There's something I must be missing here, but I still don't understand why the deal can go through Congress only with Democratic votes when Republicans have the majorities both in the House and in the Senate.
1
What about Peaceful Israel who has hundreds nuclear missiles. Over 600 of these are pointed at Western countries, including USA and EU.
Iran has not attacked a single country for 400 years. How many countries has Israel attacked in it 63 years existence. The Iranians say they are developing nuclear energy for peaceful use. They are members of the Nuclear no proliferation pact, Israel is not. So why does the world insist that Iran is the bad guy, not Israel.
Iran has not attacked a single country for 400 years. How many countries has Israel attacked in it 63 years existence. The Iranians say they are developing nuclear energy for peaceful use. They are members of the Nuclear no proliferation pact, Israel is not. So why does the world insist that Iran is the bad guy, not Israel.
4
Bravo! Obama attained the votes for the Iran Nuclear Agreement. As a Democrat, it has been extremely frustrating to watch elected Democrats be stymied time and time again by the two-note machine that is the Republicans, whose platform is "Just say NO" to anything suggested by the Obama administration, and to enhance the wealth of the already wealthy.
When a platform is so limited, it makes forming attacks very clearcut. "Just say NO" to Obama, and "Make the rich richer" are neither nuanced nor inclusive, but do make attack and blocking strategies very easy.
Democrats, on the other hand, consider all issues the Republicans simply say "NO" to--healthcare, protection of the environment, social security, education--and they consider all sides of an issue before voting. Their ability to see all sides, and desire for inclusivity, makes it seem as if they lack spine and are incapable of cohesive strategy when fighting the Reeps.
So this very organized victory came about by taking a page from the "Single-Minded Playbook" of the Republicans. The Democrats were organized, unswerving, had scientific back-up, not to mention the fact that the other nations on the U.N. Security council have already started trading with Tehran.
Bravo Democrats for being pro-active, and hopefully, keeping the U.S. as a player on the world stage.
When a platform is so limited, it makes forming attacks very clearcut. "Just say NO" to Obama, and "Make the rich richer" are neither nuanced nor inclusive, but do make attack and blocking strategies very easy.
Democrats, on the other hand, consider all issues the Republicans simply say "NO" to--healthcare, protection of the environment, social security, education--and they consider all sides of an issue before voting. Their ability to see all sides, and desire for inclusivity, makes it seem as if they lack spine and are incapable of cohesive strategy when fighting the Reeps.
So this very organized victory came about by taking a page from the "Single-Minded Playbook" of the Republicans. The Democrats were organized, unswerving, had scientific back-up, not to mention the fact that the other nations on the U.N. Security council have already started trading with Tehran.
Bravo Democrats for being pro-active, and hopefully, keeping the U.S. as a player on the world stage.
2
If we rejected the deal, the options would be sanctions or war. Without the support of other world leaders, both would be foolish. What would be the point of installing more sanctions when other first world countries will not sanction them? Maybe the GOP should figure out that we are not the only country in the world.
7
Hey thinking and tax paying Americans, this is a no brainier.
Last GOP administration twists and manipulates the truth to build a case to invade a nation which DID NOT attack us.
We all know how that turned out, heck-of-a-job bushie, and they and Cheney blame the current democrat president for it.
GOP is against the best peace treaty we could get given the time line of sanctions expiring with 5 other nations.
American and the world, we may have just dodged another bullet.
Last GOP administration twists and manipulates the truth to build a case to invade a nation which DID NOT attack us.
We all know how that turned out, heck-of-a-job bushie, and they and Cheney blame the current democrat president for it.
GOP is against the best peace treaty we could get given the time line of sanctions expiring with 5 other nations.
American and the world, we may have just dodged another bullet.
5
I am wholeheartedly for the continued existence of Israel and never want to see it attacked. I am also for this treaty and I hope that the Israeli public sees it as a wholesale repudiation of Netanyahu and his policies and party, and then throw the bums out in the next election or even before that.
6
Iran is going to self-police, that should work out well
4
When I think back to George W. Bush's years in the White House and what he accomplished then (Iraq, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo etc.), and compare it to Obama's accomplishments (Cuba, Obamacare, Iran deal etc.) there is no comparison, Mr. Obama wins 6-0.
I'm happy there are so many sensible politicians in the Congress after all.
I'm happy there are so many sensible politicians in the Congress after all.
6
'"When I'm President, we won't just reverse President Obama's dangerous Iran deal. We will increase sanctions on Iran," Rubio tweeted Wednesday.'
"Right after we repeal and replace Obamacare....."
How clueless you are young man to think you will be able to get 5 nations including Iran back to the bargaining table.....lol.
"Right after we repeal and replace Obamacare....."
How clueless you are young man to think you will be able to get 5 nations including Iran back to the bargaining table.....lol.
4
"The proponents of this agreement insist that reason is on their side and no rational person would fail to support it."
And the opponents insist exactly the opposite. Time will tell which side is correct.
But I'll tell you another thing the proponents insist upon: that we pay close attention to which side turns out to be correct. I will. If I'm wrong -- i.e. if Iran takes advantage of this deal and does one or more of the bad things that deal opponents predict -- I'll promptly admit I was wrong.
But if Iran does what I expect -- i.e. if it scrupulously performs its deal obligations and we end up with no reason to believe it's done anything to develop a nuclear weapon while this deal is in place -- I will be sure to point out that opponents' predictions were wrong. I'll also mention how Americans benefitted in the meantime by the lifting of sanctions.
The first "test" of opponents' resolve will come if/when a Republican gets elected president in 2016. All or nearly all Republican candidates have vowed to terminate the deal on his first day in office. I predict that won't happen, no matter who gets elected. Instead that candidate-become-president will say something like this: "I don't trust the Iranians farther than I can throw them. We'll be watching them very carefully. All options are on the table."
And then that candidate-become-president will do nothing, nothing at all, because the deal will be playing out exactly as the proponents predict.
And the opponents insist exactly the opposite. Time will tell which side is correct.
But I'll tell you another thing the proponents insist upon: that we pay close attention to which side turns out to be correct. I will. If I'm wrong -- i.e. if Iran takes advantage of this deal and does one or more of the bad things that deal opponents predict -- I'll promptly admit I was wrong.
But if Iran does what I expect -- i.e. if it scrupulously performs its deal obligations and we end up with no reason to believe it's done anything to develop a nuclear weapon while this deal is in place -- I will be sure to point out that opponents' predictions were wrong. I'll also mention how Americans benefitted in the meantime by the lifting of sanctions.
The first "test" of opponents' resolve will come if/when a Republican gets elected president in 2016. All or nearly all Republican candidates have vowed to terminate the deal on his first day in office. I predict that won't happen, no matter who gets elected. Instead that candidate-become-president will say something like this: "I don't trust the Iranians farther than I can throw them. We'll be watching them very carefully. All options are on the table."
And then that candidate-become-president will do nothing, nothing at all, because the deal will be playing out exactly as the proponents predict.
2
For someone devoted to being "practical" by responding to a recent article by saying 15 times not to support Sanders because he cannot get elected, it is very interesting that you claim that if some Republican clown did get elected that he or she (e.g. Fiorina) wouldn't try to abrogate the deal in some way by trumping up some excuse. Are you "practical, a wishful thinker or just strategic?
1
The Republicans have this peevish desire to keep saving they are going to rip up this deal. One might add that Obama's critique of Schumer's rather flimsy opposition to the deal was well directed. The House Republicans might yet get Netanyahu to be their chief foreign policy spokesman. He is the master of sound and fury signifying nothing. The scourge of defenseless Palestinians is going back home empty handed.
4
Obama: This is the best deal we're going to get.
GOP: No, it's not. We should rip up this agreement.
Obama: If we do that, we will inevitably end up with having to put 500k soldiers back into the desert.
GOP: No we won't. We'll put more sanctions on Iran to force them back to the bargaining table.
Obama: What happens when/if they say: "Screw you...we're not coming back...America won't stick to ANY agreement!?"
GOP: Then we'll bomb their facilities.
Obama: Then they'll move their facilities underground.
GOP: Then we'll send in special forces.
Obama: What happens when/if they get captured and executed on TV?
GOP: Then we'll bomb more targets in Iran, invade, and occupy them with 500k soldiers.
Obama: Just like Iraq?
GOP: Yes.
Obama: How did that work out?
GOP: Excellent!!!
Obama (and the rest of the world): America...you have an important choice to make in 2016...think long and hard before you pull that lever.
GOP: No, it's not. We should rip up this agreement.
Obama: If we do that, we will inevitably end up with having to put 500k soldiers back into the desert.
GOP: No we won't. We'll put more sanctions on Iran to force them back to the bargaining table.
Obama: What happens when/if they say: "Screw you...we're not coming back...America won't stick to ANY agreement!?"
GOP: Then we'll bomb their facilities.
Obama: Then they'll move their facilities underground.
GOP: Then we'll send in special forces.
Obama: What happens when/if they get captured and executed on TV?
GOP: Then we'll bomb more targets in Iran, invade, and occupy them with 500k soldiers.
Obama: Just like Iraq?
GOP: Yes.
Obama: How did that work out?
GOP: Excellent!!!
Obama (and the rest of the world): America...you have an important choice to make in 2016...think long and hard before you pull that lever.
12
Aside from the merits of the deal, which are great, what made the Republicans think continued sanctions by the US would mean anything after all the other countries dropped their sanctions?
7
I am always lost on the language used to describe the success of the Iran deal. Why is it always "victory for Obama or victory for the administration". Why we never hear "A victory for the nation, world peace, diplomacy, etc"
Is it always a game of win or lose between Obama and Congress when the fate of the world is at stake?
Is it always a game of win or lose between Obama and Congress when the fate of the world is at stake?
7
How can the entire Republican Party be against this when 5 other nations are involved? I guess they are so blind with hatred for this president they don't see that if the U.S. was to walk away from a deal that is NOT just between America and Iran that Iran will NOT come back to the table. This is in the words of Donald trump, YOOOGE!
7
As a military veteran who has spent I don't know how many months of my life in the Middle East, AND who once worked for a startup headquartered outside Tel Aviv, I offer this commentary: I have been personally very involved in forcefully advocating my position to my Congressman to support this deal. Why? Because there is no other deal. Don't kid yourself. (Read this article.)
This arrangement has been negotiated thoughtfully by MANY people of many nations..all with the same goal. If you don't get behind this deal, there is no other deal. We, the collective global community, CAN do this and we must. There is no other option other than a direct conflict. Are you ready to send YOUR children over there in military uniforms because you insist on opposing this agreement? I didn't think so.
So let's try diplomacy first.
If your nationalistic tendencies do not allow you to see this, then I can't help you. I will not persuade you otherwise, but I do ask that you acknowledge that there is no other deal possible, AND to listen to Secretary Moniz as he explains the science behind the inspection protocols.
Let's get this vote DONE!
This arrangement has been negotiated thoughtfully by MANY people of many nations..all with the same goal. If you don't get behind this deal, there is no other deal. We, the collective global community, CAN do this and we must. There is no other option other than a direct conflict. Are you ready to send YOUR children over there in military uniforms because you insist on opposing this agreement? I didn't think so.
So let's try diplomacy first.
If your nationalistic tendencies do not allow you to see this, then I can't help you. I will not persuade you otherwise, but I do ask that you acknowledge that there is no other deal possible, AND to listen to Secretary Moniz as he explains the science behind the inspection protocols.
Let's get this vote DONE!
23
If the White House is not allowed to criticize Schumer and Menendez for being "scared" into taking an illogical stand against this deal, then I will. Any Democrat, Jewish or not, who takes an illogical position on a major piece of legislation should be required to justify their decision in a glaring spotlight. If you're going to be a Democrat, you need to be held to a higher standard of reason and logic. (Obviously, no such litmus test is used on the Republican side)
And I believe Schumer's illogical stand SHOULD put his bid to become the lead Democrat in the Senate into serious question. If it does not, then Harry Reid is twisting a lot of arms behind the scenes.
And I believe Schumer's illogical stand SHOULD put his bid to become the lead Democrat in the Senate into serious question. If it does not, then Harry Reid is twisting a lot of arms behind the scenes.
7
"...cooperative strategy betweenThe White House and congressional Democrats to forcefully push back against Republican critics, whose allies had begun a $20 million plus campaign to kill the deal. "
Why not just name who those allies are? Certainly that is part of the story, no?
Why not just name who those allies are? Certainly that is part of the story, no?
5
Many who oppose this deal point to the fact that in 10 years or so Iran can create an atomic bomb. What they don't acknowledge is that Iran is currently able to create an atomic bomb whenever they decide to do so in just a matter of months. This despite tight UN sanctions. Trying to continue the status quo is not an option. Russia, China and other nations will not impose sanctions indefinitely if we walk away from this agreement. We're safer with partial dismantling of Iran's nuclear capabilities and with strong inspections. If Iran cheats (which would not surprise me) we'll be in a much stronger moral position to demand a strong response from all major world powers.
