Uneasy Feeling

[Chicopee John]

Disclaimer: I will NEVER be confused with an Obama apologist or - even somebody who believes he has done a good job captaining the Good Ship America.

 

However, I find it highly disturbing that members of the U.S. Senate authored, signed and sent a letter to Iran without working through the Executive Branch. To me, it hints of Sedition.

 

Any way, I believe this was a terrible mistake that sidesteps our system of 3 Government Branches.

 

I am not saying that Obama is handling this well or - even that I believe he has the ability (or, maybe, even desire) to strongly negotiate for the betterment of the US.

 

I am saying that we have a process that should be followed.

 

Obama should have followed the process RE: his Immigration declaration.

 

At the same time, the U.S. Senate acted in a way that tarnishes our values as a country and - if continued - will severely damage or ability to remain a world leader.

 

Throw out the names of those involved. As a practice, do you believe unilateral government action - Executive, Legislative, or Judicial - is a good, or bad course of action.

 

I believe it bodes negatively for our future.

[Browns149]

Disclaimer: I will NEVER be confused with an Obama apologist or - even somebody who believes he has done a good job captaining the Good Ship America.

 

However, I find it highly disturbing that members of the U.S. Senate authored, signed and sent a letter to Iran without working through the Executive Branch. To me, it hints of Sedition.

 

Any way, I believe this was a terrible mistake that sidesteps our system of 3 Government Branches.

 

I am not saying that Obama is handling this well or - even that I believe he has the ability (or, maybe, even desire) to strongly negotiate for the betterment of the US.

 

I am saying that we have a process that should be followed.

 

Obama should have followed the process RE: his Immigration declaration.

 

At the same time, the U.S. Senate acted in a way that tarnishes our values as a country and - if continued - will severely damage or ability to remain a world leader.

 

Throw out the names of those involved. As a practice, do you believe unilateral government action - Executive, Legislative, or Judicial - is a good, or bad course of action.

 

I believe it bodes negatively for our future.

Well when the Republicans # 1 goal was to make Obama a 1 term President, that just about says they will NOT work with him

[Westside Steve]

Well when the Republicans # 1 goal was to make Obama a 1 term President, that just about says they will NOT work with him

It's every parties number one goal to take back the White House. what kind of an idiotic gripe is that?

And if you read the story I read paragraph number 16 the president says he believes we can drastically reduce the sanctions. is there anyone here who believes that the Iranians will either follow the letter of the agreement or even negotiate in good faith? remember every month they delay, cover up or stone wall is another month closer to a nuclear weapon. that will be terrible for the region and the world. if you think it makes the United States week looking how do you think we look right now? for God's sake boys get realistic. not only that but does anyone think the Democrats really really want to work with the Republicans? That's as stupid as trusting the Iranians. they both want to pound the other side kids.

 

WSS

[DieHardBrownsFan]

I'm sure that all political parties goal is to make the rival incumbent a one term President so nothing new there. As far as fucking with Obama with the letter etc. I could care less. He is the worst POS to ever rule this country.

[Browns149]

I don't remember any D's coming out and saying their #1 goal was to make dubbya a 1 term President.

 

To come out publicly and state it as THE #1 GOAL, is stupid.

 

The number 1 goal of a congressmen should be to help the people, not to undermine the President

[calfoxwc]

Did W. work to take all the power unto himself like Obamao? NO.

 

Did W. work to control our country's entire health system? NO.

 

Did W. work to undermine our 2nd Amendment? NO.

 

Did W. diss Israel at every turn, and bow to Arabic/Muslim heads of state? NO.

 

Did W. ever diss our Constitution? NO.

 

Did W. ever work on treaties for the U.S. to be signed by him, and ignoring Congress completely? NO.

 

On the flip side, the Congress MUST RATIFY TREATIES. They are simply telling Iran the freakin truth,

which they sure the hell won't get from your dirtbag president.

 

And, remember when Pelosi defied the Bush admin's ban on travel to Syria?

 

Yeah. You liberal dems at any cost to our country applauded her on that. She made a big

show of meeting with Assad. Big mistake.

 

Now learn a few things, you libs.

[Westside Steve]

I don't remember any D's coming out and saying their #1 goal was to make dubbya a 1 term President.

 

To come out publicly and state it as THE #1 GOAL, is stupid.

 

The number 1 goal of a congressmen should be to help the people, not to undermine the President

But that is their goal and was their goal. If you don't believe it you're a fool.

