world

Obama gets Iran deal win as Democrats amass enough votes

33 Comments
By ERICA WERNER and MATTHEW LEE

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

33 Comments
Login to comment

Excellent. Well done Obama. Well done Team Democrat.

Meanwhile, right wing brains explode.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

If the GOP and fearful Democrats (fearful of the right-wing noise machine, that is) manage to scrap this initiative, the U.S. will be left holding an empty bag while all the other major economic powers will be trading with Iran, buying its oil and gas (2nd largest reserves in the world), selling it their products and so forth.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Hold on! Before you libs start munching on your salads, having support doesn't mean that the bill is done and finalized. You already have 12 Dems (sensible) that are totally against this and the entire GOP, so there is still a mountain to climb, will it pass, maybe, but that doesn't mean that these Dems and the GOP have to roll over and take this piece of crap.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Salad? I'll bet the cons got right down to eating Kim Davis pie.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The agreement all but guarantees WW III in the next decade. Doubling or tripling down on the economic sanctions on Iran and dealing separately with our global allies (ex. oil hungry Europe) and enemies (ex. Russia & China) would have been the more effective route to go. Obama is America's Frankenstein.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Yea, as mentioned above from those who source news from vaious outlets USA benefits with nothing while China and Russia do. And they are two powers I prefer did not. Security on Iran to use the technology for peaceful purposes is nil.

It's a stick of dynamite deal. Nobody can argue that sensibly. And regional proliferation is likely. How stable is the ME?

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Any Republican upset with the outcome may lay their disappointment at the feet of congressional GOP "leadership" - it is they, after all, who constructed the vote to hinge on "disapproval" - in which case, the Dems need only 36 votes to uphold a veto - rather than "approval," which would have required 66 votes, an impossibility.

Again, this is just another chance for the GOP to impotently throw a tantrum as the adults in the room proceed with responsible leadership.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Let's see if you are proud in a few years Laguna. USA didn't even negotiate U.S. Citizen hostages held in Iran freed. USA got NOTHING, and Iran leadership and its sheep still hate, yes, HATE USA.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Wah? I thought the GOP controlled both Congress and the Senate and wielded more power than they have for years - and they still fail to do anything constructive?

What's up with that?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Gee, Mark, if you could successfully persuade a nation to love the US with the threat of bombing them back to the stone age if they failed, you'd get a helluva Noble.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

I've seen the GOP alternative, which includes banning trade with our allies and giving Russia and China the green light to walk away from sanctions. Plus a military blockade.

I can't say I was impressed. Had they created a plan that wasn't 100% about strongarming our allies and putting our economy in the tank then I think they could have taken the lead and given a decent second option. But they chose empty rhetoric as their plan of action, an appeal to their mindless base. That effectively prevented any worthwhile proposals which gave me no choice but to ignore their tantrums.

Now we will be flooded by doomsday predictions that they can toss onto their pile of other doomsday predictions. There are no Reagans in the GOP today.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Again, this is just another chance for the GOP to impotently throw a tantrum as the adults in the room proceed with responsible leadership.

Leadership left the day Obama decided to circumvent the constitution and become a one party unilateralist. Obama knew full well this deal is bad, he knows that Iran will never allow any of the sites that it doesn't want to be inspected and even if it does, the IAEA can't just randomly Waltz into Tehran and get complete access to EVERY facility without giving the Iranians 24 day notice before even being allowed access. are you kidding me??! 24 days is a long time to hide or move anything. And the White House, the Sainted One and Lurch think it's ok. Weak and totally pathetic! This is just madness and rather going to war, Obama and Kerry will go with ANY deal, ANY in order for that not to happen, including complete capitulation.

What did the U.S. Get out of the deal. A smile, a snicker, back talk at how dumb this? Probably and with good reason....

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Bass, if the GOP leadership is as convinced of the horridity of the deal as you apparently are, why did they structure the vote in this way?

The answer is clear: There is no better alternative, so they duplicitously allowed themselves to stamp their feet without having to worry about screwing up the consequences. Or can you discern another reason?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The answer is clear: There is no better alternative, so they duplicitously allowed themselves to stamp their feet without having to worry about screwing up the consequences. Or can you discern another reason?

