Sidebar

Framework for a Nuclear Deal with Iran: apparently agreement

Al A Bama

Al A Bama

Hall of Fame
Jun 24, 2011
6,658
934
132
1st I don't trust Iran
2nd I don't trust Secretary of State John Kerry. Never have, never will.
3rd I don't trust this President

We are the great Satan, according to Iran. "Death to America" spouts from their leaders and citizens' mouths.
Israel according to the Iranian leaders should NOT even exist.

Now, will the final agreement be a treaty that has to be approved by 2/3 of our Senators? If so, it will be agreed to by our Senate just like the League of Nations. NOT!

Making any agreement with Iran is like signing a treaty with Satan.

Neville Chamberlain is alive and well and is still very naive!
 
92tide

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,276
45,066
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
Al A Bama said:
1st I don't trust Iran
2nd I don't trust Secretary of State John Kerry. Never have, never will.
3rd I don't trust this President

We are the great Satan, according to Iran. "Death to America" spouts from their leaders and citizens' mouths.
Israel according to the Iranian leaders should NOT even exist.

Now, will the final agreement be a treaty that has to be approved by 2/3 of our Senators? If so, it will be agreed to by our Senate just like the League of Nations. NOT!

Making any agreement with Iran is like signing a treaty with Satan.

Neville Chamberlain is alive and well and is still very naive!
Click to expand...
i think the agreement, if reached, will be a un security council resolution.
 
seebell

seebell

Hall of Fame
Mar 12, 2012
11,919
5,105
187
Gurley, Al
Thanks 92tide. Some seem to think that the US is engaged in unilateral discussion with Iran. Actually the P+5 are part of the negotiations and I believe will have to agree before any agreement is finalized.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P5+1

The P5+1 is a group of six world powers[SUP][1][/SUP] which in 2006 joined the diplomatic efforts with Iran with regard to its nuclear program.[SUP][2][/SUP] The term refers to the P5 or five permanent membersof the UN Security Council, namely China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, plus Germany. P5+1 is often referred to as the E3+3 (or E3/EU+3) by European countries.[SUP][3]

[/SUP][SUP]
[/SUP][SUP]Without their participation and approval any continuation or increase in sanctions would simply not be effective.[/SUP][SUP][/SUP]
 
Tide1986

Tide1986

Suspended
Nov 22, 2008
15,670
2
0
Birmingham, AL
seebell said:
Thanks 92tide. Some seem to think that the US is engaged in unilateral discussion with Iran. Actually the P+5 are part of the negotiations and I believe will have to agree before any agreement is finalized.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P5+1

The P5+1 is a group of six world powers[SUP][1][/SUP] which in 2006 joined the diplomatic efforts with Iran with regard to its nuclear program.[SUP][2][/SUP] The term refers to the P5 or five permanent membersof the UN Security Council, namely China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, plus Germany. P5+1 is often referred to as the E3+3 (or E3/EU+3) by European countries.[SUP][3]

[/SUP][SUP]
[/SUP][SUP]Without their participation and approval any continuation or increase in sanctions would simply not be effective.[/SUP]
Click to expand...
Are you saying that members of the United Nations would actively violate resolutions of the Security Council? The sanctions on Iran have already been approved by the Security Council. All the United States has to do is veto any vote to remove the sanctions. All other countries would then be required to abide by the sanctions; else, the United Nations is a worthless organization. If the Senate disapproves of the agreement with Iran, wouldn't our UN ambassador be required by law to veto any vote to remove the sanctions?
 
ValuJet

ValuJet

Moderator
Sep 28, 2000
22,626
19
0
Iran's Lead Negotiator Accuses Obama/Kerry of Lying About Deal

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/iran-accuses-u-s-of-lying-about-new-nuke-agreement/

Just hours after the announcement of what the United States characterized as a historic agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, the country’s leading negotiator lashed out at the Obama administration for lying about the details of a tentative framework.

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif accused the Obama administration of misleading the American people and Congress in a fact sheet it released following the culmination of negotiations with the Islamic Republic.

Zarif bragged in an earlier press conference with reporters that the United States had tentatively agreed to let it continue the enrichment of uranium, the key component in a nuclear bomb, as well as key nuclear research.

Zarif additionally said Iran would have all nuclear-related sanctions lifted once a final deal is signed and that the country would not be forced to shut down any of its currently operating nuclear installations.
 
