Kerry says Congress veto of Iran deal would be 'ultimate screwing of ayatollah'

Obama openly admitted

He (or his lord and master Rev. Wright for that matter) is Quisling rather than Chamberlain !

 

The deal doesn't "eliminate" or "take" ANY centrifuges.

- - - Updated - - -

Because Iran has a habit of ignoring its international agreements

 

Actually, under the original agreement the inspections were more stringent than they are under the new agreement.

 

Other than a history and pattern of them not abiding by their agreements.

For the same reasons they made and then violated the last agreements.

Israel never agreed to not develop nuclear weapons.

 

Obama admitted that lifting sanctions will allow Iran to upgrade terrorists. That's enough right there to nix this "deal".

 

Israel is widely believed to possess nuclear weapons[6][7] and to be the sixth country in the world to have developed them, allegedly having built its first nuclear weapon in December 1966.[8][1] It is one of four nuclear-armed countries not recognized as a Nuclear Weapons State by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the others being India, Pakistan and North Korea.[9] Israel maintains a policy known as "nuclear ambiguity" (also known as "nuclear opacity").[10][11] Israel has never officially admitted to having nuclear weapons, instead repeating over the years that it would not be the first country to "introduce" nuclear weapons to the Middle East, leaving ambiguity as to whether it means it will not create, will not disclose, will not make first use of the weapons or possibly some other interpretation of the phrase.[12] The "not be the first" formulation goes back to the Eshkol-Comer (sic[13]) memorandum of understanding made between Israel and the United States on March 10, 1965, which contained Israel's written assurance for the first time that it would not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons in the Middle East.[14][15] Israel has refused to sign the NPT despite international pressure to do so, and has stated that signing the NPT would be contrary to its national security interests.[16]

Additionally, Israel has made extensive efforts to deny other regional actors the ability to acquire their own nuclear weapons.[1] The counter-proliferation, preventive strike Begin Doctrine added another dimension to Israel's existing nuclear policy. Israel remains the only country in the Middle East believed to possess them.[1]
WHILE CLAIMING AND AGREEING THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE THE FIRST TO INTRODUCE THEM

In the best interpretation

Israel insists on holding iran to standards they reject for themselves

IN THE BEST CASE, ISRAEL HAS USED AMBIGUOUS WORDS AS A CRUTCH TO BEHAVE IN A DUPLICITOUS MANNER.... A PATTERN THAT WE WOULD ABHOR IF IRAN DID THE SAME

 

Neither the Republicans or Democrats in Congress have made any deal that they could break.

 

Because he didn't submit it as a treaty doesn't make it NOT a treaty. Do you have any idea what you are talking about?

 

I don't care. What's no good for the goose is no good for the gander. Why does every member of Congress, who have agreed to uphold the Constitution, renege within a week of swearing in?

 

“The ayatollah constantly believed that we are untrustworthy, that you can’t negotiate with us, that we will screw them,” Kerry said. “This”—a congressional rejection—“will be the ultimate screwing.” He went on to argue that “the United States Congress will prove the ayatollah’s suspicion, and there’s no way he’s ever coming back. He will not come back to negotiate. Out of dignity, out of a suspicion that you can’t trust America. America is not going to negotiate in good faith. It didn’t negotiate in good faith now, would be his point.”

Seems much less outrageous in its full context.

 

We heard about Republican "better alternatives" before. How long did it take them to come up with a better alternative to ObamaCare? They still don't have one.

 

It would certainly make it clear to EVERYONE that the U.S. is no friend to the world.

 

So for the most part, Republicans support the deal by voting against it?

 

The deal removes 13,000 centrifuges leaving them using 5,000 to 6,000.

 

as I corrected earlier.. most moderate republicans... 30+ % of republicans support the deal...

the problem is.... republicans do not want to agree with the deal because Obama supports it.... simple as that...

if this were not true, they would not of sent a open letter to IRAN saying they would not support any deal to sabotage the negotiations .....

 

I seriously doubt that he said this was a permanent solution with Iran. My understanding is that this deal has an end date - actually, several end dates as some parts end earlier than others.

If Iran were to fully comply, maybe it could become a permanent solution, but there is no way to force Iran to fully comply to anything on a permanent basis short of military conquest, because they are an independent nation. They have to choose to walk the walk.


There could be elements of permanence about this deal. It could be the start of a standard way of handling cases of nations breaking out to develop nuclear weapons. I'm sure Brazil, Egypt and others are watching.

Maybe it would be interesting to see the quote you are referencing.

 

I wonder what Kerry and Obama are getting out of this deal. I think Kerry is hoping to get a peace prize and be able to run for POTUS and I think Obama, with the blessing of Russia and China, is going to move his family to Africa and with an executive order declaring himself King of Africa for life. Any congressmen or Senator who votes to support this agreement is a political coward and surely will not qualify for "profiles in Courage" . All this agreement has done is open the door for every country in that region to pursue nuclear weapons. All ready Iran has broken the terms of the deal and it hasn't even been implemented yet. What happened to you America? ( Oh! that's what are use to be allies are asking).

 

"After two years of negotiations, we have achieved a detailed arrangement that permanently prohibits Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. It cuts off all of Iran's pathways to a bomb. It contains the most comprehensive inspection and verification regime ever negotiated to monitor a nuclear program."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...a-gives-a-speech-about-the-iran-nuclear-deal/

 

Iran is not a safe place for any Westerner to visit. The risk is too great.

 

If you have a family living in Tehran please move them away from a joint Israeli-Saudi nuclear strike. Save your children.

 

OK, I do not know why he said "permanent". I could propose possibilities, as the IAEA and the US have been looking for a standard framework to apply to all nations on a continuing basis when they approach nuclear weapons capability. But I don't see anything specific in what Obama says to prove that's what he meant.

However, what Obama says in what you posted is very clearly true. War with Iran is preposterous without attempting a negotiated resolution such as we have done. Our war in Iraq is a great example of the failure of war to be a solution.

Plus, the intel agencies of the US and Israel have stated that Iran is not currently working toward a weapon.

We have something significant to lose by refusing this deal. And, given the stakes, that's a gigantic mistake.

This is something where congress needs to look beyond partisanship and consider America - and the world, for that matter.

 

The centrifuges will be mothballed, not destroyed. When the need arises the centrifuges can be brought back on line.

- - - Updated - - -

Civil war maybe against Progressives, but that's the limit of the struggle.

 

America won't attack Iran. America should extricate itself from the Middle East without enabling recreation of the Sassanid Empire. There will be war in the Middle East, but the US need not be involved.

 

it's sad you even say republicans want a civil war again.....

 

B.S.!

Iran currently has enough weapons grade Uranium to assemble one maybe two 5 to 7 Kiloton nominal yeild Fission Bombs.

This is 70 year old Technology as Iran can easily assemble one or two cira 1945 U.S. Military Design Gun Barrel Fisson Bombs.

The Iranian's just do not have many ways to deliver such a Nuke to target.

One way is driving such a heavt bomb on a truck to target.

The other way is to load it into an Iranian Passenger Jet for a suicide run on a target but the U.S. Military Radiation Detection Capabilities exist so that we would know this was happening and we could stop it.

You do not build 17,000 centriguges for any other reason that enrich unanium to weapons grade.

Iran will cease to be Iran if they do not honor the deal.

AboveAlpha