There has also been a lot of criticism of President Obama, even from his allies, for saying the only alternative is war. I believe that he is ultimately correct. The Republicans, the right wing currently in power in Israel, and even the gulf state Arabs would love to see us bomb Iranian facilities in the hope that this will set them back. Short of using nuclear bombs on them, it is not at all clear that the deep underground facilities could be destroyed. If we do take this route, it might delay the Iranians from achieving a bomb for awhile, but it will unify the country behind the hardliners with a national will to retaliate in any ways they can, probably including nuclear.
The US is strongest when we have the moral high ground. Let's not further weaken ourselves by giving it up.
There has also been a lot of criticism of President Obama, even from his allies, for saying the only alternative is war. I believe that he is ultimately correct. The Republicans, the right wing currently in power in Israel, and even the gulf state Arabs would love to see us bomb Iranian facilities in the hope that this will set them back. Short of using nuclear bombs on them, it is not at all clear that the deep underground facilities could be destroyed. If we do take this route, it might delay the Iranians from achieving a bomb for awhile, but it will unify the country behind the hardliners with a national will to retaliate in any ways they can, probably including nuclear.
The US is strongest when we have the moral high ground. Let's not further weaken ourselves by giving it up.
21
Amazingly spot-on. Nicely done!
Are the Congressmen going to share the blame with their POTUS, and John Forbes when the first bomb goes off?
3
So garnering a minority of the House and Senate is victory of a coordinated strategy. The bar for leadership and is now at a new low.
4
"Republicans dominated the hearings. They are united, have a common position against the deal and are assertive.”
Translation from PC dialect: Republicans are a well organized, unthinking, and a fanatical radicalized mob.
Translation from PC dialect: Republicans are a well organized, unthinking, and a fanatical radicalized mob.
6
Congrats to all our administration and Congressional officials who garnered enough votes to veto a majority of Congress to enact the;
"Treaty of Delayed Islamic State of Iran's Nuclear Weapon Development and Accelerated Funding of Iran's Conventional Arms and International Terrorism"
May God Help Us All.
"Treaty of Delayed Islamic State of Iran's Nuclear Weapon Development and Accelerated Funding of Iran's Conventional Arms and International Terrorism"
May God Help Us All.
6
The Iran deal controversy created a good opportunity to see how much the Democratic Party is polluted by the Israel-firsters, who work for the war-criminal Netanyahu against the American interest.
People who put America first, should stop supporting the Democratic Party,
until they expel Sen. Schumer, Sen. Menendez and other traitors from the party. Don’t give them any donations!
People who put America first, should stop supporting the Democratic Party,
until they expel Sen. Schumer, Sen. Menendez and other traitors from the party. Don’t give them any donations!
2
Congratulation Mr President Obama Stop War in World
6
I am amazed and depressed to see how many NYT readers think Iran will stop its development of nuclear arms. Iran has no reason to do so. There will be no effective inspection.
5
There is always a resort to war. It's peace that takes courage.
5
The Iran deal represents submission, not courage.
4
By NOT walking away from this deal the U.S. has other nations who are on this treaty as allies to deal with Iran.
We don't need to go back to the mad cowby from texas approach who wanted to go an git 'em dead or alive ALONE.
We don't need to go back to the mad cowby from texas approach who wanted to go an git 'em dead or alive ALONE.
The Republicans have finally met an issue where constructing an imaginary world with rules of the game constructed solely by the United States cannot overwhelm the truth: other nations that are party to the agreement have made it obvious they will not participate in a hypothetical better alternative that depends on even tighter sanctions. This is the best we can get. Chuck Schumer failed to pass not just whatever test of party loyalty was on the table, but tests of common sense and national interest.
8
Time to call a spade a spade
The list which will live in infamy.
Out of ignorance, cowardice or stupidity?
The list of the 32 Democratic and 2 Independent senators who will be guilty of starting a nuclear war:
http://www.madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2015/09/the-list-of-34-democratic-se...
The list which will live in infamy.
Out of ignorance, cowardice or stupidity?
The list of the 32 Democratic and 2 Independent senators who will be guilty of starting a nuclear war:
http://www.madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2015/09/the-list-of-34-democratic-se...
4
Including Bibi?
4
Thanks for the list, Mladen. I'm sending them all a bottle of Dom Perignon and a fruit basket for refusing to be pressured by all the hysteria-prone doomsayers and warmongers out there.
7
To PI
Hysteria? How little you know of what is going on. I suggest you take the quiz below:
Thinking About the Unthinkable: An Israel-Iran Nuclear War
http://www.madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2015/08/thinking-about-unthinkable-i...
A mini 5 1 question quiz for Secretary Kerry
http://www.madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2014/01/a-mini-5-1-question-quiz-for...
Hysteria? How little you know of what is going on. I suggest you take the quiz below:
Thinking About the Unthinkable: An Israel-Iran Nuclear War
http://www.madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2015/08/thinking-about-unthinkable-i...
A mini 5 1 question quiz for Secretary Kerry
http://www.madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2014/01/a-mini-5-1-question-quiz-for...
It is humbling to note that two leaders (Obama and Kerry -- with the help of Sec Muniz & others) and 34 senators can "Make America Great Again!"
The Bush-Cheney invasion of Iraq cast us into the role of petty tyrants. Now the Obama-Kerry deal recasts America into a posture of world leaders!
Let the party begin!
The Bush-Cheney invasion of Iraq cast us into the role of petty tyrants. Now the Obama-Kerry deal recasts America into a posture of world leaders!
Let the party begin!
11
The Iran deal has been worked out carefully. It is a very good deal.
It prevents Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
Netanyahu and his supporters know about it.
So, what actually bothers Netanyahu is the fact that Iran will get a lot of money when the sanctions are lifted - and Iran may use some of that money to help freedom fighters – like Hamas- who are fighting Israeli occupation.
Netanyahu would love to be completely undisturbed by anybody when he is continuing occupation of Palestine, stealing Palestinian land, destruction of houses of Palestinians, treating Palestinians in subhuman way and applying Apartheid rules. (Palestinian people who are completely controlled by Israeli authorities don’t have right to vote.)
So, Hamas and other freedom fighters have every right to fight for freedom – as much as the freedom fighters in occupied countries in WWII, had right to fight Hitler army!
In conclusion: The fight about the Iran deal is actually a fight for approval or disapproval the war-criminal Netanyahu’s policy toward Palestinians.
It prevents Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
Netanyahu and his supporters know about it.
So, what actually bothers Netanyahu is the fact that Iran will get a lot of money when the sanctions are lifted - and Iran may use some of that money to help freedom fighters – like Hamas- who are fighting Israeli occupation.
Netanyahu would love to be completely undisturbed by anybody when he is continuing occupation of Palestine, stealing Palestinian land, destruction of houses of Palestinians, treating Palestinians in subhuman way and applying Apartheid rules. (Palestinian people who are completely controlled by Israeli authorities don’t have right to vote.)
So, Hamas and other freedom fighters have every right to fight for freedom – as much as the freedom fighters in occupied countries in WWII, had right to fight Hitler army!
In conclusion: The fight about the Iran deal is actually a fight for approval or disapproval the war-criminal Netanyahu’s policy toward Palestinians.
5
Marshall Wittmann, spokesman for the AIPAC said: “We believe that this strong opposition conveys an important message to the world — especially foreign banks, businesses and governments — about the severe doubts in America concerning Iran’s willingness to meet its commitments and the long-term viability of this agreement.”
Can AIPAC speak for the whole country? How can he be so sure about Iran lacking "willingness to meet......"?
We Europeans believe in giving people a chance and forgiving past felonies! Can't other people do the same?
Can AIPAC speak for the whole country? How can he be so sure about Iran lacking "willingness to meet......"?
We Europeans believe in giving people a chance and forgiving past felonies! Can't other people do the same?
5
Perhaps AIPAC can't speak for the whole country but the polls sure can. A recent CNN poll showed 52% of Americans oppose this deal. A more recent poll showed the number is now up to 56%. So the majority of Americans don't trust Iran and reject this deal.
1
Robert F., what percentage of Americans supported the Iraq invasion after the Bush Admin made it's ill-founded case for war?
1
Shawn, but they raise two distinct issues. President Bush mislead Congress and the American people in garnering support for the Iraq war.
Here it comes down to who do you trust more, the President or the American people who elected him? If millions of Americans don't trust that this agreement is in their best interests, shouldn't Congress' loyalty be to them rather than to their own respective parties?
Here it comes down to who do you trust more, the President or the American people who elected him? If millions of Americans don't trust that this agreement is in their best interests, shouldn't Congress' loyalty be to them rather than to their own respective parties?
I don't see how, of all papers, The New York Times is calling this a "Victory". New York lost two beautiful buildings and an awful pile of people by the time it was over. What do they think will happen when a kidnapped plane flies over with an atomic bomb? Nagasaki will look like childs play compared to the destruction they are calling a victory.
6
This comment is typical of the illogical and overheated rhetoric of many opponents of the agreement. Iran had nothing to do with 9/11 attacks. Nearly all of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, a supposed ally of the US. Nagasaki, which the reader gives as an example of the horrors of nuclear war, was a bomb dropped by the United States.
13
That was the last administration doing. They could have stopped that from happening had they listened to the intelligence that was coming directly to them. Clinton warned them, Richard Clark warned them....then his presidential daily briefing......
"BIN LADEN DETERMINED TO STRIKE IN U.S."
That cowboy got the memo a month and 5 days before while he was on vacation in crawfish and did NOTHING!
"BIN LADEN DETERMINED TO STRIKE IN U.S."
That cowboy got the memo a month and 5 days before while he was on vacation in crawfish and did NOTHING!
"...between the White House and congressional Democrats to forcefully push back against Republican critics, whose allies had begun a determined, $20 million-plus campaign to kill the deal."
Really? No way to figure out how to put Israel somewhere in that sentence?
Really? No way to figure out how to put Israel somewhere in that sentence?
6
My thoughts exactly. And this was co-written by the acclaimed David Sanger...
My "favorite" statement here by the opponents to the Iran nuclear agreement is that it will survive only with Democratic votes. Well of course! The Republicans so rabidly want to deny Pres. Obama a victory and a legacy that not a single one could be found to intelligently analyze the deal and its alternatives, break party loyalty and support it. That says a lot more about the Republicans than it does about the agreement, and not in a good way. This is an excellent agreement and as an American Jew I strongly support it. American Jews and others should not equate supporting Netanyahu's racist and warlike policies with supporting Israel.
11
Funny! I don't recall Netanyahu saying that he wants to "blow Iran off the face of the map"! But it seems I have heard that statement often repeated by another country's leadership. Oh, wait! Oh, yes, that would be Iran. Perhaps, Roosevelt should have flown over to Germany and forged an arms deal with Germany. Do you hear yourself?
2
Since when did paving the way for Iran to develop nuclear weapons in the foreseeable future constitute a victory? Obama has never been a friend to Israel, much less, the Jewish people. He has validated and legitimized the most anti-semitic, Israel hating nation on Earth. He wants to break bread with the same nation which draws crowds of thousands who are willing to chant the words "Death to Israel" "Death to the United States" and whose leaders have spoken of the annihilation of Israel. When you lay down with dogs, you catch fleas. We have more than laid down with them. We are eating from their filthy dog bowl.
5
The proponents of this agreement insist that reason is on their side and no rational person would fail to support it. But delve a tiny bit deeper. Ms. Mikulski insists that we must support it because the coalition that imposed the sanctions is fraying. But what if Iran reneges on its commitments? Will the frayed coalition display the will to impose the snap-back sanctions? Other proponents of the treaty (such as Thomas Friedman) insist that Iran would not dare to violate its commitments because of the threat of military action which President Obama has insisted is still on the table. So this saber rattling is acceptable, but opposing the agreement can only lead to war according to the President. This from an administration that sets red-lines but doesn't enforce them.
Clearly, an agreement consists of what's on the paper as well as each side's perception of how the other side will react in case of violation. If anything, history tells us that psychological deterrence is the most effective guarantor of any agreement. As usual, the signals that the Obama administration is sending in this regard are quite confused.
Clearly, an agreement consists of what's on the paper as well as each side's perception of how the other side will react in case of violation. If anything, history tells us that psychological deterrence is the most effective guarantor of any agreement. As usual, the signals that the Obama administration is sending in this regard are quite confused.
3
This deal was all about Obama winning a battle against the Republicans. It's a bad deal for the USA especially when Iran has many times publically announced their intentions of doing never ending war ( to them it's Jehad ) against all Americans.
