world

Obama relishes Iran deal; warns Congress not to stop it

48 Comments

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2015.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

48 Comments
Login to comment

By law, US Congress has the right to scrutinize the deal and should do a proper. But at the end of the day, the deal would pass through, as how the votes line up.

Meantime, Iran has to release the Americans under arrest unless they have proof on those charges.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm still pretty surprised at how much Obama and our allies got. Iran relented on just about every "red line" that they publicly announced.

I didn't think we'd get the ability to inspect military facilities and I thought that would be the sticking point that would kill the deal, but somehow we got them to agree. The West will personally modify the heavy water reactor facility which is a critical piece of the puzzle in making nukes. We also get oversight. Sanctions are only suspended, and the US can unilaterally put them back in place with a UNSC veto. Iran said they wanted the sanctions to be canceled which means the US would have had to work with our allies all over again. They also wanted to keep their spent fuel rods, saying this was a sovereignty issue for them. But out the go.

Just about everywhere you look in the deal, Obama got what he wanted. We managed to get unprecedented inspection, oversight, and layers of protection on a country that is a signatory to the NPT. And they still have to wait to get their money.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

The sad thing is, the Republicans have tried to torpedo anything Obama has ever proposed, simply because he proposed it, so this is unlikely to be any different.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

Yep. And the conservative drones are being topped off with the newest and best propaganda, and they'll arrive shortly. It usually takes them a day or so to learn what they should say.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Obama, relishing a foreign policy win that fulfilled a campaign promise dating back to 2008, said the pact cut off every pathway for Iran to get an atomic bomb.

Obama has been taken to the cleaners and humiliated and he is relishing it as a victory. It would be hilariously funny if it were not such an abject defeat for peace in the region and beyond. I wonder if the phrase "death to America" is part of the agreement? Obama has just legitimized nuclear proliferation in the most unstable region in the world.

-2 ( +9 / -11 )

This is a gamble. Iran needs energy-fact. Iran supports terrorism-fact. Iran agrees comply to a 24 day notice for inspections, not the unpresidented inspections as mentioned above. Let's wait and see how well that pans out. Oh, and the whole time leaders and the sheep spout anti-USA hate. Good deal? Dunno. A risk? Yes!

And as Wolfpack points out the Iranian leaders were rewarded for the "death to America" chants. Not a pride point for the POTUS I must say. Rather insulting to USA.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

Love Obama! Congress has done nothing but cut benefits to 200,000 unemployed veterans... Its nice to be friends with Iran again!

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

A-heh. :-)

The Commumity-organizer-in-Chief's administration has been "talking with the enemy" and done a deal.

That's called "diplomacy." It's what grown-ups do and what the Republicans would be completely unable to accomplish. They'd all be singing along with John McCain "Bomb Iran, Bomb." 

The GOP should only be considered potentially viable to run the country if they agree to drop the child bombastic rhetoric and start acting like adults with regards to international diplomacy. 

5 ( +8 / -3 )

The Republicans were going to reject whatever deal the Obama administration, along with the EU, reached with Iran because they are dedicated to obstructing everything Obama wants for the simple reason that Obama wants it. They are the party of "no," and they never lose an opportunity to prove it. Time to remind Boehner that he represents Ohio, not Tel Aviv.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Obama has been taken to the cleaners and humiliated and he is relishing it as a victory.

You channel the voice of Faux well, my young padawan.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

The detractors of this deal seem to forget that the alternative would've been conflict or war. They seem to forget that it wasn't just Obama's decision either. The other security council nations also agreed that the terms were good for everyone.

The only people who are against the deal are Israel (for obvious reasons) and US defense contractors (also for obvious reasons). And where there's defense contractors, there's paid off politicians (mostly Republicans).

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The detractors of this deal seem to forget that the alternative would've been conflict or war.

For supporters and benefactors of the military industrial complex, that's the preferable outcome.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

The detractors have no alternatives. Period.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

The Commumity-organizer-in-Chief's administration has been "talking with the enemy" and done a deal.

Not a done deal. There is no proof that the Iranians have to abide or WILL abide with this deal, even if Obama is out of office. 20 years later if they break out and were to attack the Sunnis or Israel, his legacy is shot, not to mention Iran would be a pile of smoldering ashes.

That's called "diplomacy." It's what grown-ups do

Yes, but that's NOT what Obama and Kerry did. They just wanted a deal. And now we have an arms race, but as in typical Democrat fashion, Clinton did the same thing with the North Koreans in 1994 and what happened with that, we then found out that they lied the entire time.

and what the Republicans would be completely unable to accomplish.

Well, we don't have a Republican president had we, this deal would not have happened, so to even make that kind of statement is nonsense.