 

WSS

[Westside Steve]

And Nancy Pelosi did say the goal was to stop George W Bush.

WSS

[Browns149]

But that is their goal and was their goal. If you don't believe it you're a fool.

 

WSS

I never said it wasn't their goal. I said it was stupid to say it

 

Pelosi is just as stupid for saying it.

[LogicIsForSquares]

Goddamn I hate politics. Nothing gets done and fan boys of either team get to blindly cheer for their favorite team.

[Legacy Fan]

Wait.... So *now* we're concerned with a single branch of the federal government acting unilaterally?

 

Say what you will about Congress but they are the most representative branch of the three. (Statistically speaking)

[FairHooker11]

to "shun" the notion of the House (inviting Netanayhu) and now the Senates version and its own end around with this letter-

 

must be 1) ignorant of whats been happening for the last 6 years ,

 

or 2) compicit with what the MSM has been spoon feeding you regarding the "majesty" of the king on the throne... sheesh

[Chicopee John]

Wait.... So *now* we're concerned with a single branch of the federal government acting unilaterally?

 

Say what you will about Congress but they are the most representative branch of the three. (Statistically speaking)

This is an example of what I believe is a negative trend within our national government.

 

There are such examples on both sides of the political divide.

 

My point is that rouge actions like this (circumventing) the process need to be reeled in.

 

Personally, I have grave reservations about Obama's motivations, love for America, and his ability to negotiate from a position of strength against ANY opposing world power. In fact, I am sure his is looked upon as a 'wet noodle' by the likes of Russia, N. Korea, Iran, ISIS, etc.

 

I am talking PROCESS, not PEOPLE or INDIVIDUALS.

[Westside Steve]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/10/democrats-declare-nancy-pelosi-john-kerry-ted-kennedy-traitors/

[sadbrownsfan]

It undermines any possibility of forming a treaty with Iran, who could be a big help in fighting ISIS in the region and getting more permanent stabilized Middle East region. They have major influence over Hezbollah, if we can come to an agreement on their nuclear program then we can start working on their support for Hezbollah and other similar groups.

[Westside Steve]

It undermines any possibility of forming a treaty with Iran, who could be a big help in fighting ISIS in the region and getting more permanent stabilized Middle East region. They have major influence over Hezbollah, if we can come to an agreement on their nuclear program then we can start working on their support for Hezbollah and other similar groups.

So we stand down allow them to develop a nuclear weapon and hope they will be of assistance with the handling Isis? that's The plan?

 

WSS

[OldBrownsFan]

I don't know if it is true or not but there has been many sources who reported this that the Obama administration threatened to shoot down any Israeli jets over Iraq air space if they attacked Iran's nuclear facilities. Pretty sad if true.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2975207/President-Obama-threatened-shoot-Israeli-jets-attacked-Iranian-nuclear-facilities-year-claim-sources.html

[sadbrownsfan]

So we stand down allow them to develop a nuclear weapon and hope they will be of assistance with the handling Isis? that's The plan?

 

WSS

 

A treaty does not equal standing down. What is the plan from the R side of the aisle to deal with Iran? Keep throwing useless sanctions at them? Puff out the chest and threaten war?

[Westside Steve]

 

A treaty does not equal standing down. What is the plan from the R side of the aisle to deal with Iran? Keep throwing useless sanctions at them? Puff out the chest and threaten war?

A bad or lax treaty does indeed equal standing down.

The results are basically the same. I think that letter was meant to underscore the idea.

 

WSS

[sadbrownsfan]

A bad or lax treaty does indeed equal standing down.

The results are basically the same. I think that letter was meant to underscore the idea.

 

WSS

 

Yes...b\c the best way to encourage another country to agree to a treaty is by telling them even if there is an agreement we may remove it in 2 years, no treaty is perfect each side needs to compromise..... to me it does what the Republicans wanted. They get a few PR points while making it very difficult to come to terms with a treaty with a country that has been a virtual enemy for us for years, underminning anything we try to do in the region.

[Chicopee John]

 

A treaty does not equal standing down. What is the plan from the R side of the aisle to deal with Iran? Keep throwing useless sanctions at them? Puff out the chest and threaten war?

Obama is more into Bending Over than Standing Down.

 

He will bend over for, virtually, any Islamic State.

 

Obama is spineless and in naive (or diabolical?) enough to believe we all just need to hold hands and sing, "One World".