The GOP didn't know or think that Obama would make this deal. They thought he would take the approach of strength and walk away, no matter what the consequences were in order to get Iran to comply with all the terms unconditionally to allow inspectors into the country and to never engage in ANY proliferation of Plutonium and Uranium. Obama chose the way of complete capitulation whatever the cost and as long as he can build a positive legacy, since he doesn't have one domestically, at least he wants a shot at it internationally.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Really? Do you really believe McConnell legislatively proactively gave Obama his way because they TRUST him - this, from a party whose majority still doubt in both the president's birthplace and religion? From a party which turns its back even on legislation they themselves formulated the moment the president expresses interest? A bridge awaits sale for you, if so.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Maybe this will give AIPAC and Netanyahu pause about so shamelessly interposing themselves in US foreign policy... but probably not.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

This is really a battle between people who believe the US can put the most pressure on Iran working with the international community and those who think the US can exert even more pressure if we act unilaterally.

I can't really see how isolating America from a good chunk of the world would actually strengthen our position. Pressure through sanctions requires international support by definition. The most likely outcome is an economic quagmire for the US while Iran goes about doing business with others who won't agree to US sanctions. Talk of crippling Iran just sounds so silly if you don't include the rest of the world. Or maybe impossible is a better word.

The GOP's position is that the US can act unilaterally and accomplish our goals strictly with threats to both enemies and allies. Cut them off from our economy (which is really us cutting ourselves off when you consider the number of countries we'd have to do this to) , withhold aid, and now some GOP candidates are talking about military strikes, something that was put to rest years ago because it's just so horribly counterproductive in this specific situation.

So it's pretty obvious which side I'm on. It took an agreement that a lot of countries had to sign off on. And of course the hostages were not part of this agreement because they are not part of this agreement. It's like when the world is trying to talk to North Korea and Japan wants to put all of that on hold to talk about the kidnapping victims. If you think international cooperation is the best way, which I do, then you have to be part of the team and focus on the thing you are all there for.

Finally, Obama made it clear that an agreement ups the legitimacy of a future military strike which will most likely be supported by a much larger number of countries. This is Iran's chance. If they blow it after going through this agreement, there will be a lot of leaders who won't get in the way of regime change. That's a serious threat that's more effective than unilateral military action by the US.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@bass4funk

The GOP didn't know or think that Obama would make this deal.

A bit of a tactical error, then.

They thought he would walk away.

You have a gift for comedy.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Really? Do you really believe McConnell legislatively proactively gave Obama his way because they TRUST him - this, from a party whose majority still doubt in both the president's birthplace and religion?

Of course they knew the Dems would follow Obama off the edge of the Earth, who the heckle said, they had ethics??

From a party which turns its back even on legislation they themselves formulated the moment the president expresses interest? A bridge awaits sale for you, if so.

Again, you libs get your facts wrong as usual! None of the GOP EVER thought in reality that Obama and Lurch would be THAT stupid to go with this deal. Also, these group of Republicans are useless spineless cowards that would sit on the sidelines and take it up the pipe by this President.

I can't really see how isolating America from a good chunk of the world would actually strengthen our position. Pressure through sanctions requires international support by definition. The most likely outcome is an economic quagmire for the US while Iran goes about doing business with others who won't agree to US sanctions.

If so, wo cares. Again, Dems are ONLY foocused on not getting into another war and whatever you have to do good or bad as long as the Dems can look good and Obama soon to be out of office, why would they care?

Talk of crippling Iran just sounds so silly if you don't include the rest of the world. Or maybe impossible is a better word.

More capitulation talk.

The GOP's position is that the US can act unilaterally and accomplish our goals strictly with threats to both enemies and allies.

I agree.

Cut them off from our economy (which is really us cutting ourselves off when you consider the number of countries we'd have to do this to) , withhold aid, and now some GOP candidates are talking about military strikes, something that was put to rest years ago because it's just so horribly counterproductive in this specific situation.

We will be drawn into another war anyway sooner later, if you think Israel or the Sunnis will live next to a Nuclear Iran tha s just unacceptable.