They'd all be singing along with John McCain "Bomb Iran, Bomb."

If they decide to attack Israel or the Sunnis, yup.

The GOP should only be considered potentially viable to run the country if they agree to drop the child bombastic rhetoric and start acting like adults with regards to international diplomacy.

I think you really need to tell the Dems that and when you do, tell them to be honest and more transparent. I don't like Bernie Sanders, but I have a deep respect for him as a progressive lib, he doesn't BS and pretend he is something other than what he is and admits to. I just wish the rest of the Democratic party would do the same.

You channel the voice of Faux well, my young padawan.

Don't hate the messenger, hate the message.

Obama has been taken to the cleaners and humiliated and he is relishing it as a victory.

Most definitely. Only time will tell what the overall outcome will look like, but given the Iranians history, the outlook doesn't look good. But the ball is in Iran's court, like Bibi said, Israel is NOT bound by this deal whatsoever, so if Iran really wants to see the sun rise and not be incinerated, they'd better tread lightly and not endanger the country and their people.

It would be hilariously funny if it were not such an abject defeat for peace in the region and beyond. I wonder if the phrase "death to America" is part of the agreement? Obama has just legitimized nuclear proliferation in the most unstable region in the world.

Can't argue with that point.

This is a gamble. Iran needs energy-fact. Iran supports terrorism-fact. Iran agrees comply to a 24 day notice for inspections, not the unpresidented inspections as mentioned above.

Iran will NEVER agree to that, but that doesn't matter to the anointed one and Kerry as long as they get their Nobel and legacy that is all they care about when they sit on Jimmy Fallon's chair and laugh it all off.

Let's wait and see how well that pans out. Oh, and the whole time leaders and the sheep spout anti-USA hate. Good deal? Dunno. A risk? Yes!

Definitely!

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

Obama has been taken to the cleaners and humiliated and he is relishing it as a victory. It would be hilariously funny if it were not such an abject defeat for peace in the region and beyond. I wonder if the phrase "death to America" is part of the agreement? Obama has just legitimized nuclear proliferation in the most unstable region in the world.

Bluster > substance.

I wonder if the phrase "death to America" is part of the agreement?

Golly some people wonder about the silliest things.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

I was in little doubt that a deal would be reached because, quite frankly, it had to be reached. Imperatives have a way of cutting through the BS. Now is from when interesting actions will commence.

There will be a period of bluster on both sides as they each posture to show their conservatives that they have each achieved the best deal possible, but after that time is when the real deal making will begin. Iran and America have long had convergent interests in the region and would be allies if not for certain unfortunate actions committed by both sides. Once respective hardliners have been sidelined by success, we will see real progress.

This is a gamechanger that trumps reconciliation with Cuba.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Obama has been taken to the cleaners and humiliated and he is relishing it as a victory. It would be hilariously funny if it were not such an abject defeat for peace in the region and beyond. I wonder if the phrase "death to America" is part of the agreement? Obama has just legitimized nuclear proliferation in the most unstable region in the world.

Pure empty political partisan poppycock .. Would be nice if our FOX news parroting friends would think the slightest bit before mindlessly jumping on the nay-sayer bandwagon.

The detractors of this deal seem to forget that the alternative would've been conflict or war.

They're always willing to send someone else's kid go fight a war and will never let intelligent diplomacy get in the way of that.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

An interesting development which only allows time for Iran to continue while giving them the economic aid once denied. The problem is as everyone stated that there is no guarantee that Iran will stop weapons development.

Given the state of affairs (the reality) in the area now and for centuries, and especially since WWII, Iran will most probably in secret continue with armament. (an opinion)

If ISIS was a distraction, then Iran and most Muslim nations benefited from that distraction and allowed for the unification of the non-ISIS Muslim nations. They are no longer considered as "problem" nations but at least appear to be better than ISIS. And all of them now have the modern armaments supplied by other nations trying to contain ISIS. And in some sense they have started to work together as never before. Although still divided by "racial" and "ethnic" differences, they are Muslim just the same.

And meanwhile, the Christians and other groups are systematically being eliminated. What will happen all of the Muslim nations really do come together and "unite" as a religious and not a national group?

While China and Russia are seemingly primarily interested in territorial and economic gains using military prowess, what are the Muslim nations really looking for?

Do you know what their objectives are?

Why are they "waking up" Muslims all over the world? At least that is what ISIS was "allowed" to do till now and still doing quite efficiently. There is religious and racial fervor tied with terrorism all over the world today. Why?

Difficult to see the entire picture here. However, it all appears too conveniently designed and executed with thousands of lives being "sacrificed".

We all know who and what are being affected and those who have been hurt or things that were damaged. Do we really know the real damage to our societies and the world?

