.

Stop the Iran Deal-

FrancFFrancF Member, Moderator Posts: 35,278 ******
edited September 2015 in Politics

Comments

  • jaegermisterjaegermister Member Posts: 692 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    from my understanding this is a 7 country deal. and all the other countries
    have approved and lifted sanctions etc. what gives?
  • wifetrainedwifetrained Member Posts: 996 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    The whole thing is a sham. Only the Senate can ratify the treaty, the house plays no part and the president can't veto it. But the media and the politician's keeps playing the nonsense that it will be voted on in both houses, the president will veto and there's not enough votes to override.

    The other countries in this sham want to have dealings with Iran, particularly the Russians and the Chinese who are major weapons suppliers and supporters of the regime.

    What's really hilarious (if it wasn't so pathetic!) is Schumer's (as well as others of his ilk)response. He can vote against knowing it will be veto'd with insufficient votes to override thereby feeding the public the illusion that he did the "right" thing.

    Nothing like vaudeville!
  • jaegermisterjaegermister Member Posts: 692 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    called the p5+ 1 whatever, i count 7 . the iran money has been unlocked
    and the other countries are already lining up to sell weapons and do
    business with iran. tbis is a multi national agreement made outside the
    control of the people of those countries. i am not saying to go along
    with them but if you think we control the outcome think again.
  • jaegermisterjaegermister Member Posts: 692 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    4. Reality. The UN Security Council has already approved the deal, and by a 15-0 unanimous vote-hardly its norm on controversial issues. So has the European Union. Sample report, from Reuters: "`It is a balanced deal that means Iran won't get an atomic bomb,' said French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius. `It is a major political deal.'" The Russians and Chinese are moving ahead as if the deal is done, because from the world's perspective it is.
    if the US were to reject the deal which we should and send Kerry back....there will be nobody there to talk to.
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 21,780 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    It is a done deal.

    It is an arms control treaty that has been defined as an agreement so as not to trigger the Article 2, Section 2 requirement that all treaties need a 2/3 approval vote by the Senate. McConnell has gone along with it because he doesn't have the stones to stand up for the Constitution. Nothing new.

    McConnell and Boehner have also gone along with a contrived negative approval vote. The vote is to Dis-approve the agreement, giving the President power to veto the dis-approval. This turns the 2/3 ratio upside down, now requiring a 2/3 vote of the Senate to disapprove a treaty instead of the Constitutionally mandated opposite.

    Effectively, 1/3 of the U.S. Senate (33 people) plus the President, have been granted the power to engage in an international treaty. This turns the Constitution on his head.

    In all fairness, this *-clown did tell us before he was elected that he was going to fundamentally change this country.

    He is succeeding.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • bpostbpost Member Posts: 30,921 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    It is a done deal.

    In all fairness, this *-clown did tell us before he was elected that he was going to fundamentally change this country.

    He is succeeding.


    I would expect nothing less from a Marxist Muslim like Obama; licking the boots of his Imam Lords is his way of life since a child in Indonesia.
  • jaegermisterjaegermister Member Posts: 692 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    if this deal passes the consequences will fall on the shoulders of the democratic party
    with the majority of the public both democrats and republicans opposed
    to the iran agreement.
  • bpostbpost Member Posts: 30,921 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by jaegermister
    if this deal passes the consequences will fall on the shoulders of the democratic party
    with the majority of the public both democrats and republicans opposed
    to the iran agreement.


    Not so much; the (D) party has an uncharged felon Hillary, running for POTUS, even if convicted the (D) party would still elect her to office. Remember a guy named Marion Barry (RIP)?? He went to prison and was reelected back to public office after he got out of jail!! (D) voters do not care about the consequences of their actions they care about how they "feel", they care about making you pay, they care about Marxism and are utterly clueless about Iran, its nuke program or radical Muslims with bombs.
  • RocklobsterRocklobster Member Posts: 7,060
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    It is a done deal.

    It is an arms control treaty that has been defined as an agreement so as not to trigger the Article 2, Section 2 requirement that all treaties need a 2/3 approval vote by the Senate. McConnell has gone along with it because he doesn't have the stones to stand up for the Constitution. Nothing new.

    McConnell and Boehner have also gone along with a contrived negative approval vote. The vote is to Dis-approve the agreement, giving the President power to veto the dis-approval. This turns the 2/3 ratio upside down, now requiring a 2/3 vote of the Senate to disapprove a treaty instead of the Constitutionally mandated opposite.

    Effectively, 1/3 of the U.S. Senate (33 people) plus the President, have been granted the power to engage in an international treaty. This turns the Constitution on his head.

    In all fairness, this *-clown did tell us before he was elected that he was going to fundamentally change this country.

    He is succeeding.
    Exactly! The Corker-Menendez bill has been passed with the support of the establishment GOP to allow the president to enact whatever international agreement that strikes his fancy. They know that there will not be enough Senate votes to override a presidential veto of the "resolution of disapproval", but they can still say that they voted against the agreement, and BS their clueless constituency into re-electing their sorry a$$es..

    This method will also be applied to the ( non-issue) UN "Small-Arms Treaty."
  • spasmcreekspasmcreek Member Posts: 38,925
    edited November -1
    the UN is just a money grubbing set of empty suits sucking everything the can out of the USA
  • mnrivrat48mnrivrat48 Member Posts: 1,715 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Someone out to send Obama an appropriate uniform. Anyone have a spare Turban ?
  • wifetrainedwifetrained Member Posts: 996 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Rocklobster
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    It is a done deal.

    It is an arms control treaty that has been defined as an agreement so as not to trigger the Article 2, Section 2 requirement that all treaties need a 2/3 approval vote by the Senate. McConnell has gone along with it because he doesn't have the stones to stand up for the Constitution. Nothing new.

    McConnell and Boehner have also gone along with a contrived negative approval vote. The vote is to Dis-approve the agreement, giving the President power to veto the dis-approval. This turns the 2/3 ratio upside down, now requiring a 2/3 vote of the Senate to disapprove a treaty instead of the Constitutionally mandated opposite.

    Effectively, 1/3 of the U.S. Senate (33 people) plus the President, have been granted the power to engage in an international treaty. This turns the Constitution on his head.

    In all fairness, this *-clown did tell us before he was elected that he was going to fundamentally change this country.

    He is succeeding.
    Exactly! The Corker-Menendez bill has been passed with the support of the establishment GOP to allow the president to enact whatever international agreement that strikes his fancy. They know that there will not be enough Senate votes to override a presidential veto of the "resolution of disapproval", but they can still say that they voted against the agreement, and BS their clueless constituency into re-electing their sorry a$$es..

    This method will also be applied to the ( non-issue) UN "Small-Arms Treaty."



    Like I said previously, it's all a sham and the general public is too stupid to see it. They may disapprove but they're doing nothing, as usual, about it and the media is going along with the sham. I don't see how the Corker bill even meets constitutional muster but then again they violate the constitution when they like with no repercussions. We're screwed!!
  • casper1947casper1947 Member Posts: 1,147 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I wonder if Texas could get a similar agreement to develop a nuclear program for peaceful uses?
  • casper1947casper1947 Member Posts: 1,147 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
  • 800fthi800fthi Member Posts: 196 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    It's all part of the NWO. What the people that care about America think makes no difference to the people in washington.
Sign In or Register to comment.