This boils down to being one small victory for an individual, political payoffs to those coerced into supporting it and one big sellout to the people of our nation.
This boils down to being one small victory for an individual, political payoffs to those coerced into supporting it and one big sellout to the people of our nation.
3
This short term victory and legacy might (and I am sure will) become a terrible blunder once iran gets the bomb, and it will. No one of us who opposes this deal wants war. Many of us who are democrats think the war in Iraq, with its 1 trillion dollar and thousand of precious American lives cost, was a terrible mistake. Yet, for those who are keen observers of history it is difficult to avoid comparison with 1938. When Churchill spoke in Parliament on October 5 1938, only a few members supported him. Yet history shows that he was right, and the cost was tens of millions of lives and 6 million Jews. Then as now there was a hope that the agreement will result in a change of behavior. Then and now it was naive and dangerous to brush away the clear signs that suggest otherwise. Then and now the fate of the Jews proves to be the least of the world's concern. The British foreign minister mumbles about nuances in Iran's approach to israel, and a few hours later there is a reaction to the contrary. Apparently Europe does not speak Persian.
The Jews are again on their own, but the difference now is that they have a state and an army, and the means to turn iran into a radioactive wasteland. There will not be long lines to the gas chambers in Birkenau again. Jews will no longer wait for those who provide evil with a nuclear device to come to their rescue. One should hope that Israel will have a courageous leadership that will do whatever necessary so that the world will be saved.
The Jews are again on their own, but the difference now is that they have a state and an army, and the means to turn iran into a radioactive wasteland. There will not be long lines to the gas chambers in Birkenau again. Jews will no longer wait for those who provide evil with a nuclear device to come to their rescue. One should hope that Israel will have a courageous leadership that will do whatever necessary so that the world will be saved.
4
If our allies were backing the sanctions up until now, how did Iran get the nuclear technology?
If Iran violates the agreement - what are the consequences for them?
Unanswered questions - apparently glossed over.
Obama can manipulate the Democrats in Congress - that's all that this proves.
If Iran violates the agreement - what are the consequences for them?
Unanswered questions - apparently glossed over.
Obama can manipulate the Democrats in Congress - that's all that this proves.
3
Iran is a small potato. U.S. interest in the middle east is Texas tea, black gold, oil, oil, oil. OPEC members hold around 75% of world crude oil reserves. The countries with the largest oil reserves are, in order, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Venezuela, Russia, Libya, Kazakhstan and Nigeria. Now where are all our military troops? The nuke boys to worry about are the U.S., Russia and China. On Oct. 16, 1964, China detonated its first atomic bomb. Russian submarine-- the SS-N-21 has a range of about 1,860 miles -- and the weapon would have a greater chance of reaching its target than an air-dropped bomb. SSN Akula Class (Bars Type 971) Nuclear Submarine, Russia are deployed in the Pacific Ocean, so target cities would be Los Angeles. 8/6/09 CNN reported that two Russian attack submarines were cruising in the Atlantic off the East Coast of the United States. Well, there goes NY city. As humans we are all plagued with the same homicidal, warring, behavior which will always remain unchanged. In terms of human behavior, the more things seem to change....the more they remain the same. Man should stop making war in the name of liberty, justice, peace and in the name of God (all religions in the world). The true God is good and would not be blessing soldiers, war, weapons, nuclear bombs. nor murder and killing. As Christians we must get on our knees and ask God for forgiveness for killing our brothers after the bloodshed of war.
We are not all Christians. But I for one have a broad perspective. Our President did the right thing. Time will prove this to be true.
4
The ignorance and naivete of JCPOA opponents has been stunning. Additionally their appeals have been beside the point of the agreement. Many apparently never read the agreement, and their silly selling point that the US could somehow magically bring everyone back to the negotiation table for a "better deal" even after the P5 1 partners told them bluntly that this was never going to happen was an incredibly stupid posture. Everyone with half a brain knew this to be ridiculous.
The GOP needs to move on, as do the Democrats who oppose the deal out of intimidation or fear of the 2016 election. When the floodgates of trade are opened all will be forgotten.
The big losers: AIPAC, Netanyahu, Sheldon Adelson and Chuck Schumer.
Paradoxically, Israel will benefit going forward as bogeyman Iran recedes as Netanyahu's all-purpose excuse for his own failings.
The GOP needs to move on, as do the Democrats who oppose the deal out of intimidation or fear of the 2016 election. When the floodgates of trade are opened all will be forgotten.
The big losers: AIPAC, Netanyahu, Sheldon Adelson and Chuck Schumer.
Paradoxically, Israel will benefit going forward as bogeyman Iran recedes as Netanyahu's all-purpose excuse for his own failings.
15
Another pig in a poke opposed by most Americans, like Obamacare. We also oppose the porous border policy and the flood of Muslim "refugees." No wonder Trump is going gangbusters.
5
You sir, are WILDLY misinformed. Trump isn't "going gangbusters." His media network owner buddies are simply letting him be a loud, bigoted, mouthpiece on their platforms. No worries. We voters know better. P.S. Check the Telemundo and Univision polls to understand where Trump REALLY stands. :-)
Though I am very happy to see this deal pass, I see many people express the opposite opinion. I still have not heard any alternative proposal to the deal that seems plausible. Maybe someone in this forum who is unhappy with the deal would be willing to offer an alternative idea, if only for discussion's sake?
6
You haven't heard an alternative plan because, like most liberals and those who adore Obama, you haven't been listening. Even Alan Dershowitz a liberal Democrat has discussed his plan to amend the very poorly negotiated deal.
2
would you please give us a short summary, or a link?
5
The sanctions were working. That's why the negotiation got started.
2
Hail to the Chief.
4
Finally, after nearly 7 years, the President is working with people to get things he wants. Surely working with Congress is something the White House ought to be doing everyday, with members of both parties!
The Republicans floated arguments that ignore fundamental facts, such as the essential fact that our P5 allies have all said they support this agreement and would not support continuing sanctions simply because the U.S. Congress and Senate might decide to reject the agreement achieved by these historic negotiations.
The Republican's inherited their illogical talking point from Bibi Netanyahu. Neither party can explain how 'continued sanctions' involving only the U.S. and not the four other allies, China, France, England and Russia, who engage in more trade with Iran than we have reason to, would provide any pressure to bring Iran back to the bargaining table. That is because everyone knows it wouldn't work at all.
That leaves Iran freed from any restrictions to pursue its best interests with a U.S. and Israel isolated from support from the P5. In other words, it sharply escalates the probability of military confrontation without any leverage beyond the bomb.
Just about everybody gets this and this accord has very broad popular support. Let's move on.
The Republican's inherited their illogical talking point from Bibi Netanyahu. Neither party can explain how 'continued sanctions' involving only the U.S. and not the four other allies, China, France, England and Russia, who engage in more trade with Iran than we have reason to, would provide any pressure to bring Iran back to the bargaining table. That is because everyone knows it wouldn't work at all.
That leaves Iran freed from any restrictions to pursue its best interests with a U.S. and Israel isolated from support from the P5. In other words, it sharply escalates the probability of military confrontation without any leverage beyond the bomb.
Just about everybody gets this and this accord has very broad popular support. Let's move on.
10
That congress surrendered it's right to require 2/3 vote to enact what is essentially a treaty and instead allowed 1/3 vote to prevent a veto override is beyond the pall.
No one really believe the President nor John Kerry when they say it will prevent nuclear arms proliferation in the middle-east. In a few years, the Saudis and other will acquire them to protect themselves from the Radical Islamic Terrorist state of Iran. God help Israel. God Help America, God help humanity.
No one really believe the President nor John Kerry when they say it will prevent nuclear arms proliferation in the middle-east. In a few years, the Saudis and other will acquire them to protect themselves from the Radical Islamic Terrorist state of Iran. God help Israel. God Help America, God help humanity.
2
The debate appears more ideologic than pragmatic.
Any 'agreement' so many years in the making and, with Iran in particular, is doomed for failure due to future Iran's violation.
What to do, then?
Let the 'agreement' pass, then deal with Iran's violation might be the way the US Democrats are doing
Any 'agreement' so many years in the making and, with Iran in particular, is doomed for failure due to future Iran's violation.
What to do, then?
Let the 'agreement' pass, then deal with Iran's violation might be the way the US Democrats are doing
The article describes support for the agreement as "highly partisan" as though the dynamic were mutual. Come on. The actual "news that is fit to print" here is that Republicans are the ones who have made it partisan. Consistent with their performance since President Obama was elected in 2008, they oppose this agreement with Iran on the same basis they have opposed everything the president has proposed. That basis is that HE proposed it. The Congressional Republicans never even read the agreement before opposing it. The did everything possible to stop the negotiations with Iran, including the unprecedented act of inviting Israeli prime minister Netanyahu to address Congress to denounce the negotions. When will the media tell the truth about Republican behavior instead of perpetuating the myth that both political parties are equally responsible for gridlock in Washington? Not to do so is a willful disservice to the people of the United States.
70
Wonder if the Jews will vote Democratic this time. So sad and bad mistake by an incompetent President or rather a former community organizer. I hope it works out though. I think it seeds the world with a future atomic bomb one way or the other.
Hey Arnie, the community organizer organized the world community.
3
Arnie. Got solutions? Or just a car full of clowns?
2
The PRAGMATIC ones will indeed vote to support the party that HELPED achieve a diplomatic solution. How many of YOUR kids wear military uniforms? Signed, a veteran of conflicts in the Middle East.
Most of these comments arguing against the deal seem to ignore the fact that the negotiations were not the US versus Iran. There were five other countries involved who had achieved what they believed was an acceptable compromise with Iran. The hubristic thinking that we could unilaterally impose our will is a thought that, perhaps sadly, is for a time past. Refusal by the US to accept a multilaterally reached accommodation can only reduce our standing in the eyes of the world.
18
does this mean that the remaining dems can now vote with their brains?
A victory for sanity.
9
It is quite interesting that this article totally ignores the Iranian lobby group "National Iranian American Council" which had poured millions into an effort to get this campaign passed as well as their millions of campaign contributions, directed from Iran itself, into the coffers of many of the senators who will vote for this agreement. Of course in the last month the New York Times hasn't had a problem bashing AIPAC and their effort against this agreement. The difference between these two lobby groups is quite clear: AIPAC is supported and funded by Jewish & Christian Americans while NIAC is funded and directed almost exclusively from Iran. Its clear to me which lobby controls Washington these days.
3
What victory for Obama? Almost 2/3 of the Congress voted against the agreement that puts Israel's existance in danger. Obama only got his agreement because the dastardly Republicans failed to demand that it be treated as a treaty, and not and "agreement." Obama lost, and Israel lost. IRAN WINS!
2
Remember the outrage over Israeli intervention in a US government decision? So do you think there is going to be any outrage over this foreign intervention? "senior diplomats from Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia who delivered a blunt, joint message" I don't. Hypocrisy and double standards.
2
There are so many Monday morning quarter backs that state that they "could have gotten a better deal with Iran and President Obama is a fool", to all of you, the GOP and Mr. Netanyahu talk is cheap. The Republican Party has no leader in sight and no idea how to proceed together to lead a nation. These are very angry white men, who hate government and should not be members of Congress where they must act together for the good of the nation. Even Mr Boehner is powerless against this current group of Representatives.
Iran may or may not comply but this deal is much better then the previous nothing and the sanctions were losing support in Europe. The ME is quicksand, once involved no easy way out, look at Iraq.
Iran may or may not comply but this deal is much better then the previous nothing and the sanctions were losing support in Europe. The ME is quicksand, once involved no easy way out, look at Iraq.
7
"the deal meant that a presidential veto could not be overridden in the Senate". The writer of this piece is missing the big picture, without 2/3s majority, opponents of the Iran Deal can't even break a filibuster meaning (and here is the big picture) the measure will never even come up for a vote.
When none of the choices that face our country look good, we still have to make a choice. The idea that Israel can be the only country in the Middle East with a nuclear weapon is hideous. It gives Israel a superior power that Netanyahu is proving can and will be used. Why wouldn't their neighbors take issue with that?
Israel is not the US's 51st state and Netanyahu needs to grow up and stop playing the victim card. He's anything but. All that whining and wailing about allowing the Iran Treaty formulated by 51 other countries and the US is not going to change history. All of the Iran sanctions were to benefit US Big Oil.
Anyone who fools themselves into believing otherwise need only look at the enormous potential for Iran to sell oil on the global markets, creating unwanted competition for the US Big Oil boys.
And, let's be honest. Why would Iran trust the US after the US CIA deposed the Shah, replaced him with a doppleganger and then replaced the doppleganger after he double crossed the US and decided the US meddling into Iran's government was too much western interference.