 

One world that doesn't include Israel.

[Westside Steve]

 

Yes...b\c the best way to encourage another country to agree to a treaty is by telling them even if there is an agreement we may remove it in 2 years, no treaty is perfect each side needs to compromise..... to me it does what the Republicans wanted. They get a few PR points while making it very difficult to come to terms with a treaty with a country that has been a virtual enemy for us for years, underminning anything we try to do in the region.

I understand everyones concerns, I just don't particularly agree. I think the president and the Secretary of State are so eager to get anything signed they will give up too much and the consequences are too serious. that's all.

 

WSS

[DieHardBrownsFan]

It undermines any possibility of forming a treaty with Iran, who could be a big help in fighting ISIS in the region and getting more permanent stabilized Middle East region. They have major influence over Hezbollah, if we can come to an agreement on their nuclear program then we can start working on their support for Hezbollah and other similar groups.

Thats idiotic. They are already 'fighting' ISIS with Iraqi troops in fighting for Takrit. They want to be the predominant 'ally' of Iraq which is run by Shiite muslims. Iran is an enemy. Has been, and will continue to be.

[sadbrownsfan]

Thats idiotic. They are already 'fighting' ISIS with Iraqi troops in fighting for Takrit. They want to be the predominant 'ally' of Iraq which is run by Shiite muslims. Iran is an enemy. Has been, and will continue to be.

 

We are both fighting the Daesh(need to remember to use that term more) but we are not coordinating our attacks and working together against a common enemy. The ideal fight would be to use Iraqi, Iranian, and Kurdish land forces supported by US and other Middle Eastern countries air force(Jordan, Saudis) to fight them. But instead we have Iranian half supporting Iraq since they don't want to be seen helping the US, and the US only willing to use air force, since Obama does not want to send troops back to Iraq.

 

Why do they have to continue to be an enemy? Why not try to find common ground against a common enemy and come to an agreement on something that is keeping us apart(nuke deal), and then try to come to an agreement on other things(ending support for hezballoh, and other stuff)?

[sadbrownsfan]

Also to be noted I should not be calling it a treaty its an executive agreement.

[sadbrownsfan]

A bad or lax treaty does indeed equal standing down.

The results are basically the same. I think that letter was meant to underscore the idea.

 

WSS

 

Also it would have to be really bad agreement for the next president(repub or dem) to cancel an agreement that is being negotiated between the US, China, Russia, the UK, Germany, and France(p5+1) with Iran.

[Westside Steve]

 

Also it would have to be really bad agreement for the next president(repub or dem) to cancel an agreement that is being negotiated between the US, China, Russia, the UK, Germany, and France(p5+1) with Iran.

And how important or not is a nuclear Iran to them?

 

WSS

[sadbrownsfan]

China is indifferent to Iran, they probably want an open market to trade their goods but usually don't involve themselves with middle eastern policy, Russia supports Iran but wouldn't want to see a Nuke built that might fall into the hands of chechenian(sp?) or other muslim extremist, Uk and France support Israel and don't want to see a nuclear Iran, Germany not sure they have decent trade but have stated against nuclear Iran.

 

 

Edit-found this statement about china's opinion

 

"According to official statements, China’s position on Iran is as follows: First, “Iran is entitled to peaceful use of nuclear energy, and should honor its international obligations.” Second, “Final settlement of the Iran nuclear issue should depend on dialogue, negotiation and other means of cooperation.” Third, “China does not favor unilateral sanctions against Iran.” In a nutshell, China believes the following: Iran may carry out limited uranium enrichment activities, the Iranian nuclear issue should not lead to war, and the unilateral sanctions by Western countries on Iranian oil and other products have affected China’s interests. In other words, avoiding war and ensuring energy security are China’s fundamental interests when it comes to Iran." http://thediplomat.com/2013/11/the-iranian-nuclear-question-chinas-perspective/

[Legacy Fan]

It undermines any possibility of forming a treaty with Iran, who could be a big help in fighting ISIS in the region and getting more permanent stabilized Middle East region. They have major influence over Hezbollah, if we can come to an agreement on their nuclear program then we can start working on their support for Hezbollah and other similar groups.

Meh. Egypt > Iran as an ally every day of the week. Thanks

[FairHooker11]

uh oh....look out

 

http://bluenationreview.com/joe-biden-ready-cut-47-republican-senators/