Who have benefited from all this? That is other than those making arms and munitions. It certainly is not social justice, democracy or any other ideals we may tout.

Do you have any ideas?

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Obama has given a green light for Irans nuclear bomb, and we will have to live with consiquences of this idiocy.

Of course he will try to sell this capitulation it as some sort of diplomatic success, and the "liberal" media and sycophants will parrot that.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

And as Wolfpack points out the Iranian leaders were rewarded for the "death to America" chants. Not a pride point for the POTUS I must say. Rather insulting to USA.

Wow, talk about living in the past. But forgotten is the role that the Reagan administration played in arming Iran by selling drugs in Latin American. Iran Contra ring a bell boys? That worked out well didn't it?

Regardless this is yet another huge victory for the most acclaimed President since FDR. What else can this President do for the USA and the world? Economy set right after the conservatives ruined everything, no stupid wars after the conservatives started two that failed, restoration of the USA's role in the world that is positive instead of being a huge joke as it was under the conservatives. Obama has outwitted the backward loser republicans and is racking up victory after victory against them and for the USA. He is a great President and will be regarded as one of the best ever. Simply amazing! Too bad he cannot run for a third term, that would be yet another landslide victory. Hope and change, he has delivered. Second nobel prize is being wrapped up for him right now.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Much ado about nothing.

Did you forget how many nuclear weapons America STILL has? America, Russia and China are probably the only nations that could successfully turn this planet into a doughnut. Iran would be obliterated.

If Obama has successfully organized a deal that would turn the rudder on nuclear proliferation in Iran then so be it. As of yesterday the situation was Titanic meets iceberg in the making.

So let this play out. We already know what the alternative is.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Obama has given a green light for Irans nuclear bomb, and we will have to live with consiquences of this idiocy.

Says someone who obviously has no clue whatsoever as to the details of the deal, and is only parroting a certain faux news station.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

@kazetsukai

If ISIS was a distraction, then Iran and most Muslim nations benefited from that distraction and allowed for the unification of the non-ISIS Muslim nations…it all appears too conveniently designed and executed with thousands of lives being "sacrificed".

That's an interesting theory you have there... But it only appears conveniently designed if you look at it from a narrow field of view. ISIS didn't just appear out of nowhere. A long serious of complicated events (like the removal of Saddam) allowed them to come into power.

The problem is as everyone stated that there is no guarantee that Iran will stop weapons development.

There's no guarantee that they won't either. The deal was made with security and safety allowances that satisfied everyone involved. Without a deal, tensions would continue on both sides and Iran would be backed into a corner.

Iran is officially a secular nation and one of the more Westernized in the region. Is it impossible to think that they simply want nuclear power and sanctions lifted so they can join the rest of the modern world? That's a simpler explanation than your Unified-Non-ISIS-Muslim conspiracy theory. We should be welcoming Iran into the fold instead of antagonizing them.

It's understandable to be wary, but there's enough blame to go around for the mess in the region on all sides. Mending relationships requires trust on both sides. It also takes time, but you have to start somewhere.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Pure empty political partisan poppycock .. Would be nice if our FOX news parroting friends would think the slightest bit before mindlessly jumping on the nay-sayer bandwagon.

Apparently, according to virtually everyone with expertise in the field, not including Obama, he created the Universe as we all know. I think the jumping comes from the reality that people without any political axe to grind can see this is a 1994 botched and rehashed Clinton North Korean moment.

They're always willing to send someone else's kid go fight a war and will never let intelligent diplomacy get in the way of that.

Diplomacy can take place once the other side is willing to give up all ambitions and desires to eradicate another nation and once that has been unconditionally confirmed, then you go to the next step start to build the road of peace.

Wow, talk about living in the past. But forgotten is the role that the Reagan administration played in arming Iran by selling drugs in Latin American. Iran Contra ring a bell boys? That worked out well didn't it?

And neither will this deal. You just made my point for me.

Regardless this is yet another huge victory for the most acclaimed President since FDR.

I'll bet you wouldn't say that if you were an Israeli or a Sunni, not even close to being a victory, but if you don't live in the region, maybe, but in the long term, it's equally as bad for the U.S.

What else can this President do for the USA and the world?

In 482 days leave and never come back.

Economy set right after the conservatives ruined everything,

45 million people on food stamps for the last 48 months. Who's been in office during that time??

no stupid wars after the conservatives started two that failed,

But why do you not address the raise of ISIS that Obama was warned about to take action as early as 2010 and decided (as usual) to do nothing.

restoration of the USA's role in the world that is positive instead of being a huge joke as it was under the conservatives.