So..now we come down to it. Don't we? US Big Oil and their attempts to schmooze Saudia Arabia to continue and industry in the US that has cost more in tax dollars than the Big Oil boys dare admit.
Israel is not the US's 51st state and Netanyahu needs to grow up and stop playing the victim card. He's anything but. All that whining and wailing about allowing the Iran Treaty formulated by 51 other countries and the US is not going to change history. All of the Iran sanctions were to benefit US Big Oil.
Anyone who fools themselves into believing otherwise need only look at the enormous potential for Iran to sell oil on the global markets, creating unwanted competition for the US Big Oil boys.
And, let's be honest. Why would Iran trust the US after the US CIA deposed the Shah, replaced him with a doppleganger and then replaced the doppleganger after he double crossed the US and decided the US meddling into Iran's government was too much western interference.
So..now we come down to it. Don't we? US Big Oil and their attempts to schmooze Saudia Arabia to continue and industry in the US that has cost more in tax dollars than the Big Oil boys dare admit.
2
"In tandem, they made the Iran vote a strong test of party loyalty." Loyalty to one's party is fine, but not when it conflicts with loyalty to your constituency. A recent CNN poll found that 52% of the American people oppose this deal. Shouldn't Congress be representing these people, and place loyalty to the American people before loyalty to their party?
The foreign policy advisor to French President Francois Hollande told members of Congress not to worry if they disapprove this deal, because the result will be a better deal. He said Iran would engage in some saber rattling in the beginning, but would return to the table. He was later chastised for saying these things when he returned home and retracted them, but his real views on the subject were clear. The alternative to this deal was never war, but a better deal.
The foreign policy advisor to French President Francois Hollande told members of Congress not to worry if they disapprove this deal, because the result will be a better deal. He said Iran would engage in some saber rattling in the beginning, but would return to the table. He was later chastised for saying these things when he returned home and retracted them, but his real views on the subject were clear. The alternative to this deal was never war, but a better deal.
1
After Sandy Hook 80% of Americans wanted stricter gun laws.
Shouldn't congress have represented those people too...placed loyalty to us rather than their party?
Hollande is but one man....clearly not speaking for the majority....or even the rest of his own country. Hardly a reason for our entire congress to change direction.
Shouldn't congress have represented those people too...placed loyalty to us rather than their party?
Hollande is but one man....clearly not speaking for the majority....or even the rest of his own country. Hardly a reason for our entire congress to change direction.
I don't understand your point - is it that Congress shouldn't represent the people? It's failure to pass stricter gun control laws was wrong, but two wrongs don't make a right.
The fellow I referred to was not just one man, but the French President's most senior foreign policy advisor. France was not happy with this deal but eventually succumbed to pressure. A few well-placed people stand to make a lot of money off of the lifted sanctions and increased trade.
The fellow I referred to was not just one man, but the French President's most senior foreign policy advisor. France was not happy with this deal but eventually succumbed to pressure. A few well-placed people stand to make a lot of money off of the lifted sanctions and increased trade.
Thank goodness sanity has prevailed. The opposition to this negotiated Iranian Nuclear Deal had absolutely no merit..other than the absurd idea the Israeli government seems to have that keeping the sanctions on Iran, plus the backing of the U.S., would assure Israels power in the Middle East. The fact that it took comments from all five of the other countries involved to sway the few remaining democrats in congress to assure a pro-deal vote speaks loudly on the weight of the Israeli government's influence on the U.S. Congress. It leaves many scratching their heads. How does this small middle eastern country manage to have this much control over the U.S. of A ??? Only one possible conclusion...financial backing of our political process by Jewish money. Another reason to get campaign finances under control.
4
The reason the other foreign powers are out of the sanctions they imposed was because of the deal instigated by Obama. Now Obama uses the excuse that we must validate the deal because the foreign powers won't re institute the sanctions. The argument is circular. More importantly, the "deal" is not a deal but a treaty and is being consummated in complete violation of the Constitution. Anyone who disagrees can define the differences between this "deal" and a treaty. More deceptive use of language to violate constitutional law.
1
Dems state: "this is as good a deal as they could get. Might as well go along with it." Good job guys!............................. oh boy.
1
Now maybe we can get rid of the Senate DINOs: Bob Menendez, Chuck Schumer, and the House DINOs: Brendan Boyle, Ted Deutch, Eliot Engel, Alcee Hastings, Steve Israel, Nita Lowey, Carolyn Maloney, Grace Meng, Donald Norcross, Kathleen Rice, David Scott, Brad Sherman, Albio Sires, Juan Vargas and relace them with congress people who are intelligent and not political hacks.
4
Now, with passage of this agreement, it would be responsible of Congress to pass a statement that declares that "To ensure that Iran holds up it's end of the agreement, if at any time in the future, including beyond the term of the agreement, it is discovered that Iran has enriched uranium to levels beyond scientific, energy, or other peaceful purposes, the United States will unilaterally, if necessary, use any means necessary, including military force, to eliminate this effort."
3
Whooh! Someone tell Senator Blumenthal he can come out now. Its safe. All the really hard choices have been made.
3
Let's not forget to give credit to Dr Ernest Moniz, who was able to simplify the science to the third grade level, ie the only level comprehensible by our legislators.
Thanks to his efforts, the monitoring and verification steps and the timeline estimates are based on solid science
Thanks to his efforts, the monitoring and verification steps and the timeline estimates are based on solid science
4
He won?
What?
He may still have to veto the passage of the bill in both houses.
The majority of Americans, over the past few weeks, has come out more and more against this in all polls.
And the next president, if Republican, may dismantle all of this and reinstall sanctions.
Obama will soon be history.
However, those who supported him in this will still be up for re-election and it won't be pretty for some of them.
A hollow victory at best.
What?
He may still have to veto the passage of the bill in both houses.
The majority of Americans, over the past few weeks, has come out more and more against this in all polls.
And the next president, if Republican, may dismantle all of this and reinstall sanctions.
Obama will soon be history.
However, those who supported him in this will still be up for re-election and it won't be pretty for some of them.
A hollow victory at best.
5
After Sandy Hook 80% of Americans wanted stricter gun laws.
Congress ignored us.
Were they penalized in any way for ignoring the will of the people THEN?
Congress ignored us.
Were they penalized in any way for ignoring the will of the people THEN?
Funny, you come from Maryland yet overlook the University of Maryland poll that came out two days ago that showed the majority wanted Congress to support the deal, 52-47%, including 60% of independents and 69% of Democrats. Clearly, not all polls show the people are against the deal.
"Victory" for Obama? Just another misleading NYT headline. 66% of the Senate voted against his pitiful attempt at diplomacy. The American people are overwhelmingly against the "deal." When it comes to Obama, NYT bar for "victory" is set very low.
4
Maybe the "American people" in your little corner are opposed. The town hall meetings I attended with MY Congressman showed the EXACT opposite. Remember, there is NO OTHER DEAL. Nations have worked together long, hard, diligently to achieve this agreement. As a military veteran, I 100% support DIPLOMACY FIRST.
It shouldn't have been this difficult. We should have a solid majority supporting the agreement - not just enough votes to sustain a veto.
But I am optimistic that partisan gridlock is beginning to crumble and politicians representing a majority of Americans will again marginalize wingnuts.
Americans are fed up with a government that does not represent them, with politicians who let a few hundred wealthy people buy government policy. It may require a Constitutional amendment or new Supreme Court to negate Citizens United and install reasonable campaign funding rules. But, it will happen.
Partisans overplay their hands. They are increasingly on the wrong side of issues that American majorities support - women's rights, workers' rights, economic opportunity, fair distribution of profits, regulation of too big to fail banks/investment houses, public education, environmental protection, the safety net, gay rights, immigration, on and on.
In their desperation they are taking positions that are huge losers with Americans - deporting 11 million people, building a fence between the U.S. and Canada, privatizing Social Security, supporting a public official refusing to grant marriage licenses to gays, preventing voting ...
Their complete undoing will be opposition to campaign reform, continue trying to put us in the middle of the religious power struggle between Shiites and Sunnis, trying to shred the safety net and opposing rights of anyone other than white males
Enough!
But I am optimistic that partisan gridlock is beginning to crumble and politicians representing a majority of Americans will again marginalize wingnuts.
Americans are fed up with a government that does not represent them, with politicians who let a few hundred wealthy people buy government policy. It may require a Constitutional amendment or new Supreme Court to negate Citizens United and install reasonable campaign funding rules. But, it will happen.
Partisans overplay their hands. They are increasingly on the wrong side of issues that American majorities support - women's rights, workers' rights, economic opportunity, fair distribution of profits, regulation of too big to fail banks/investment houses, public education, environmental protection, the safety net, gay rights, immigration, on and on.
In their desperation they are taking positions that are huge losers with Americans - deporting 11 million people, building a fence between the U.S. and Canada, privatizing Social Security, supporting a public official refusing to grant marriage licenses to gays, preventing voting ...
Their complete undoing will be opposition to campaign reform, continue trying to put us in the middle of the religious power struggle between Shiites and Sunnis, trying to shred the safety net and opposing rights of anyone other than white males
Enough!
2
Trust must begin somewhere before any more negotiations begin and this is a good place to start.
1
The one thing wrong with this article is that it totally ignores the critical role played by J Street and other progressive Jewish organizations, as well as progressive Jewish individuals, in getting the support to uphold the accord. J Street brought Israeli defense and security experts to the USA to meet politicians and Jewish audiences, the importance of which you do acknowledge in the article (without crediting the people that brought them). The deal wouldn't have been upheld if AIPAC were the only voice of Jewish Americans in this debate - the "Jewish Lobby" FOR the deal needs to be recognized and given due credit for this victory.
5
Yeah, and Israel gets blown to bits AND the Iranians will be able to land a nuclear bomb in America!! Yeah!!
3
Bottom line -
Anyone in the peanut gallery who has more knowledge, insight or expertise on this accord and its effects than:
- the former heads of Israel's security apparatus;
- the brightest, most experienced people in nuclear science and arms control from all over the world;
- the 100 former diplomats (Republican and Democrat) including Brent Scowcroft, widely respected security and military advisor to first President Bush;
- our own military top brass;
- top officials, security people and scientists from the five other nations that negotiated on our side against Iran;
whom all SUPPORT the agreement…
please do stand up and make a better, smarter, more effective argument for your alternative to the agreement.
Remember all the people mentioned above will be judging you so don't embarrass yourself in front of the entire world.
Wow, it sure got real quiet!
Anyone in the peanut gallery who has more knowledge, insight or expertise on this accord and its effects than:
- the former heads of Israel's security apparatus;
- the brightest, most experienced people in nuclear science and arms control from all over the world;
- the 100 former diplomats (Republican and Democrat) including Brent Scowcroft, widely respected security and military advisor to first President Bush;
- our own military top brass;
- top officials, security people and scientists from the five other nations that negotiated on our side against Iran;
whom all SUPPORT the agreement…
please do stand up and make a better, smarter, more effective argument for your alternative to the agreement.
Remember all the people mentioned above will be judging you so don't embarrass yourself in front of the entire world.
Wow, it sure got real quiet!
6
History of Iran nuclear problem repletes with accidents when The IAEA specialists and experts were not allowed to enter nuclear facilities of Iran. Who guaranties that Iran won't cheat this time?
NY Dems should encourage a fresh face to primary against Schumer, the way we did in CT to get rid of another Israel 1st Senator, Joe Lieberman. Lieberman was leading the chorus for AIPAC against this deal as well.
Schumer represents, even by today's low standards, all that is truly reprehensible in politics.
The sooner he is gone, the better for the country and the party.
Schumer represents, even by today's low standards, all that is truly reprehensible in politics.
The sooner he is gone, the better for the country and the party.
8
My takeaways:
1. Schumer is more concerned about Israel than the U.S. He should not be in a leadership role in the Democratic Party.
2. The Republicans are an all war all the time party. They have no interest in diplomacy unless other countries accept all of our conditions.
3. Obama and Kerry understand that in order to lead we have to understand that our partners are not our slaves who must obey our orders without question.
4. The military option is still there if Iran cheats.
5. We have the expertise and technology to determine if Iran cheats. That said, expect the right wing war mongers to try to generate false reports about Iran cheating. The media will be drawn to their assertions without requiring any proof.
6. If a Republican is elected president we will continue to be engaged in wars in the Middle East.
1. Schumer is more concerned about Israel than the U.S. He should not be in a leadership role in the Democratic Party.
2. The Republicans are an all war all the time party. They have no interest in diplomacy unless other countries accept all of our conditions.
3. Obama and Kerry understand that in order to lead we have to understand that our partners are not our slaves who must obey our orders without question.
4. The military option is still there if Iran cheats.
5. We have the expertise and technology to determine if Iran cheats. That said, expect the right wing war mongers to try to generate false reports about Iran cheating. The media will be drawn to their assertions without requiring any proof.