So it's pretty obvious which side I'm on.

As well as I and that's not with this president.

It took an agreement that a lot of countries had to sign off on.

They don't have to worry about, if the Europeans get in a jam, we would have to bail them out as usual, also they don't have to worry about Iran attacking them.

And of course the hostages were not part of this agreement because they are not part of this agreement.

That's just pure BS!

It's like when the world is trying to talk to North Korea and Japan wants to put all of that on hold to talk about the kidnapping victims. If you think international cooperation is the best way, which I do, then you have to be part of the team and focus on the thing you are all there for.

Now you are making an Apples and Artichoke comparison.

Finally, Obama made it clear that an agreement ups the legitimacy of a future military strike which will most likely be supported by a much larger number of countries.

Like his so called coalition that is supposedly fighting ISIS?? ROFL

This is Iran's chance. If they blow it after going through this agreement, there will be a lot of leaders who won't get in the way of regime change.

Oh, they will and if they do, Israel as well as the Sunni states will wipe them off the map and that's a promise

That's a serious threat that's more effective than unilateral military action by the US.

Under this weak president, you might be right, because no one else takes him serious.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Obama, Lurch and the weak Dems

For himself and Lurch

particularly Obama and Lurch

the Sainted One and Lurch

Obama and Lurch

Do you really find referring to Kerry as Lurch funny? Do you think Kerry's appearance has any relevance to the Iran deal?

Just shows that there is no substance to your argument. Infantile.

Your mentor Rush Limbaugh has done more to poison American political discourse over the last three decades than any other person. You and your tea party dittoheads are victims of that.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Do you really find referring to Kerry as Lurch funny?

Not funny, just saying how he looks, besides, you libs call conservatives a lot worse, so I don't understand disapproval.

Do you think Kerry's appearance has any relevance to the Iran deal?

No, but the lack of brains he and Obama have does.

Just shows that there is no substance to your argument. Infantile.

I see, but when you guys do it, there's a lot of substance to your arguments?

Your mentor Rush Limbaugh has done more to poison American political discourse over the last three decades than any other person.

First of all, I don't like or listen to Rush, second he as about 22 million listeners since 1991, he's one of the biggest and most famous conservative radio talk show hosts ever. I would like to see one progressive liberal get half of that number daily. But that wouldn't happen because NO one would listen. Air America was a complete joke

You and your tea party dittoheads are victims of that.

Dittoheads!? ROFL

With Dr. Ben Carson and Trump in a dead heat, surprisingly, quite a few Dems are following both men, this is the result of how broken both parties are. Obama practically ran the country in the ground. Hillary is in deep, deep water and you libs boast as if your party doesn't have a problem. You lost the House, the Senate and don't think you can't lose the presidency as well. You think a loudmouth like Trump could ever get this far if the people weren't pissed? You basically two choices, either you vote for a Capitalist or a Socialist and I'm not voting for more socialism!

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

the lack of brains he and Obama have does.

Do all those who back this deal lack brains?

Let's look at who supports the agreement (remember, it's not just Obama and 'Lurch'):

-- Every nation on earth, except Israel. That includes all of the United States' allies, including Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates

-- A majority of Americans

-- An even larger majority of Jewish Americans

-- National security leaders, former career diplomats, Iranian dissidents, Israeli security experts

Are you saying that all of these people are stupid?

You are free to disagree with the deal, but you don't make a very convincing case calling its supporters idiots.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Let's look at who supports the agreement (remember, it's not just Obama and 'Lurch'):

-- Every nation on earth, except Israel. That includes all of the United States' allies, including Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates

Nice work, I'm not stupid! While it is true what you say, the fact is, if you talk about the Shia factions of these countries, then you are right, the Sunni factions on the other hand (which are also the majority) oppose this deal.

Those favouring the deal tended to be Shiite Muslims and they suggested that a better relationship between Iran, a Shiite Muslim theocracy, and the US would mean more stability in Iraq in general. The two nations – arguably Iraq’s closest foreign allies – often jostle for power inside Iraq, using Shiite Muslim (Iran) or Sunni Muslim (the US) proxies. If they are on better terms, so the argument goes, maybe Iraq’s sects will be on better terms and all forces could come together to combat the extremist group known as the Islamic State, which is currently causing Iraq’s debilitating security crisis.