No one likes us, in fact, we are a bigger joke than before. The Russians, the Cubans, the French, the Iranians (especially) the Chinese and the North Koreans are laughing at us and our closest allies are disgusted with us. What in blazes are you talking about, man?!!

Obama has outwitted the backward loser republicans and is racking up victory after victory against them and for the USA.

No, the problem is this group of Republicans are complete wimps, they have the power to stop Obama, but are reluctant because they don't want to offend or be seen as heartless. So it was lack of Republican leadership and not the lies and fabrications of the anointed one.

He is a great President and will be regarded as one of the best ever.

They said the same about Carter and history proved otherwise.

Simply amazing! Too bad he cannot run for a third term,

Thank God for terms. I wish they would shorten them a bit more.

that would be yet another landslide victory. Hope and change, he has delivered. Second nobel prize is being wrapped up for him right now.

So that's what it's all about! A stupid prize and screw the country and our allies. I keep forgetting, we have a celebrity president, silly me.

Says someone who obviously has no clue whatsoever as to the details of the deal, and is only parroting a certain faux news station.

Anyone with half a brain can see that this deal is a green light for Iran to pursue their goal to build a bomb, wipe Israel and the Sunni states off the map, if you don't believe it fine, but there are 80 million people that believe otherwise. Thankfully, the Israelis won't be sitting ducks as well as the Saudis, if they have to incinerate that country, the fault will be on the shoulders of the Mullahs and the Ayatollah.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

bass4funk: "Well, we don't have a Republican president had we, this deal would not have happened, so to even make that kind of statement is nonsense."

You're RIGHT you don't have a Republican president, thank god, and you never will they way the party is going (and don't spout the usual nonsensical, "You said that about this or that and look what happened!" because we are talking about the presidency, and us saying Obama would get it DID, and with your boy Trump in the lead for the GOP nomination, and him showing the GOP for the group of bigots and haters they are... well... it's just TOO comical! Can't wait for the debates!). The GOP literally wants war with Iran, and don't deny it -- last time you did you were given flat out, undeniable proof of Senators saying we should go to war with Iran when you asked for it, and then played dumb.

"Anyone with half a brain can see that this deal is a green light for Iran to pursue their goal to build a bomb, wipe Israel and the Sunni states off the map,"

Nope, it's a deal to prevent what you would have the US go to, yet AGAIN -- war! Proof? have already given Senators saying as much. Need more? Who started the last two wars the US is in again? A Republican president who simply could not wait and see that he was wrong about WMDs, etc. Now is the same tune coming from you guys: "They are building a bomb! They are building a bomb!" Where's the proof, bud? and none of the "prove they aren't" that... well, you remember how that turned out for Iraq, right?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I truly hope all you pro Iranians are right. Recent history shows red flags to put it lightly. This is a risk. Inspections are essentially made by appointment. If they would be random and without notice the risk would be greatly reduced.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Just a reminder to commentators: this is not a deal between US and Iran.

This is a deal between the world (except Israel) and Iran.

US is not the center of the world.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

This deal will drive down the price of oil even more, of course the republicans are against it. Oil finances that party, along with coal. Which is why republicans deny science.

This is a huge breakthrough deal and will change the dynamics in the ME immeasurably. Iran and the US are fighting together now against ISIS, they are allies now.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Conservatives, the conservatives think they have no choice but to slam this deal because Obama's behind it. Fox News, Rush Limbough and the GOP Talking Points tell conservatives they must spread the same lies and misinformation .....because Obama's behind it.

The programming is too strong....thinking is banned....exercising intellectual rigor is anti-American on issues like this for all conservatives..... because Obama's behind it - which he's not since as some posters have already stated this is multi-nation pact so the conservatives screwed up yet again and proved yet again they're not fit to run a lemonade stand let alone the US government. 

My pleasure. :-) 

2 ( +4 / -2 )

@MrBum I prefer to have addressed you using another name, (You obviously have thought things out.) but... that is what you have on site.

Sir, your points are well taken and I can respect your conclusions.

The concept or theory is simply based on trying to find who has benefited from all of the events since Mr. Obama took office.

The question started when he received a Nobel Prize out of nowhere with no visible qualification or accomplishment. It took some powerful people or entities to get him that prize and his presidency. He may "appear" to be "laid back", but he had to be "brilliant" for those very powerful people to back him up and get him the most powerful position in the world. So therefore, I asked a simple question, who has and is benefiting from all that.

Looking at not just what he said and did, but also what he did not say and did not do that brought about different results throughout the world that idea just appeared. It was what was not said or acted upon on a timely manner that started to show a trend. There is a direction and a pattern, which now appears to be a "design".