6. If a Republican is elected president we will continue to be engaged in wars in the Middle East.
67
I'm now hearing that the deal may not even come up for a vote. By all means let's put our pols on record. I want to see if ANY Republican will support it or are they just that dense en masse?
4
20 million dollars Israel has spent to kill this deal should be subtracted from their annual aid. In fact, the way our President, regardless of your political affiliation, has been treated by the Israeli government, all aid should be discontinued. I have learned in life their are consequences for a persons actions and deeds. Israel should suffer those consequences.
6
I wish that the author would have added one point. This is a win for the people !! Not just for the President.
I emailed both Ga. Senators, Isakson & Perdue & asked that they give thoughtful & informed consideration to this. Instead, they came out blazing before they had seen the proposal, gathered the information from the hearings or having talked to the other countries. And of course, with no alternative. In addition: they actually signed the letter to the Iranian Gov! Unbelievable.
This is not the kind of people I want representing me in such a powerful position.
The US needs to be a leader not a bully. We must try diplomacy & save military action , when & only when, it is absolutely unavoidable.
I emailed both Ga. Senators, Isakson & Perdue & asked that they give thoughtful & informed consideration to this. Instead, they came out blazing before they had seen the proposal, gathered the information from the hearings or having talked to the other countries. And of course, with no alternative. In addition: they actually signed the letter to the Iranian Gov! Unbelievable.
This is not the kind of people I want representing me in such a powerful position.
The US needs to be a leader not a bully. We must try diplomacy & save military action , when & only when, it is absolutely unavoidable.
8
"The US needs to be a leader not a bully."
The USA needs to ban AIPAC and its ilk so that the Congress & the WH can make policies and decisions that help the nation not hurt it as in invading Iraq for Israel. eg.
In 2003, journalist Thom Friedman of the NYT`s counted 25 members of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations saying, “if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened”.
Only Israel has benefited from the Iraq invasion. Ie It ended Iraq`s support for some measure of justice for the indigenous people of Palestine. Now these same people are pushing the US to do the same to Iran.
It is time to change the US election campaign funding laws so that a lobby can no longer game the system & thereby control Congress against the interests of the nation.
The USA needs to ban AIPAC and its ilk so that the Congress & the WH can make policies and decisions that help the nation not hurt it as in invading Iraq for Israel. eg.
In 2003, journalist Thom Friedman of the NYT`s counted 25 members of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations saying, “if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened”.
Only Israel has benefited from the Iraq invasion. Ie It ended Iraq`s support for some measure of justice for the indigenous people of Palestine. Now these same people are pushing the US to do the same to Iran.
It is time to change the US election campaign funding laws so that a lobby can no longer game the system & thereby control Congress against the interests of the nation.
2
One characteristic of Obama that comes through time and again is that when pressed, he is a consummate organizer and political counterpuncher. And so he proved himself here. The bar was set low. Just pick the low hanging fruit and round up enough party loyalists to garner a 1/3 veto-proof fire wall in the Senate. Credit him with setting and achieving that goal. And then skillfully playing it as a ringing endorsement. Only inside the upside down logic of the Beltway is having a proposal defeated by almost an almost 2/3 margin a great victory.
2
No it's an indication of the number of people in congress who are not governed by reason or logic but driven by partisanship and racism. You should be thankful that here are a few adults in the room.
"The opponents noted the Obama victory promises to be narrow and dependent solely on Democratic votes." Actually, the proponents noted the opposition promises to be narrow and dependent solely on republican partisan politics, trying to hinder everything Obama does.
4
Of course Europe would refuse to return to the bargaining table if the US were to reject the agreement. Europe wants to start doing business with Iran again, as does China and Russia, which is why China and Russia would not return to the bargaining table either. In fact, all of them are already making plans to do business with Iran and enjoy selling Iran goods and services now that Iran will have substantial available funds once sanctions are lifted.
Iran, on the other hand continues to call the US the "Great Satan" and call for the death of the US. Iran says it will not change its views about the US, which will most probably be the case. Iran's views of the US have not changed for nearly 40 years, and there is no reason to think the next 15 years will be any different. The US, therefore, will not enjoy much, if any, opportunity to do business with Iran or influence its policies or views. The status quo will remain in place.
Fifteen years from now, when Iran can move forward with its nuclear ambitions, Iran will most certainly do so. It will then be left to the US to clean up the mess, as it is likely that the US will still be the world's police force. But, the task will be much more difficult once Iran is nuclear. And, it will be highly questionable as to whether the US could then count on much support, if any, from Europe, China, or Russia.
Iran, on the other hand continues to call the US the "Great Satan" and call for the death of the US. Iran says it will not change its views about the US, which will most probably be the case. Iran's views of the US have not changed for nearly 40 years, and there is no reason to think the next 15 years will be any different. The US, therefore, will not enjoy much, if any, opportunity to do business with Iran or influence its policies or views. The status quo will remain in place.
Fifteen years from now, when Iran can move forward with its nuclear ambitions, Iran will most certainly do so. It will then be left to the US to clean up the mess, as it is likely that the US will still be the world's police force. But, the task will be much more difficult once Iran is nuclear. And, it will be highly questionable as to whether the US could then count on much support, if any, from Europe, China, or Russia.
“They basically said unanimously this is as good a deal as you could get and we are moving ahead with it,” recalled Senator Chris Coons, the Delaware Democrat who lent crucial support to the deal this week despite some reservations. “They were clear and strong that we will not join you in re-imposing sanctions.”
In other words, President Obama was correct, ratify this deal or war, unless you count doing nothing as a third alternative. The GOP and Netanyahu are shameless warmongers.
In other words, President Obama was correct, ratify this deal or war, unless you count doing nothing as a third alternative. The GOP and Netanyahu are shameless warmongers.
5
It is interesting and worrisome to note that the brand of demagoguery promoted by members of the Republican party has gotten such widespread appeal across party lines. But all's well that ends well.
3
This is a great development indeed. I always found it inexplicable when a whole nation of 70 million people with an unbroken civilization going back more than 3,000 years in history is blithely declared an 'evil empire' and a pariah just because it serves limited geopolitical objectives of a few for the day. This is a great step forward but by no means an easy way forward as angst and rancour among a whole generation of Iranians will not be easy to reverse. War on terror is never won by unleashing violence but negotiating with an open pragmatic mind of give and take.
3
Congress should now pass this single statement that would hold Iran to its promises:
"The United States will unilaterally, if necessary, use any means necessary, including military force, to prevent Iran from enriching uranium to weapons grade level — at any time that this agreement is in effect and beyond."
"The United States will unilaterally, if necessary, use any means necessary, including military force, to prevent Iran from enriching uranium to weapons grade level — at any time that this agreement is in effect and beyond."
2
This entire controversy was simply a pitched battle between the Jewish lobby and the better wisdom of the Obama administration. Republican leadership shamelessly threw its full weight behind the Jewish lobby for the singular an untoward goal of shifting Jewish financial support to the Republican party. We simply have no strategic or other interest in supporting Israel in its oppression of its neighbors in the middle east. That support has caused America untold harm, including the 9/11 attacks. Exit Israel, and now.
4
We are pathetic.
Obama's best argument is that so many other parties support it.
The best we can expect? Why is Iran being accorded such respect?
That this is part of a larger strategy would be more credible if this weren't i line with the rest of Obama's bow-down-strategy throughout the rest of his presidency.
It's just a coincidence, of course, that Valerie Jarrett was born in Iran.
We are done.
Obama's best argument is that so many other parties support it.
The best we can expect? Why is Iran being accorded such respect?
That this is part of a larger strategy would be more credible if this weren't i line with the rest of Obama's bow-down-strategy throughout the rest of his presidency.
It's just a coincidence, of course, that Valerie Jarrett was born in Iran.
We are done.
I'm one of those liberal types thinking idealistically at some point differences can be settled and conflicts overcome. I believe it is not the eternal destiny of humans to hate and kill each other, even if we're too limited by our moral and intellectual shortcomings to see a path there as yet. I believe Jews and Muslims (and for that matter, Jews and Jews, and Muslims and Muslims-- how's that for a stretch?) will learn to get a long and even like each other. Call me Pollyannish.
Naturally I was inclined to embrace this deal. The Iranians on the street seem nice enough, kind of reminiscent of most Russians in the Soviet era: they really just seemed nice, and friendly toward us.
But this is maybe what confuses me somewhat, and all the preceding may come off as cynical, or that most odious form of "discourse"-- snark, but I really meant the above. But here's my sincere question:
Why is there no explicit recognition of Israel's right to exist, and pledge not to eventually develop a nuclear arsenal and direct it at Israel, in the agreement?
Naturally I was inclined to embrace this deal. The Iranians on the street seem nice enough, kind of reminiscent of most Russians in the Soviet era: they really just seemed nice, and friendly toward us.
But this is maybe what confuses me somewhat, and all the preceding may come off as cynical, or that most odious form of "discourse"-- snark, but I really meant the above. But here's my sincere question:
Why is there no explicit recognition of Israel's right to exist, and pledge not to eventually develop a nuclear arsenal and direct it at Israel, in the agreement?
1
Is it possible that, contrary to Mr. Obama's statement that only Mr. Nethanyahu of Israel tries to influence US legislators, other governments do so as well?
2
Eight years of Republican’s knee jerk rejection and condemnation of everything and anything coming from Mr. Obama has made their any legitimate and logical opposition to the Iran deal a suspect. This perception was bolstered by the instant rejection by a few senior Republican leaders without even reading the Iran deal. Their attempt to discredit “Obama care” or unfounded talk of the death panels in Obama care are examples of their doctrinaire opposition to Mr. Obama. Any sensible person, except for the extreme right wing Republican party diehards, now discredits all Republican arguments. This is what happens when one cries wolf not only too many times but every time.
2
Obama reminds me of the Biblical story of Esther. Haman, an enemy of the Jewish people, tricked King Ahasuerus into signing a decree to destroy the Jewish people, but when Esther exposed him, Haman was hanged on the gallows he had built for Esther's uncle, Mordecai, and Mordecai was exalted to the right hand of the King Ahasuerus. Like Haman, Obama made an agreement with a Persian government that is designed to destroy the Jews. Obama, like Haman, might just disintegrate in the very conflagration he believes will annihilate Israel.
1
I used to support our policy for Israel. But this Iran deal has enlightened me for our relation with our perceived over bearing selfish friend.
2
Iran is a terrorist state that has caused turmoil throughout the Middle East and beyond. It wasn't only Israel that is fearful of Iran, but also the other major Arab countries. If and when Iran has a nuclear weapon, I hope you'll remember your mistaken view.
Selfish? Leaving aside the question of whether it's in our interests, you can hardly fault the Israelis for opposing a deal that that they assess will strengthen a country that's sworn to destroy them
The winners: President Obama, Nancy Pelosi (love the way she rules!! Go girl!), the world. The losers: Repubs, Schumer (you don't deserve to lead the Democratic Senate), Netanyahu ( how dare you try to tell independent-minded Americans how to make decisions that affect us!).
3
The P5 + 1 countries deal on Iran's nuclear weapons program has led to : a ) New awakening , expectations and hope for the dawn of a new era of peace in Iran . b) U. K. has taken a lead by opening Embassy in Tehran , after almost 4 years , China , Russia and other European countries would follow soon . c ) As of today 34 Senators have declared their support for the Iran deal , and counting for 7 additional Senate votes needed for a procedural filibuster in the Senate . Any World view of divided Congress for the Iran deal should be averted ! The undecided Senators to help save any finger pointing , shame on divisive message from Congress , for the World community of nations , need to focus before their vote . The expert opinions and views on this deal from : 1 . Nuclear scientists community . 2. Security experts . 3. Consider the continuing slow economic recovery with 3.1 percent economic growth rate , unemployment hovering around 5.3 percent , long term unemployed , Youth and minority unemployment rate at 20 percent, 46 million folks under poverty line , $14 trillion debt liability and related issues etc . The U. S. can not afford another war. 4. Recent majority of public opinion polls also show , there is no support support for another War with Iran and in the Middle East countries .
2
China, Russia and the generally-speaking "others" had open embassies in Tehran all along. The closed embassies of note were that of the UK (re-opened) and Canada (closed).
“We believe that this strong opposition conveys an important message to the world — especially foreign banks, businesses and governments — about the severe doubts in America concerning Iran’s willingness to meet its commitments and the long-term viability of this agreement,” said Marshall Wittmann, a spokesman for the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee.
Mr. Wittmann got the basic language right, however, I would make one small editing change to make it more accurate considering the attitude of the Republicans to undermine the agreement: change "Iran's" to "its". I guess AIPAC will applaud those efforts to undermine the agreement, believing somehow that it is good for America if other countries, such as our European partners, perceive that the United States will not fulfill its commitments. A strange attitude.