Al A Bama

Al A Bama

Hall of Fame
Jun 24, 2011
6,658
934
132
ValuJet said:
Iran's Lead Negotiator Accuses Obama/Kerry of Lying About Deal

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/iran-accuses-u-s-of-lying-about-new-nuke-agreement/

Just hours after the announcement of what the United States characterized as a historic agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, the country’s leading negotiator lashed out at the Obama administration for lying about the details of a tentative framework.

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif accused the Obama administration of misleading the American people and Congress in a fact sheet it released following the culmination of negotiations with the Islamic Republic.

Zarif bragged in an earlier press conference with reporters that the United States had tentatively agreed to let it continue the enrichment of uranium, the key component in a nuclear bomb, as well as key nuclear research.

Zarif additionally said Iran would have all nuclear-related sanctions lifted once a final deal is signed and that the country would not be forced to shut down any of its currently operating nuclear installations.
Click to expand...
Are they ALL speaking the same language? I don't mean Farsi and English. I mean the lies and deception language.
 
BamaSC

BamaSC

All-SEC
Oct 17, 1999
1,840
262
207
Chapin, SC
This is how I know the world has gone mad. There should be no nuclear deal with Iran. The U.S.., Russia, China, and the EU may have their differences, but if there's one thing we should all agree on is that those bunch of whackos should not have any nuclear capability.
 
seebell

seebell

Hall of Fame
Mar 12, 2012
11,919
5,105
187
Gurley, Al
Tide1986 said:
Are you saying that members of the United Nations would actively violate resolutions of the Security Council? The sanctions on Iran have already been approved by the Security Council. All the United States has to do is veto any vote to remove the sanctions. All other countries would then be required to abide by the sanctions; else, the United Nations is a worthless organization. If the Senate disapproves of the agreement with Iran, wouldn't our UN ambassador be required by law to veto any vote to remove the sanctions?
Click to expand...
The sanctions are a hodgepodge '86. The UN has 4 primary sanctions. The EU has its own list as does the US.

http://www.cfr.org/iran/lengthening-list-iran-sanctions/p20258

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-15983302
 
Bama Reb

Bama Reb

Suspended
Nov 2, 2005
14,446
0
0
On the lake and in the woods, AL
BamaSC said:
This is how I know the world has gone mad. There should be no nuclear deal with Iran. The U.S.., Russia, China, and the EU may have their differences, but if there's one thing we should all agree on is that those bunch of whackos should not have any nuclear capability.
Click to expand...
Agreed. We have taken the next step, which brings us much closer to a nuclear war. Note I didn't say "with Iran", because once it starts, it won't matter who "fired" first.
 
Tidewater

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,465
13,299
287
Hooterville, Vir.
This was a bit troubling:
When questioned about the Iran deal, and the provision in the Congressional bill requiring Iran to officially renounce terrorism.
Josh Earnest said:
This is a significant concern that we have - is that it includes a provision that makes the Iran deal contingent on Iran renouncing terrorism. That's not a reasonable expectation that that's going to happen.
Click to expand...
Wait, what? It is not reasonable to expect Iran to renounce terrorism?
 
Tidewater

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,465
13,299
287
Hooterville, Vir.
Tidewater said:
This was a bit troubling:
When questioned about the Iran deal, and the provision in the Congressional bill requiring Iran to officially renounce terrorism.

Wait, what? It is not reasonable to expect Iran to renounce terrorism?
Click to expand...
Iran Nuke Deal.

We are apparently lifting sanctions on Qasem Soleimani, leader of the Kuds Forces which has killed more American soldiers than AQI.
 
Tidewater

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,465
13,299
287
Hooterville, Vir.
Tidewater said:
Iran Nuke Deal.

We are apparently lifting sanctions on Qasem Soleimani, leader of the Kuds Forces which has killed more American soldiers than AQI.
Click to expand...
The President says he will veto any bill designed to thwart implementation of the agreement.

The President... shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.
Click to expand...
Except that is not the way it works. The President negotiates a treaty, and it is adopted once 2/3 of the Senate concurs. If you cannot meet that standard, it ain't a treaty.
Once again, that darn Constitution gets in the way.
 
92tide

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,276
45,066
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
Tidewater said:
The President says he will veto any bill designed to thwart implementation of the agreement.


Except that is not the way it works. The President negotiates a treaty, and it is adopted once 2/3 of the Senate concurs. If you cannot meet that standard, it ain't a treaty.
Once again, that darn Constitution gets in the way.
Click to expand...
i may be mistaken, but i don't think this deal is a treaty
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a> <br /> <!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \--> <p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.

Top Bottom