That is why I called ISIS a "distraction." It could have been addressed and acted upon much earlier. So was the Iran deal. It could have been achieved before they went into final refining stage. No other nation in that area except Israel really "opposed" it. So I asked why?

I do not consider it a conspiracy as much as there is now a visible pattern of events leading somewhere.

Include what is happening in every part of the world, not just the Middle East. It is affecting the entire world, even here in our host country. I am still trying to understand.

Where do you think it is leading toward?

Who is and will benefit from all this?

And, it cannot be the entire world. That is idealism and out of touch with reality.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

WilliB: Obama has given a green light for Irans nuclear bomb... Of course he will try to sell this capitulation

Expect this to be the message from conservatives. You're going to hear a lot of buzzwords like green light, paving the way, guaranteed nukes, etc. Then the follow up will usually have words like embolden, legitimize, any deal/legacy, etc. They will be able to have entire conversations about a deal they don't like without having to actually say anything specific about the deal, and their mindless parrots will go out into the world and copy and paste the buzzwords.

You can mix and match the catchphrases any way you want, for example: This deal paves the way for Iran to get nukes, personally guaranteed by Obama. The mullahs have a green light to get a nuke and they are laughing at us now. This deal will only embolden Iran's bad behavior and legitimize the current regime in Tehran. Why? All because Obama only cares about one thing: his legacy.

The ones who aren't too bright will start to answer questions about alternatives, which will most likely include the US pulling out of the deal and pissing off our allies, then the US turning around and forcing those same allies to sign on to harsher sanctions. When asked how that could be based in logic, then response will gloss over that by using buzzwords like "strength". "Well a strong US president would be able to do it."

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Again for the US centric psychopath, this deal is a worldwide deal.

And so far only US has ever used the A-Bomb. So please respect the ones who try to resolve conflicts through 2-way diplomacy. Thanks!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Y'all realize, of course, this deal marks the end of the Bush Era foreign policy.

International Liberalism is back.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Ran across this article about the GOP response:

Republicans’ knee-jerk hatred of the Iran deal

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-knee-jerk-hatred-of-the-iran-deal/2015/07/14/e62f32c4-2a5a-11e5-a5ea-cf74396e59ec_story.html

Negotiators in Vienna had announced the Iran nuclear deal only an hour earlier, but Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a Republican presidential candidate, was already on the airwaves denouncing it.

“You have created a possible death sentence for Israel,” [Lindsey Grfaham] declared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “This is a virtual declaration of war against Sunni Arabs,” he said. “This is the most dangerous, irresponsible step I have ever seen in the history of watching the Mideast. Barack Obama, John Kerry, have been dangerously naive,” he added. Tough stuff. But had Graham actually seen the deal? “No,” he admitted.

"This is legislating by reflex — a mass knee-jerk by the Republican majority in Congress. Those who howled “read the bill” during the health-care debate couldn’t be bothered to read the nuclear agreement before sounding off."

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Superlib

The Republican party is broken. It's base is ill-informed, ideological, and impervious to reason. Lindsey Graham is an intelligent, well-informed man, who in another day and age, would be rational and responsible when it comes for our foreign policy. But in today's America, with what Reagan called the 'the lunatic fringe of the Republican party' now in the mainstream of the party, Graham must act the fool.

Republiican leadership has stoked that stupid insanity for decades, and now must kow-tow to it.

These people are dangerous.

VOTE DEMOCRATIC.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

@Black Sabbath... I haven't witnessed any particular reason for the voter to vote Democratic. The GOP, better than anything else, offers no alternative to that which they object. Happy to stay alive too see how this plays out.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

You're RIGHT you don't have a Republican president, thank god,

Wow and you think the country is in better shape with this Buffon in charge over the last 6 years?? LMAO

and you never will they way the party is going (and don't spout the usual nonsensical, "You said that about this or that and look what happened!"

Well, you just read my mind.

because we are talking about the presidency, and us saying Obama would get it DID, and with your boy Trump in the lead for the GOP nomination, and him showing the GOP for the group of bigots and haters they are...

So if they are haters, what does that make Ben Carson, Bobby Jindal, Colin Powell and Condi Rice, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio? These must be some of the racist people I have ever met. I think you need another shovel.

well... it's just TOO comical! Can't wait for the debates!). The GOP literally wants war with Iran, and don't deny it --

No, no one wants a war, they would have just walked away from the negotiations, the Iranians need it more than the US. So time is on our side. But we already know what his majesty is all about.

last time you did you were given flat out, undeniable proof of Senators saying we should go to war with Iran when you asked for it, and then played dumb.

What on Earth are you talking about?

Nope, it's a deal to prevent what you would have the US go to, yet AGAIN -- war!