However those opposed to the deal – most often Sunni Muslims – are arguing that the agreement gives Iran the right to interfere in Iraq without any US opposition. Washington has bought Iran’s nuclear weapons, they complain, and in return they have sold Iraq to Iran.

“The nuclear deal is against Iraq’s interests; Iran and the US have allied to destroy this country,” says Safaa Abdel-Meguid, an employee with the Ministry of Electricity who lives in the mostly Sunni neighbourhood of Saidiya in southern Baghdad. “Ali Khamenei has already acknowledged that his country won’t stop supporting Iraq, even after the deal – which basically means his country won’t stop interfering in Iraq.” Insults and accusations also flew, with anyone opposed to the agreement often accused of being a secret agent for Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states – these countries have already expressed concern about the agreement, believing that if Shiite-majority Iran has more power it will be to the detriment of their Sunni-Muslim-majority nations.

http://www.juancole.com/2015/07/iraqis-divided-sunnis.html

-- A majority of Americans

But not conservative Americans

-- An even larger majority of Jewish Americans

Depends on what you see as large or the size of the survey. The biggest poll taken was about 1,034 Jews that didn't oppose the deal. Now how many conservative Jews in the U.S. Oppose it compares to liberal Jews? Also, American Jews are Americans first and most don't have to live next door to Iran.

-- National security leaders, former career diplomats, Iranian dissidents, Israeli security experts

Your cherry picking now, come on......

Are you saying that all of these people are stupid?

Ok, then misinformed or gullible

You are free to disagree with the deal, but you don't make a very convincing case calling its supporters idiots.

Then this will....

A group of nearly 200 retired generals and admirals sent a letter to Congress on Wednesday urging lawmakers to reject the Iran nuclear agreement, which they say threatens national security.

The letter is the latest in a blizzard of missives petitioning Congress either to support or oppose the agreement with Iran, which would lift sanctions if Iran pared back its nuclear program. Letters have come from ad hoc groupings of rabbis, nuclear scientists, arms-control and nonproliferation experts — and now, retired senior military officers, many of whom have worked in the White House during various administrations dating to the 1980s.

The letter, addressed to Republican and Democratic leaders in the Senate and the House, is a response to one sent last week by three dozen retired senior military officers who support the nuclear deal

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/retired-generals-and-admirals-urge-congress-to-reject-iran-deal/2015/08/26/8912d9c6-4bf5-11e5-84df-923b3ef1a64b_story.html

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Ok, then misinformed or gullible

The government of every country on Earth, excluding Israel, is misinformed or gullible. Why might Israel and the Republican Party be the only political entities to vehemently oppose not only this deal, but any deal not based in a cartoon universe?

juancole.com

Juan Cole is a professor who has an opinion. Are you presenting this as a respected news source?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/retired-generals-and-admirals-urge-congress-to-reject-iran-deal/

Yes, I know. There are some US military officers who oppose the deal. The point is that globally they are in the vast minority, and even in the US they represent a neocon ideological fixation on war and the $$$ it entails.

The realpolitik of the situation is this. If Iran is truly dedicated to making nuclear weapons, then a rejection of this deal brings Iran closer to its goal by at least a decade. Otherwise commit to full scale war immediately.

The GOP knows this deal is the best available, but for political reasons it doesn't want to admit it. The GOP knows that the deal will go through, but by not signing on it doesn't have to take responsibility for the outcome either way. Classic chicken hawk move by a party that has nothing substantive to offer.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Also, American Jews are Americans first and most don't have to live next door to Iran.

Nor does Israel. If you care to glance at a map, you'll notice that it's not even next door to a country that's next door to Iran.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The government of every country on Earth, excluding Israel, is misinformed or gullible.

I think you might be wrong on that. People were wrong about Hitler as well and look what happened.

Why might Israel and the Republican Party be the only political entities to vehemently oppose not only this deal, but any deal not based in a cartoon universe?

Because, they don't believe in capitulation and appeasing the enemy with Hippie love! No matter what the costs, including sacrificing one of our closest allies in the ME.