Mr. Wittmann got the basic language right, however, I would make one small editing change to make it more accurate considering the attitude of the Republicans to undermine the agreement: change "Iran's" to "its". I guess AIPAC will applaud those efforts to undermine the agreement, believing somehow that it is good for America if other countries, such as our European partners, perceive that the United States will not fulfill its commitments. A strange attitude.
1
With few exceptions,when Americans focus on an issue,we tend to make credible appraisals,particularly in matters of national life and death.We've historically committed to action after introspective analysis forbids credible alternative(sometimes crassly sought).National independence,African American Emancipation and freedom from totalitarian menace,all speak to this assessment.In the nuclear age,MAD(Mutually Assured Destruction)has prohibited catastrophic military exchanges between the then Soviets,now Russian Federation and America.We anticipate that the desire for survival is cherished by opponents and allies alike.The nuclear agreement with Iran is a continuation of those values.
1
This isn't a victory; or, rather, it's a pyrrhic one because every Republican in both congressional houses likely will vote to reject the Iran deal -- and not because some believe that the president lacks a birth certificate, but because it's a very bad deal. A ton of Democrats will be voting against it, as well, and important ones. But this will put Republicans yet again firmly athwart the president on a matter of judgment, and by these actions this administration will own Iranian behavior going forward -- some suggest that Democrats generally will own the outcome, but enough will be voting against it to spare them that.
What odds will Harry Reid, who's trying to stage a Senate filibuster to keep the deal from even coming to a vote, to spare Mr. Obama the chore of vetoing it, give that over the next year Iran won't split hairs, cross lines and generally seek to narrow the fabled 15 years to 15 months? But, then, both he and Mr. Obama will be retired by then (Reid's and the president's terms end in January, 2017), won't they? Someone else will need to clean up the mess, to the extent that it can be cleaned up.
In ten years at the outside, every major player in the Middle East will possess nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles, within a cauldron that mixes two opposed apocalyptic, Islamist paths that claim the one true way to Islam and the authority from God to kill all who question it.
Heaven help those people, because it's very clear that Barack Obama refused to.
What odds will Harry Reid, who's trying to stage a Senate filibuster to keep the deal from even coming to a vote, to spare Mr. Obama the chore of vetoing it, give that over the next year Iran won't split hairs, cross lines and generally seek to narrow the fabled 15 years to 15 months? But, then, both he and Mr. Obama will be retired by then (Reid's and the president's terms end in January, 2017), won't they? Someone else will need to clean up the mess, to the extent that it can be cleaned up.
In ten years at the outside, every major player in the Middle East will possess nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles, within a cauldron that mixes two opposed apocalyptic, Islamist paths that claim the one true way to Islam and the authority from God to kill all who question it.
Heaven help those people, because it's very clear that Barack Obama refused to.
1
There needs to be a vote so that every Senator can go on record.
When the mullahs get the bomb and the world turns upside down, let posterity show who was responsible. And who tried to turn the tide.
When the mullahs get the bomb and the world turns upside down, let posterity show who was responsible. And who tried to turn the tide.
1
Sure, zero tolerance, just like that line for Syria and chemical weapons, and all the things Obama and Kerry told us about what they were negotiating. How can anyone possibly believe this line of drivel from our esteemed leaders? Oh, I suppose the democratic "apologists", or sheep, will go with it, as they toe the party line and don't have any thoughts of their own.
The opposition is all about right wing Israel.
In particular perpetuating the settlement building.
The settlement building is in the name of bible stories.
Thank goodness for Obama acting in the name of peace and constructive effort in the Middle East.
Reagan won the cold war without war.
The Obama administration can usher in peace to the Middle East, this time without war.
Amen, Brother.
In particular perpetuating the settlement building.
The settlement building is in the name of bible stories.
Thank goodness for Obama acting in the name of peace and constructive effort in the Middle East.
Reagan won the cold war without war.
The Obama administration can usher in peace to the Middle East, this time without war.
Amen, Brother.
3
What a huge victory! Maybe a little over 1/3 of Congress will support a pact after being instructed to do so by Russia and China. Yep, sounds like a resounding foreign policy victory to me, all right.
2
The US showed its parochial, essentially Rightist complexion even now, for in fact the Five Nations would by their approval of the Accord have nullified any US efforts to maintain sanctions and a permanent state of hostility toward Iran. Obama had no choice; America would have looked absurd, its partners (Britain and Germany joining the others) abandoning the vindictive policy. No credit to Obama and the Democrats: their reluctance was so marked as to be hardly distinguishable from the Republicans.
Peace is a dirty word in America. We crave conquest, hegemony, unilateral dominance, regardless of party. And as the prelude to 2016 plays out, the situation will not change. Sanders on foreign policy is one more sign the Empire is crumbling of its own ignorance and belligerence.
Peace is a dirty word in America. We crave conquest, hegemony, unilateral dominance, regardless of party. And as the prelude to 2016 plays out, the situation will not change. Sanders on foreign policy is one more sign the Empire is crumbling of its own ignorance and belligerence.
1
The world is a safer and better place because of this agreement. I am very disappointed in Connecticut Senator Blumenthal who has yet to state his position on this critical issue. Instead of showing leadership, he dodged and sidestepped. Now that the ultimate outcome is probable, maybe he'll just take a poll and vote where the votes are. Sad.
And Chuck Schumer, having taken a position supporting the Republican Party's prime goal of denying the President any success at any cost, should forever step aside from seeking a leadership position in the Democratic Party.
And Chuck Schumer, having taken a position supporting the Republican Party's prime goal of denying the President any success at any cost, should forever step aside from seeking a leadership position in the Democratic Party.
13
All "great presidential victories" are partisan: Passage of the 13th and 14th Amendments; Social Security; Lend Lease; the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965; the Affordable Health Care Act and now this.
Great presidents win great victories because they have great vision, determination and courage and lead where others cannot see to go and would not go.
Great presidents win great victories because they have great vision, determination and courage and lead where others cannot see to go and would not go.
11
It was a well intentioned coordinated multilateral effort initiated by Obama that won the day for him on the Iran nuclear deal, the same did the trick to get him the Senate support isolating the Republicans who lacked the logic but had only Netanyahu to their side.
10
It's disgraceful that it took leaders from other countries to speak up to make our 'elected' representatives do the right thing. It was clear from the beginning that this was the best deal to he had. The disrespect shown to the President and our Executive branch of government is a travesty for this country.
17
It a measure of the total inanity that infects today's Republican party that they are opposing this agreement although they know as well as everyone that if this deal doesn't go through the sanctions regime will completely collapse. Even our closest allies like the British and French are normalizing relations with Iran. The British have just re-opened their embassy there. Unfortunately, they so consumed with Obama hatred and partisanship that not one of them apparently is capable of showing some intelligent statesmanship when it comes to acting in the national interest. It's an appalling state of affairs which has never really been equaled in even the most bitter fights over foreign policy issue in the past like the league, support for Britain in the early 40's, and the cold war.
13
I think John Kerry is an accomplished diplomat and orator.
6
Peace wins. What a contrast to the previous administration, and what direct and indirect benefits that outcome will bring. Thank you President Obama.
11
Invite the Iranian President to DC next year.
Move peace forward.
Keep normalizing relations with Iran and they will be less likely to pursue proxy conflicts in the region.
Good relations is our best weapon to use with Iran.
Bibi should invite him too.
Knock the wind out of the extremists.
Move peace forward.
Keep normalizing relations with Iran and they will be less likely to pursue proxy conflicts in the region.
Good relations is our best weapon to use with Iran.
Bibi should invite him too.
Knock the wind out of the extremists.
15
Mr. Obama once again shows that he's the smartest guy and best chess player in the room. Not bad for a "community organizer". Kudos and thank you, Mr. President.
20
I am so grateful -- this from someone without any kind of insider access or input, just sitting here hoping. As someone who spent time in Iran and the MidEast before it was scary, I thank you (BHO, Kerry, the Senate, whomever) for standing tall for the world, not just US. I know the world will be grateful, someday.
11
Had the GOP sought to work with the President instead of against him, perhaps a "better" deal could have been negotiated.
8
The Administration didn't give the GOP a voice in the negotiations.
The reason we even have the current approval procedure is thanks, in part, to the courage of Senator Robert Menendez, a member of the President's own party. That speaks volumes. (He's now being persecuted by the President's Justice Department for that action.)
The reason we even have the current approval procedure is thanks, in part, to the courage of Senator Robert Menendez, a member of the President's own party. That speaks volumes. (He's now being persecuted by the President's Justice Department for that action.)
1
Work with a black guy? While needing your Southern base to win the White House back after Bush befouled it with Iraq and Katrina??? Good grief, Gort!!
Gort, had the GOP sought to work with the President on even just a few of his initiatives for the past six and a half years, perhaps we would have a much better country all around. The GOP and its base have shown again and again that they lack any concrete understanding of patriotism, as they daily call themselves "real Americans," while the rest of us have to turn our eyes from them, disgusted as we are at their perfidy.
It isnt 'mission accomplished' until it IS. And that wont happen until congress 'rejects' and president vetoes and congress fails to override. Any congressperson CAN still change their mind up to that point -- of the veto override vote.
2
This reminds me of another diplomatic show of strength: the coalition the first George Bush put together to push Iraq out of Kuwait. Whatever one thinks of that conflict, the president was exceptionally skilled in pulling together so many nations behind a military action that had a very clear (and modest) mission. When Iraq bombed Israel and the world held its breath, US diplomats did an astounding job in convincing Israel not to take the bait and fight back. It was impressive.
For many reasons, Obama does not have such willing partners in Israel, but he has persevered and found a way (against odds) to get this deal through. One wishes Congress would fall into line, but at this point, that seems like a fantasy. Nonetheless, I find myself as impressed as I was in 1991.
For many reasons, Obama does not have such willing partners in Israel, but he has persevered and found a way (against odds) to get this deal through. One wishes Congress would fall into line, but at this point, that seems like a fantasy. Nonetheless, I find myself as impressed as I was in 1991.
8
Its apperant that once was called treason under our Constitution, is now called, A good arms deal with Iran. Our Constitution defines treason as, Aiding and providing support to known enemies of the U.S. ( Goggle it) and since it SHOULD BE KNOWN that Iran is a sworn enemy to Isreal and the United States, then why are we going to give them 150 billion dollars of support, and 24 days to hide their missiles. No Sir, it appears there is more sinister plans this deals with, view it by going to U Tube and put....Alex Pike, three world wars. Wake up America before its too late.
Obama is now fully worthy of his (prematurely awarded) Nobel Peace Prize.
Time for John Kerry to be given his.
Time for John Kerry to be given his.
18
We will see soon enough. Many of us are still waiting for the payback for the Syrian red line that was crossed and not answered awhile back. Obama's "Commander-In-Chief" responsibilities are about to be tested. Let's hope he does a better job this time.
3
@GMHK
Connecticut
Another Republican disappointed Obama wasn't willing to start a war. No doubt you thought the Iraq debacle was a great success.
Connecticut
Another Republican disappointed Obama wasn't willing to start a war. No doubt you thought the Iraq debacle was a great success.
11
"... condescension some heard in Secretary of State John Kerry’s presentations." Both John Kerry and President Obama lack certain sophistication in people skills. Being smart & decent aren't enough. You can't afford to look down at anyone in politics. When you have enough confidence in yourself & in your ability to understand the complexity of things, you can afford to be humble. Humility has certain beauty in it. And conceit is repulsive - look at Donald Trump.
Yesterday Kerry was saying, "Without this agreement, Iran has 2 months of 'breakout time'. With this Iran's breakout time will be increased by a 'factor of 6'." What does "factor of 6" mean? 2X6=12months. Okay. 2 things: Only one year would make anyone apprehensive. Is that what Obama & Kerry got out of Iran, after all this time? My understanding was it was >10years, not 1 year. Anyway, Kerry's bombastic pronouncement was just annoying. When your man messes up things like that, you have every right to get angry at him. And I am.
I admire both Obama & Hillary Clinton. But I am quite upset with them, as I am with Kerry. Now I wonder, this is how he gave the presidency away to George W Bush in 2004, as Al Gore handed his to Bush in 2000. Gore did not miss a chance to mess it up in his notorious 2000 campaign, starting with keeping Bill Clinton out & ending up by picking, of all the people, Joe Lieberman!
Yesterday Kerry was saying, "Without this agreement, Iran has 2 months of 'breakout time'. With this Iran's breakout time will be increased by a 'factor of 6'." What does "factor of 6" mean? 2X6=12months. Okay. 2 things: Only one year would make anyone apprehensive. Is that what Obama & Kerry got out of Iran, after all this time? My understanding was it was >10years, not 1 year. Anyway, Kerry's bombastic pronouncement was just annoying. When your man messes up things like that, you have every right to get angry at him. And I am.
I admire both Obama & Hillary Clinton. But I am quite upset with them, as I am with Kerry. Now I wonder, this is how he gave the presidency away to George W Bush in 2004, as Al Gore handed his to Bush in 2000. Gore did not miss a chance to mess it up in his notorious 2000 campaign, starting with keeping Bill Clinton out & ending up by picking, of all the people, Joe Lieberman!
2
In the not so distant end, Iran will get a nuclear arsenal, and an expanded economy, while chanting "Death to America."
And, bye and bye, Shia Iran will have their claim to leadership of fundamentalist Islam. The same title their rivals in Sunni nuclear Pakistan, and Sunni Saudi Arabia now share.
And while we wait for a time and place of Iran's choosing, the democrats will have a fig leaf the size of a piece of paper.
After that, the democrats will have nothing.
And, bye and bye, Shia Iran will have their claim to leadership of fundamentalist Islam. The same title their rivals in Sunni nuclear Pakistan, and Sunni Saudi Arabia now share.
And while we wait for a time and place of Iran's choosing, the democrats will have a fig leaf the size of a piece of paper.
After that, the democrats will have nothing.
4
RE: Honolulu Ed's final statement: "Democrats [are] always calculating their political advantage, standing up for nothing" and similar expressions.
What a near-sighted point of view. To consider possibilities beyond this US-centric adolescent ego-driven anti-anything supported by
"stands-for-nothing" Obama, please review the opening nutshell paragraphs of the article, the title of which begins with "Coordinated Strategy..."
"Just before the Senate left town for its August break, a dozen or so undecided Democrats met in the Capitol with senior diplomats from Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia who delivered a blunt, joint message: Their nuclear agreement with Iran was the best they could expect. The five world powers had no intention of returning to the negotiating table.
“They basically said unanimously this is as good a deal as you could get and we are moving ahead with it,” recalled Senator Chris Coons, the Delaware Democrat who lent crucial support to the deal this week despite some reservations. “They were clear and strong that we will not join you in re-imposing sanctions.”
There is a concept known as "the Greater Good," and I will always believe that this is what President Obama has steadfastly meant to stand for."
What a near-sighted point of view. To consider possibilities beyond this US-centric adolescent ego-driven anti-anything supported by
"stands-for-nothing" Obama, please review the opening nutshell paragraphs of the article, the title of which begins with "Coordinated Strategy..."
"Just before the Senate left town for its August break, a dozen or so undecided Democrats met in the Capitol with senior diplomats from Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia who delivered a blunt, joint message: Their nuclear agreement with Iran was the best they could expect. The five world powers had no intention of returning to the negotiating table.
“They basically said unanimously this is as good a deal as you could get and we are moving ahead with it,” recalled Senator Chris Coons, the Delaware Democrat who lent crucial support to the deal this week despite some reservations. “They were clear and strong that we will not join you in re-imposing sanctions.”
There is a concept known as "the Greater Good," and I will always believe that this is what President Obama has steadfastly meant to stand for."
13
It would be irresponsible, if not criminal to opt for force over diplomacy in dealing with Iran. If Iran fails to honor the accord, then other measures will be an appropriate response. Thankfully, there are at least 34 adults in the Senate.
17
"Other measures" will most surely be eventually needed. Unfortunately, because of this foolish deal, any other measure will be rendered ineffective. Oh well.
Please take a step back and ask yourself "Why/How did I come to believe that Iran wants and has been working to get a nuclear bomb? (Answer: AIPAC propaganda) What would Iran do with it even if it had one ? (nothing of course).
Has the Supreme leader said that Iran does not want or seek to have nuclear weapons ? Answer many times.
So why do people start with the false idea that Iran will be a nuclear power ? If I were Iran and constantly being threatened by Israel I would want to have a MAD threat but that is just me.
Has the Supreme leader said that Iran does not want or seek to have nuclear weapons ? Answer many times.
So why do people start with the false idea that Iran will be a nuclear power ? If I were Iran and constantly being threatened by Israel I would want to have a MAD threat but that is just me.
The Republicans have not one true states-person in their ranks. This is especially true of the flock of special interest panderers or the billionaire buffoon in the presidential race.
My only wish, but it's too late now, is that John Kerry would have been secretary of state for all of Obama's time in office.
And other than recapping what rational Americans already know, if you think that the US isn't making sure that measures like a new and improved StuxNet virus are in the works to prevent Iran's nuclear weapons program you are not being rational. I'm quite sure the US is, on all fronts, going to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
Now let's start working on the longterm diplomacy with Iran just as we have with Cuba. Those moves will ultimately make a safer and more morally balanced world - not typical Republican self interested shortsightedness.
My only wish, but it's too late now, is that John Kerry would have been secretary of state for all of Obama's time in office.
And other than recapping what rational Americans already know, if you think that the US isn't making sure that measures like a new and improved StuxNet virus are in the works to prevent Iran's nuclear weapons program you are not being rational. I'm quite sure the US is, on all fronts, going to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
Now let's start working on the longterm diplomacy with Iran just as we have with Cuba. Those moves will ultimately make a safer and more morally balanced world - not typical Republican self interested shortsightedness.
12
The outcome is undoubtedly a positive one, but the fact that it required the intervention of foreign diplomats to tip the balance reveals once again the appalling lack of confidence that certain Democratic senators have in their president.
4
Or they were getting valuable information.
Victory?! Yes, its a victory for Obama insofar as his notion of the all important "Legacy" and Presidential Library, but it's no victory for the President of the United States who, in writing, guarantees Iran's pathway to nuclear weapons and continued regional and global terror.
4
I see that opponents of the accord spent (and continue to spend) tens of millions of dollars on advertising. I have the feeling supporters have spent little or nothing on a similar effort. I certainly haven't stumbled across any pro-agreement commercials, as I have anti-agreement ones.
Arm-twisting for votes in Congress is crucial, but I wish the President also recognized the need to bring the public along when it comes to contentious matters like this. It's not enough to win in Congress: you have to ensure that the Cpngressfolk who stick their necks out for you don't get those necks chopped off in the next election, and to do that you have to neutralize the acid of steady, unopposed criticism of important policies. The Administration has been extraordinarily bad at doing that.
Arm-twisting for votes in Congress is crucial, but I wish the President also recognized the need to bring the public along when it comes to contentious matters like this. It's not enough to win in Congress: you have to ensure that the Cpngressfolk who stick their necks out for you don't get those necks chopped off in the next election, and to do that you have to neutralize the acid of steady, unopposed criticism of important policies. The Administration has been extraordinarily bad at doing that.
6
I have had to listen to a commercial featuring a scary picture of an old bearded guy, scary music and
"We need a better deal"
OR WE WILL ALL DIE.
Over and over and over.
Nary a peep in defense of the agreement.
I don't get it.
"We need a better deal"
OR WE WILL ALL DIE.
Over and over and over.
Nary a peep in defense of the agreement.
I don't get it.
Pat f. Read the agreement and decide. Don't base your decision on commercials or even politicians' pronouncements. Especially here where the Administration has a record of misrepresenting what's in a bill.
Man up.
Man up.
Any agreement that will limit the flow of nuclear arms is a good beginning. Israel is our ally and she always will be. There is an impressive to go beyond the box and President Obama, with the help of some Israelis, will achieve this step forward. It is not perfect, but what in the past 50 years has succeeded? Let us move forward, together, Israel. What can we gain, peace. What can we lose, not a great deal more than what has already been lost.
5
I applaud Obama for a historic accord. If some are worried about what happens in 15 years they will be surprised how fast History can change societies and even more so in our ever-changing modern globalized world. There will be different leaders in all parts of the world and it will be up to them to renegotiate when time comes. In the meantime let's enjoy 15 years of peace.
Why do we have to asume that all this money they'll get will be used to finance terrorism? In fact, I don't know what they'll do with it. Maybe they'll invest in building a downtrodden country. Build high-rises, like the Emirates. I don't know, it doesn't worry me. What worries is their potential threat of obtaining a weapon of mass destruction, and preventing THAT is what this deal is all about.
Why do we have to asume that all this money they'll get will be used to finance terrorism? In fact, I don't know what they'll do with it. Maybe they'll invest in building a downtrodden country. Build high-rises, like the Emirates. I don't know, it doesn't worry me. What worries is their potential threat of obtaining a weapon of mass destruction, and preventing THAT is what this deal is all about.
5
Maybe they will buy a bunch of olive branches and doves and have a hugathon.
Congratulations to President Obama for this important deal. And shame on the Republicans for their "Anything Obama tries we will oppose" mentality. Not in America's best interest, that. And shame, of course, on Senators Schumer and Menendez for their caving before Netanyahu's unseemly political pressure.
20
Sheldon Adelson, Netanyahu's shill in the GOP, had a lot to do with Netanyahu's mischief here. He needs to dial back. Unseemly is mild as a condemnation. Disgusting is more like it.
Victory celebrations are premature. Between the vote and the veto and the re-vote, a couple of months can go by. A lot can happen: more terrifying revelations about this sad excuse for American diplomacy; mistakes by the U.S. or Iran; Congressmen and women having attacks of conscience (rare, but it has been known to happen); players changing. It's much too early to give up hope or to give up period.
2
Are toy reverting to attacks of conscience by republicans who finally realize that partisan politics should not trump a peace accord.
Obama deserved his Nobel Peace Prize
15
Yes, Iran's leaders most surely smile upon your thinking.
The final, sad note to this is the republican 'statement of opposition' - I might have the title wrong but I guess it's one more little package of grumbling; Bibi and Sheldon probably insisted. Now the republicans will have to figure out how else to waste the remaining time of Obama's presidency.
9
AIPAC says: “We believe that this strong opposition conveys an important message to the world …”. Yes it does and that message is that, as usual, US politics is completely riven down party lines and that partisan ideology over-rides all debate.
10
It does. It sends a message that Sheldon Adelson's money and Netanyahu's panic are more important than our national interests in a contained Iran. It's the same message that Bush sent when he went into an Iraq that was pretty much contained and cost thousands of American deaths. The hawks are out there. They hate Obama for a lot of reasons, one of which is he is not lily white. He is still the smartest guy in the room and he outsmarted them yet again.
You can never completely know the future and this may not work but it is an opportunity to work with Iran instead of against them. Once we can openly trade with them we can sell products their and they can sell producers here. To me the best weapon against war is to have a healthy trade relation with thee other country. To be sure Europe has more to gain financially in the short term than we do. Until recently, Iran and the EU had a robust trading relationship and it will not take much to reopen those agreements. We need to get our business to sell products in Iran.
7
Bravo! Obama attained the votes for the Iran Nuclear Agreement. As a Democrat, it has been extremely frustrating to watch elected Democrats be stymied time and time again by the two-note machine that is the Republicans, whose platform is "Just say NO" to anything suggested by the Obama administration, and to enhance the wealth of the already wealthy.
When a platform is so limited, it makes forming attacks very clearcut. "Just say NO" to Obama, and "Make the rich richer" are neither nuanced nor inclusive, but do make attack and blocking strategies very easy.
Democrats, on the other hand, consider all issues the Republicans simply say "NO" to--healthcare, protection of the environment, social security, education--and they consider all sides of an issue before voting. Their ability to see all sides, and desire for inclusivity, makes it seem as if they lack spine and are incapable of cohesive strategy when fighting the Reeps.
So this very organized victory came about by taking a page from the "Single-Minded Playbook" of the Republicans. The Democrats were organized, unswerving, had scientific back-up, not to mention the fact that the other nations on the U.N. Security council have already started trading with Tehran.
Bravo Democrats for being pro-active, and hopefully, keeping the U.S. as a player on the world stage.
When a platform is so limited, it makes forming attacks very clearcut. "Just say NO" to Obama, and "Make the rich richer" are neither nuanced nor inclusive, but do make attack and blocking strategies very easy.
Democrats, on the other hand, consider all issues the Republicans simply say "NO" to--healthcare, protection of the environment, social security, education--and they consider all sides of an issue before voting. Their ability to see all sides, and desire for inclusivity, makes it seem as if they lack spine and are incapable of cohesive strategy when fighting the Reeps.
So this very organized victory came about by taking a page from the "Single-Minded Playbook" of the Republicans. The Democrats were organized, unswerving, had scientific back-up, not to mention the fact that the other nations on the U.N. Security council have already started trading with Tehran.
Bravo Democrats for being pro-active, and hopefully, keeping the U.S. as a player on the world stage.