Sorry, but you're wrong again as usual. The GOP doesn't want a war, however, Israel is living next door to Iran and I will tell you this..if Israel feels the utmost indication that the Iranians have a bomb and could strike, Israel will as I said before incinerate that country, so it's up to Iran how serious they are, they have to worry about possible repercussions from Israel and the Sunnis should the Iranians renege on their word.

Proof? have already given Senators saying as much. Need more? Who started the last two wars the US is in again?

How about who was the president in 2010 that basically gave the Pentagon the middle finger when they advised the president to take action against ISIS.

A Republican president who simply could not wait and see that he was wrong about WMDs, etc.

So I don't hear you saying anything about the faulty intelligence from the international community that came up with the same Intel that seemed pertinent at the time.

Now is the same tune coming from you guys: "They are building a bomb!

Ugh, completely different scenario and remember, the Ayatollah swore to wipe Israel from the map, sounds like a clear threat to me.

They are building a bomb!" Where's the proof, bud?

We just won't know will we, since we can't have unfettered access to any of their sights and we have to notify them 24 hours before the inspectors are allowed to view any selected sights, thanks to his majesty.

and none of the "prove they aren't" that... well, you remember how that turned out for Iraq, right?

So now we are back to comparing oranges and apples???

This deal will drive down the price of oil even more, of course the republicans are against it. Oil finances that party, along with coal. Which is why republicans deny science.

Do any of Obama's or Hillary's or any of the other Democrats or better yet, their limo drivers drive around in green algae? Yes, the Republicans and also MANY Democrats (the smart ones) like Chuck Schumer are not that happy, skeptical me want to see more verification and proof before jumping ahead to a vote. Of course Iran would greatly benefit from the $$$ that's more money to fund terrorism, but I keep forgetting, lobs only care about that Obama looks good and absolutely nothing else, why, oh, why am I not surprised?

This is a huge breakthrough deal and will change the dynamics in the ME immeasurably.

Oh, for sure! Now we have essentially the two clowns started a nuclear ME arms race.

Iran and the US are fighting together now against ISIS, they are allies now.

Honestly, do you say that with a straight face?

Conservatives, the conservatives think they have no choice but to slam this deal because Obama's behind it.

No, has nothing to do with Obama. Kerry was the main broker, he's equally as inept, please stop making this a racial issue, I know lobs love to play the race card, but that's not it, the objection is his out of control policies.

Fox News, Rush Limbough and the GOP Talking Points tell conservatives they must spread the same lies and misinformation .....because Obama's behind it.

You mean, the truth? That's why millions of people from either political party or affiliation aren't happy with this deal or at least at the minimum, cautiously skeptical, which they should be, any smart person would.

The programming is too strong....thinking is banned....exercising intellectual rigor is anti-American on issues like this for all conservatives.....

Ahhh, that's why Conservatives love talking about their country so much and get pissed off when you denigrate it and are demonized for wanting to protect our borders and libs want open borders and allow any and everyone to come in regardless of their background, criminal, rapists, murders. I keep forgetting the liberal party of flower and surrender are so pro-American.

because Obama's behind it - which he's not since as some posters have already stated this is multi-nation pact so the conservatives screwed up yet again and proved yet again they're not fit to run a lemonade stand let alone the US government.

Actually, at this point, both parties are horrible, the Dems especially, but the GOP are a bunch of spineless cowards as well. I hope that one day, we can have a party that can put the people of America first and NOT Washington or their political selfish ambitions.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Sadly as other events overlap and confuse this issue, be reminded that this is not about politics, party politics in particular within the USA.

It has to do with the entire world.

Politics is muddled with problems where ever there are people who want wealth and power. The issue is with governance, with "responsibility" to and for the people they profess to represent, protect and care for while living up to the principles set forth for their government. At the Federal level the politicians must first "represent" the nation "realistically" and not just idealism or political interests. In this intentional politics, each country (at least in principle) has the right and the responsibility to first protect their citizens while considering and evaluating the overall world picture. In that light, since we share the earth, (the world), each nation must also value each others needs and responsibilities and share at a level where all humanity can exist.

It is not with one political party being good or bad. It is whether each individual within the parties have placed their allegiance to the people or to their parties. Sadly because of the electoral process a party affiliation is needed to get elected.

Here the question is whether each legislator considers his/her primary obligation to the nation or to their political parties.

(A similar situation, though local, exists in Japan regarding the changes to its constitution.)

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The G.O.P is and has always been about starting wars. Thats what they do. That's what they are good for.

Being American has never been better. I can wear the Stars and Stripes on my bag just like a Canadian. These are good times.

I dare NOT vote for a Republican ever again. So for those of you who seek a Republican G.O.P candidate take office you can hold your breath. The people have been galvanized by Obama's fine work. We are going to the polls and we are keeping peace loving, liberal, compassionate Democrats in office.