Juan Cole is a professor who has an opinion. Are you presenting this as a respected news source?

Dude! You're never satisfied with references, without them, you always complain! When I provide them, then it is still not good enough. So from now on I guess, I just won't need to bother with putting any source down, because unless it was written, notarized and approved by the looney left progressive media, you'll just dismiss it! I clearly see what this is about. Peace!

Yes, I know. There are some US military officers who oppose the deal. The point is that globally they are in the vast minority, and even in the US they represent a neocon ideological fixation on war and the $$$ it entails.

Hold on a second! First, we are talking about the top of the top and the highest ranking officers, i will take all of their knowledge, expertise and years of experience combined of Obama's faulty gut feelings anytime of the year. I don't care if the rest of the world THINKS it knows better, but these men know the enemy fought in combat and I wouldn't take what they say or feel with a grain of salt either, but Obama, the ever all-knowing person, omnipotent as he is and the creator of the Universe, well of course, he knows better.

The realpolitik of the situation is this. If Iran is truly dedicated to making nuclear weapons, then a rejection of this deal brings Iran closer to its goal by at least a decade. Otherwise commit to full scale war immediately.

Well, I'm not worried, because Obama is buying that BS, Israel is not and they will have the final word on this, knowing that their country is facing serious dangers. Obama will be long gone (thank God) and the Iranian problem will still remain and if you think Israel is just going to become a sitting duck, I already can see how this scenario will play out. The Israelis and the Sunnis will destroy that country sooner or later, that is not a guess, that is a promise.

The GOP knows this deal is the best available,

They don NOT think that at all.

but for political reasons it doesn't want to admit it.

No, for political reasons, unlike Trump, they are too scared of alienating their constituents.

The GOP knows that the deal will go through, but by not signing on it doesn't have to take responsibility for the outcome either way. Classic chicken hawk move by a party that has nothing substantive to offer.

On that part, these groups of GOP politicians, you might be right for the first time.

Nor does Israel. If you care to glance at a map, you'll notice that it's not even next door to a country that's next door to Iran.

You know what Im talking about. Vegas is about 4 hours away from Los Angeles, for us, it's right next door. Try not to take EVER word literally.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

It wasn't like anyone was going to go to war with them.

This is just another way to run out the clock. An inspection regime with the limits this one has is not really serious.

Will be interesting to see what Iran does with its new weapons, and how well they control them from theft.

Europe can't even keep refugees out, don't see they're going to keep out surreptitious nukes.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Europe can't even keep refugees out, don't see they're going to keep out surreptitious nukes.

If they couldn't handle WWI and WWII, how the heck do you think they can handle any refugees? It shouldn't come at a surprise to anyone!

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

the top of the top and the highest ranking officers, i will take all of their knowledge, expertise and years of experience combined of Obama's faulty gut feelings anytime of the year.

What about the three dozen retired generals and admirals who back the deal? Do you "take all of their knowledge expertise and years of experience"?

believe in capitulation and appeasing the enemy with Hippie love!

Yep, that's all it is. Hippie love has infiltrated even the highest ranks of the US military.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@bass4funk

You know what Im talking about. Vegas is about 4 hours away from Los Angeles, for us, it's right next door. Try not to take EVER word literally.

I don't. I took next door for the metaphor that it is, but metaphorically, when a place is three countries away, it isn't next door.

However, you are right to acknowledge that much of what you say means something else and people reading should just guess at it.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

What about the three dozen retired generals and admirals who back the deal? Do you "take all of their knowledge expertise and years of experience"?

3 dozen to 200.....yeah, I really do.

Yep, that's all it is. Hippie love has infiltrated even the highest ranks of the US military.

Pathetic! At least in 430 days, we won't have to worry about that status.

I don't. I took next door for the metaphor that it is, but metaphorically, when a place is three countries away, it isn't next door.

You're splitting hairs now. As long as you understand, it's all good. so you or anyone can call it what you want and I'll do the same.

However, you are right to acknowledge that much of what you say means something else and people reading should just guess at it.

Thank you.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

You're splitting hairs now.

You would say that.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Just telling the truth, why the hate?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites