03T10:07:07-04:00

I ask simple questions, what is the alternative to an agreement? Do we really want to bomb Iran? Do you think we alone can hold together the sanctions without support from the other partners? They want the agreement.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Apr 3 at 2015 7:21 PM

2015-04-03T19:21:59-04:00

There can't be any hidden agendas here so congress needs to see the details. Now that being said, and Iran being the A-hole country they are - remember the whole hostage thingy a few years ago that our government essentially gave them a pass on - does anyone think that we're going to walk away from the table with a truly enforceable deal that gives us the upper hand??

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2015 11:46 PM

2015-04-15T23:46:16-04:00

http://allenbwest.com/2015/04/iran-chants-death-to-america-while-obama-pays-them-how-much/

Is this the real reason Obama is giving Iran $11.9 billion? - Allen B. West - AllenBWest.com

If you feel this is acceptable, you are very wrong.

Response by Sgt Tom Cunnally made Sep 10 at 2015 2:06 PM

2015-09-10T14:06:22-04:00

Boehner is just posturing again... because he has to know if he files a law suit and the courts reject it he will be finished in congress.

Response by SGT Ben Keen made Sep 10 at 2015 2:06 PM

2015-09-10T14:06:25-04:00

Sgt Tom Cunnally - Can you please provide some background on this topic to help the community understand more of what is going on?

Response by SGT Jeremiah B. made Sep 10 at 2015 2:08 PM

2015-09-10T14:08:30-04:00

Boehner keeps promising to sue Obama for this thing or the other and it never happens. There's a reason for that.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Sep 10 at 2015 3:20 PM

2015-09-10T15:20:48-04:00

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/sep/08/politifact-sheet-6-things-know-about-iran-nuclear-/

For those not familiar.

PolitiFact Sheet: 6 things to know about the Iran nuclear deal

With 41 Senate Democrats backing the historic agreement between Iran and five world powers, the Iran nuclear deal is on its way to becoming a done deal, notching a foreign-policy win for President Barack Obama. Yet the debate is far from over. Republican presidential hopefuls Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, flanked by Sarah Palin, appeared at a Stop the Iran Deal Rally on Sept. 9. They and other critics say the deal gives away too much to Iran,...

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Sep 10 at 2015 3:30 PM

2015-09-10T15:30:03-04:00

Alright. I posted another post to get folks familiar with the deal. Here is an article to get folks an idea of why or why not suing would be "worthwhile"

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/12/politics/iran-nuclear-deal-treaty-obama-administration/

This really boils down to whether you think the President is violating the INTENT of the Constitution. Is the Iran Deal a Treaty or is it Not a Treaty. In essence, if he is negotiating with a Foreign Power and it requires Senate Approval. That's the crux of the argument.

If it's a Treaty, he's "Power Grabbing" and the Senate is correct to sue. If it's not a Treaty, then he doesn't need the Senate. That's the argument in a nutshell.

Iran deal: A treaty or not? - CNNPolitics.com

If it looks like a treaty, walks like a treaty and talks like a treaty, is it a treaty? When it comes to the Iran nuclear deal, not necessarily.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 10 at 2015 4:00 PM

2015-09-10T16:00:47-04:00

I'm sorry. Why are the House and the Speaker involved in this? I thought treaty negotiation was between the Executive and the Senate.

Iran's capability to create a nuclear weapon is arguably the global issue most likely to precipitate war. If war should only be used as a last resort, then isn't a diplomatic solution preferable?

This deal does not strike me as the most controversial thing going on in the world today. How does Iran's ability to get a bomb measure up against the Cold War in the 1950s? It is not comparable.

Important questions remain for those on both sides of the issue. If sanctions could not stop Iran from getting the materials for a bomb, what do you propose; war? On the other hand, is this deal just weak tea that punts the issue to another generation?

Response by SSgt Khanh Pham made Sep 10 at 2015 5:37 PM

2015-09-10T17:37:40-04:00

The right question should be, does the US promote nuclear war?

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 10 at 2015 9:10 PM

2015-09-10T21:10:52-04:00

A friend sent me this video that was never meant to go public. Secretary Of State John Kerry invited Admiral Ace Lyons to speak at a private meeting. I'm sure he regrets doing so. This is a short video, and you're not going to believe what Admiral Lyons said.
https://www.facebook.com/adrian.ionescu.376/videos/ [login to see] 010913/?fref=nf

Adrian Ionescu | Facebook

Stunning Video the world was never supposed to see.... Secty. of State John Kerry introduces Admiral Ace Lyons to speak at a private meeting. He...