Not giving up anything We are keeping peace with Iran We are keeping peace with Cuba We are keeping Gay Marriage We are keeping Affordable Health Care We are keeping the pride and respect earned by the world for electing a clean intellectual President.

So you can keep you Bushes, Trumps, and others who want to take away Living Wages.

This Iran deal is here to stay. Till this world can heal!

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The G.O.P is and has always been about starting wars.

So you meant to tell me, they sit in a corner sharpening their knives plotting and planning to wage war because it's fun? Seriously???

Thats what they do. That's what they are good for.

So what are the Dems good for besides taking other people's money and punishing businesses?

Being American has never been better.

I'm sure 45 million people on food stamps, 40% of college grades that can't find a job, minorities, especially Blacks would probably vehemently disagree with you.

I can wear the Stars and Stripes on my bag just like a Canadian.

I wear it regardless because I'm proud to be an American, I just won't sport a Democrat or Republican bumper sticker on my car.

These are good times.

For the people that don't understand politics or care about corruption, perhaps.

I dare NOT vote for a Republican ever again.

But you'd vote for more income redistribution and more failure?? Wow!

So for those of you who seek a Republican G.O.P candidate take office you can hold your breath. The people have been galvanized by Obama's fine work.

Yeah, riiight.

We are going to the polls and we are keeping peace loving, liberal, compassionate Democrats in office.

The hippie party, sure flower power rules.

Not giving up anything We are keeping peace with Iran

But they not with us, Israel or the Sunnis, what are you celebrating again?

We are keeping peace with Cuba We are keeping Gay Marriage We are keeping Affordable Health Care We are keeping the pride and respect earned by the world for electing a clean intellectual President.

As for Cuba, there was no mention of our fugitives that are still wanted on murder and what a it the Castro brothers paying their people in dollars instead of worthless Pesos now we re-established ties with the Communist nation. As far as pride and respect, ask the 55% of millennials that want to relocate because they can't find proper employment. And having an intellectual president isn't a bearing or qualification for being good or bad. Integrity and honesty is and that's something this president and Washington is lacking.

So you can keep you Bushes, Trumps, and others who want to take away Living Wages.

What wages?

This Iran deal is here to stay.

It still needs to be approved by congress and if both parties are not in agreement and even if this president tries to veto the final bill, if congress can get 67 votes to override his veto, that is a very strong possibility.

Till this world can heal!

After that deal, that will never happen.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

bass

Conservatives love talking about their country so much and get pissed off when you denigrate it and are demonized for wanting to protect our borders and libs want open borders and allow any and everyone to come in regardless of their background, criminal, rapists, murders. I keep forgetting the liberal party of flower and surrender are so pro-American.

Sounds pretty nonpartisan to me.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Sounds pretty nonpartisan to me.

Sorry, I keep forgetting, if your nonpartisan, you cannot critique one party over another. You should just be quiet and tow the line and submit to the liberal ideology thought process.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Sorry, I keep forgetting, if your nonpartisan, you cannot critique one party over another.

Yes, that's right. If you can't follow that principle, please refrain from calling yourself nonpartisan. That's obvious.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Yes, that's right. If you can't follow that principle, please refrain from calling yourself nonpartisan. That's obvious.

Again, that's your personal opinion and you are entitled to believe what you like, I don't agree, I know what I believe and am.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

You channel the voice of Faux well, my young padawan.

Why so hung up on Fox News? Is all dissent from Obama and his Iranian allies verboten! Is it time now to throw out the race card again and talk about white privilege and all kinds of other Leftist psycho-babel? Is this the famous tolerance the Left always talks about? Having a mere 99% of the media on your side must be driving you guys batty.

Obama willingly got taken to the cleaners by a raving lunatic - the Iranian ('death to America') Ayatollah. According to Obama it was necessary to give the Iranians sanctions relief - even for unrelated issues like ballistic missile technology - while getting virtually nothing in return because it was a necessity or else he would have had to start a war. Huh? Yeah, I know that is crazy logic on Obama's part but that is how he talked himself into alienating Israel and ensuring nuclear proliferation in the region.

I mean really, what did Obama get from the Iranians out of this deal? Inspections anywhere, anytime? Nope. Does he dismantle Iran's nuclear infrastructure? No. Does he did a commitment to stop exporting terror in the region? No. He didn't even get 4 American hostages released. What he did do is free up huge amounts of money for the Iranians to use in opposing US interests in the Middle East. Obama is just stupid. Either that or he hates Jews and is trying to get Israel wiped off the map. There is no other explanation for such a terrible foreign policy initiative.

I guess the Left sees this as 'peace in our time'....

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Geez, no need to get hysterical. Our friend was simply pointing out that pretty much all of the negative reactions are remarkably similar in tone, to the asinine and supremely partisan stupidity we hear from FOX news. No, idea where you're getting race or psychobabble from.

Honest, intelligent, reasoned non-partisan motivated, non-stupid dissent is welcome. Thing is we've yet to see any of that.

Now, I wonder what we could have done if Bush and hadn't turned down the Iranian offer to talk back in 2003; you know back when Tehran didn't have centrifuges and oil money rolling in. Now we have nitwits like John Bolton, yes that John Bolton of the Bush administration, saying we should attack Iran now despite the agreement.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/03/john-bolton-times-iran-bomb-war/388850/

These nitwits never learn...

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Geez, no need to get hysterical.

Hysterical? Hmmm...

Honest, intelligent, reasoned non-partisan motivated, non-stupid dissent is welcome. Thing is we've yet to see any of that.

So refusal to accept that the situation with Iran is something other than Obama's black and white "War or make a deal" is not honest, intelligent, and reasoned dissent? You make your own point by not accepting any views opposed to the Iranian deal as legitimate. How many times have Obama's opponents been called racist for merely stating a different opinion? Modern America is tremendously polarized ideologically. Every news story is a zero-sum game. The murder of 9 black Americans in Charleston by a white racist is used as a political weapon to prove the Left's belief that white privilege is oppressive and that all whites are inherently racist whether they realize it or not. The murder of five white military men in Chattanooga by a Islamist radical is no doubt to be considered work place violence and is no indication of a sick ideology that exists within the America Muslim community. Two similar events. Two very divergent perspectives from the same media sources.

To learn more of the truth of any event it is a requirement to watch different media sources because they are all partisan to some extent or other. They all consciously decide what it is that the public will be informed of. Picking and choosing the stories that suit their perspectives and deciding how they will be presented. The media has largely gone along with Obama's Iran talking points because they see him as a historic figure who largely shares their world view and therefore requires deferrence. The Left does not want to hear other opinions because it upsets their sensibilities. They feel that a micro-aggression has been perpetrated against them.

These nitwits never learn...

Oh yes, peace in our time... they never learn.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Is all dissent from Obama and his Iranian allies verboten! Is it time now to throw out the race card again and talk about white privilege and all kinds of other Leftist psycho-babel? Is this the famous tolerance the Left always talks about?

Verboten, race card, white privilege..... Hysteria...

So refusal to accept that the situation with Iran is something other than Obama's black and white "War or make a deal" is not honest, intelligent, and reasoned dissent?

Basically, yes. I'm sure there are honest, intelligent, reasoned critiques to be made about the deal but the right wing hasn't offered any. You, haven't offered any. Most all of it, from the likes of Boehner et al. is pretty transparently politically motivated.

So, do you have any links to any intelligent ones?

Did you read Bolton's article?

To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/opinion/to-stop-irans-bomb-bomb-iran.html?_r=0

You make your own point by not accepting any views opposed to the Iranian deal as legitimate.

No, not really. It's just that you, and your fellow right-wingers (if everyone else is a "lefty") just failed to make any intelligent... views opposed.

How many times have Obama's opponents been called racist for merely stating a different opinion?

yawn do tell... how many times? I'm so interested. It's so relevant to the point at hand. Then do tell me how many times Obama's opponents have opposed him and his initiatives on anything more than reflexive opposition seated partisanship or... obvious personal antipathy.

The media has largely gone along with Obama's Iran talking points ...

Please, FOX news is MSM. Number one rated channel in cable news? And even without FOX news, the "MSM", CNN, CBS has fully reported on GOP and conservative "dissenting' views. Don't need to go to the "Faux news" (does anyone really expect intelligent commentary from them ?) to get Boehner's view, Christie's, John Bolton's, Dick Cheney's or anyone else's... so, enough with the whining.

Unfortunately for you, these "dissenting" views reported by the media are pretty clearly, obviously and uniformly partisan-motivated nonsense.

You do understand that in negotiations the more concessions you ask for, the more you have to offer in exchange, right? So, if your goal is to achieve A, you don't attach F, G and H as riders, if they are not part of what of what you would consider essential to the deal.

To learn more of the truth of any event it is a requirement to watch different media sources because they are all partisan to some extent or other.

Funny you should say that. If you'd take your own advice you'd be in better stead to raise dissent. As it turns out, merely parroting the party line.

Oh yes, peace in our time... they never learn.

Ah, Chamberlain appeasement, so clever... honest, intelligent, non-partisan. As usual...

Here's something to read. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0405.kaplan.html

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

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