9
I'm surprised that the democrats never brought up the senate rejection of the Treaty of Versailles that President Wilson negotiated with Germany to end WWI. The failure to ratify and join the League of Nations, based on republican personal and politically motivated animosity towards Wilson (and deep-seated isolationism), was a black eye for America for years. But where President Wilson was unable to rally the country behind the treaty he helped negotiate, President Obama succeeded in this case.
13
So proud of my senator, Mr.Casey! I wish more of our elected leaders had the same wisdom as him,in blocking out the distractions and fear mongering. He made his decision on facts. I wrote him a note to thank him .
9
I'm glad enough folks get that there is not a better deal out there if we only press down harder on the Iranians. I, though, will continue to hold my breath until the voting is over. On a few occasions an ill timed medical emergency has changed a vote on an important issue...
2
I hate to say it, but it's clear that not just the GOP, but some Democrats (Schumer, Menendez, etc.) and the US media are in the tank for AIPAC. You have FIVE--FIVE--major nations across the globe, including powerhouses UK, Russia and China, who rarely agree on anything, all saying let's work with this deal.
Yet wealthy lobbyists flood our airwaves with slanted ads, the prime minister of a foreign country is invited to address our Congress and harangue our democratically elected president, and we hear over and over from the US media about ONE side of this deal, which is the AIPAC side. There's something very wrong with this picture.
I'm glad these Democrats who are reasonable are doing the right thing by backing the deal. They were elected to represent their US constituents, not AIPAC.
Yet wealthy lobbyists flood our airwaves with slanted ads, the prime minister of a foreign country is invited to address our Congress and harangue our democratically elected president, and we hear over and over from the US media about ONE side of this deal, which is the AIPAC side. There's something very wrong with this picture.
I'm glad these Democrats who are reasonable are doing the right thing by backing the deal. They were elected to represent their US constituents, not AIPAC.
30
There have been many column inches written about Israels opposition to the deal. On the otherhand, there have been precious few about the other negotiating countries viewpoint ( the so called P5 +1), their support for the deal, and why, and that they would honor this deal even if partisan politics resulted in the U.S. walking away.
I'm glad that those supporting the deal actually listened to what those other country's had to say, and not just what doomsayer Netanyahu and his supporters loudly trumpeted.
I'm glad that those supporting the deal actually listened to what those other country's had to say, and not just what doomsayer Netanyahu and his supporters loudly trumpeted.
28
I want to say Thank You to the Senators who are for the deal and are willing to try and make this world a better place. I hope New Yorkers' will remember Schumer come election time and send him home. I certainly will remember Menendez here in NJ who was probably through anyway. And to Cory Booker I am still watching, you can't tread water forever. Also to all these commentators who keep harping on the $150 billion, please read the first paragraph a few times so it sinks in. " The Five World Powers Had No Intention Of Returning To The Negotiating Table " .. and probably a host of other countries will be doing trade. That means Iran is going to make the money anyway. The other nations involved are glad the deal will survive but in the end they don't care what we do, they want to do business.
8
Yes this is Obama's victory, but more so a victory for the International community and the American people who he works for. The media sets up Mr. Obama as a target when they blame him or give him credit only. this treaty was never a personal thing, a victory for the world and sanity which is not the province of one person and I am certain that President Obama would agree with this.
5
When full story is reported some credit also will be given to the coalition of progressive organizations
that has supported Administration efforts on behalf of the agreement, and the citizens who have made known their belief in diplomacy.
that has supported Administration efforts on behalf of the agreement, and the citizens who have made known their belief in diplomacy.
8
The GOP position on this deal has never made any reasonable sense. It is Obama Derangement Syndrome magnified. If Obama is behind it, they're against it. The five other international signatories have made clear that this is the deal. Period. The GOP seems to believe, yet again, that it must be their way or the highway. They remain in their blinkers, believing that they alone control the planet.
8
As you ponder your votes, both in the primaries and in the general election next year, consider how any of the Republican candidates who have been opposing this deal would have handled it had they been President. Then, please, consider what they might do in the future were any of them to be elected.
It is issues such as this, and not who has something nasty to say about whom, that should be in the forefront of news coverage and analysis.
It is issues such as this, and not who has something nasty to say about whom, that should be in the forefront of news coverage and analysis.
10
According to this NY Times report, Representative Nancy Pelosi played a key role in rallying support for this agreement. She also played a key role as Speaker of the House in getting the Affordable Care Act passed. She has proved repeatedly that she is a highly skilled and effective legislative leader, and she will be remembered positively in history for her contributions to our nation.
22
It isn't over till it is over. This is a hollow victory for the President if he can't get more than 40 Democratic Senators to go along.
2
The next step: President Obama must soon position the nuclear deal in a broader package of initiatives to restore our relations with Iran. Massive celebrations there, when the agreement was announced, were inspired by much more than the removal of economic sanctions. To the Iranian people, particularly the young, this agreement is also the start of a transformation to less Islamic fundamentalism and more democracy and free enterprise. The U.S. should capitalize on their sentiments, urgently accelerating economic and other social transformations in Iran. Perhaps most important among our potential initiatives are immigration reforms pertaining to foreign students. Old and recent proposals in Congress focus on allowing them to work in the U.S. after graduation to help make America more competitive. The main issue: concern that expansion of work visas to foreign students would depress wages and limit employment opportunities for Americans. But this perspective is too narrow; it must be expanded to address positive impacts abroad. With specific regard to Iran, these immigration reforms should focus on expanded opportunities for its students to get advanced STEM degrees and then work in the U.S. up to five years after graduation. When these young people return to Iran, they would be agents-of-change for democracy and open markets, producing pervasive and enduring benefits for Iran, elsewhere in the Middle East, and the United States.
5
The Iranians are already breaking the treaty and cannot be trusted. Once the billions of sanctions are lifted, they are free to contribute even more to their web of international terrorism while they pursue the bomb in self-inspected facilities. There is no "win" anywhere in this agreement. It is folly.
3
How are they breaking the treaty? Are you privy to some special knowledge that the rest of us don't know- please do share.
2
So President Obama's signal foreign policy achievement is highly partisan. So be it. When history makes its judgment, let there be no doubt about the spiteful, small-minded Republican leaders who mindlessly opposed everything this president touched. The world recognized the unusual qualities and qualifications of Barack Hussein Obama early on and he got the Nobel Peace Prize on that basis. What did our opposition party do? Let me put it this way: The Republicans did not do in this case what the Democrats did when the supreme court selected George Bush over Al Gore as our President. Just imagine the extent of the national loss on account of the Republican failure to lend a modicum of support to the only president we have had for the last six years.
13
Thank you President Obama for this rational approach to dealing with Iran... The opposition had no credible alternative and scuttling the deal would have left the US isolated and closer to another destructive war. Obama and his team are the sensible adults in a room apparently teeming with foreign policy juveniles.
16
President Obama has been a phenomenal president and I will feel profound regret the day he leaves office. Hopefully, Hillary can continue the work he has done for the betterment of this country. Thank you, Mr. President. I am so grateful to have witnessed the class, intelligence and tolerance you have demonstrated in moving this country forward-- despite the continual opposition from the Republican party. History will be good to you.
2
The agreement with Iran is entirely unenforceable. If they choose to proceed with their nuclear program, we can bomb them -- but we could have done that with or without an agreement. Nuclear agreements with the USSR eased tensions with them. By contrast, the Iranians hate us today like they hated us yesterday because this agreement was forced upon them, not negotiated. Worse, there was so much that could have been accomplished with a country that arms radical factions throughout the Middle East and was desperate for an end to sanctions.
During the last 8 years, Iraq has further fractured, relations with Saudi Arabia have deteriorated, Egypt has forgotten the meaning of democracy, Syria has exploded. ISIS has gained in influence, Israel, like Egypt, has moved toward authoritarian rule. And Lebanon has become a deeply divided country. The situation in the Middle East has gotten markedly worse of late. Democrats who care about peace rather than Obama's legacy, know that the last 8 years were very bad years for the cause of peace in the Middle East. C'mpn Dems, be real.
During the last 8 years, Iraq has further fractured, relations with Saudi Arabia have deteriorated, Egypt has forgotten the meaning of democracy, Syria has exploded. ISIS has gained in influence, Israel, like Egypt, has moved toward authoritarian rule. And Lebanon has become a deeply divided country. The situation in the Middle East has gotten markedly worse of late. Democrats who care about peace rather than Obama's legacy, know that the last 8 years were very bad years for the cause of peace in the Middle East. C'mpn Dems, be real.
3
The previous eight years sowed the seeds of the destabilization of the MIddle East far more than events during the Obama Administration. Iraq was already broken from the needless destruction of its infrastructure and loss of over 100,000 innocent lives. Eqypt has never been a "democracy" as you describe. ISIS was created out of the vacuum created by the War in Iraq-- not out of events occurring in the aftermath. Syria and Lebanon were already troubled and deeply divided countries.
The verification provisions in the agreement are the most rigorous ever created as is the process for resolving perceived violations. Twenty-nine U.S. physicists have signed a letter describing the agreement as "innovative" and "stringent" "more so than any other previously negotiated nonproliferation framework." The letter praises the technical features of the agreement and rebuts criticism of issues of verification or the secret pursuit of nuclear weapons research.
Dozens of former senior members of Israel's defense establishment in an open letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu dated August 3, 2015 stated their belief that it is in Israel's best interests to support implementation of the agreement and implement steps toward reaching a two-state solution and establishing a moderate Sunni-western axis to combat extremist forces.
And a bipartisan group of over 50 retired military leaders, foreign policy and security leaders and ambassadors and released a statement supporting the agreement.
The verification provisions in the agreement are the most rigorous ever created as is the process for resolving perceived violations. Twenty-nine U.S. physicists have signed a letter describing the agreement as "innovative" and "stringent" "more so than any other previously negotiated nonproliferation framework." The letter praises the technical features of the agreement and rebuts criticism of issues of verification or the secret pursuit of nuclear weapons research.
Dozens of former senior members of Israel's defense establishment in an open letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu dated August 3, 2015 stated their belief that it is in Israel's best interests to support implementation of the agreement and implement steps toward reaching a two-state solution and establishing a moderate Sunni-western axis to combat extremist forces.
And a bipartisan group of over 50 retired military leaders, foreign policy and security leaders and ambassadors and released a statement supporting the agreement.
2
And we were supposed to do, exactly what? Oh, I forgot: more war.
Too bad those diplomats from our international partners in the negotiations with Iran didn't deliver the same message to the whole Congress. There again, it doubtless would have changed not even one Republican mind.
13
The article quotes Patrick Darton of a "Nuclear-free Iran" group (already a preposterous name for an impossible idea): "For pro-Israel activists, this is a once-in-a-generation vote."
Patrick Darton, meet Efraim Halevy, the former director of Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, and Ami Ayalon, the former director of the Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security service, both of whom have good things to say about the deal in this very same article.
Patrick Darton, meet Efraim Halevy, the former director of Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, and Ami Ayalon, the former director of the Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security service, both of whom have good things to say about the deal in this very same article.
6
Because as an untenable plan it provides their agencies a bonanza of options in putting a fork through the heart of Iran's offensive operations.
I cannot understand the thinking behind the proponents of the Iranian nuclear arms agreement.
The financial sanctions against Iran were clearly working and were the likely the cause of Iran wanting to negotiate in the first place. Upon approval of the agreement, all the parties will almost immediately remove the sanctions and Iran will get access to billions of desperately needed dollars. And should Iran violate the agreement, reimposing the sanctions will be nearly impossible, as our "partners" will be more interested in trading with Iran to get some of that money rather than shutting off the spigot again.
Then there is the issue of trust. What has Iran done to cause us to trust they will live up to the terms of the agreement? Absolutely nothing except shout "Death to America!"
We can only imagine what the reported side deals are all about. One that was leaked has Iran using its own inspectors in certain military sites. This is the classic "fox guarding the henhouse" scenario. Yeah, of course they will be honest.
Lastly, at the end of the ten years, Iran is free to develop nuclear weapons. And we can all agree that they will, if they have not done so already.
So what does this agreement buy us? Maybe 10 years of a no-nuke Iran, IF they do not violate the agreement? And if they do violate the agreement, what happens? The parties sit down again and negotiate. Laughable.
Iran has correctly played Obama and Kerry as fools.
The financial sanctions against Iran were clearly working and were the likely the cause of Iran wanting to negotiate in the first place. Upon approval of the agreement, all the parties will almost immediately remove the sanctions and Iran will get access to billions of desperately needed dollars. And should Iran violate the agreement, reimposing the sanctions will be nearly impossible, as our "partners" will be more interested in trading with Iran to get some of that money rather than shutting off the spigot again.
Then there is the issue of trust. What has Iran done to cause us to trust they will live up to the terms of the agreement? Absolutely nothing except shout "Death to America!"
We can only imagine what the reported side deals are all about. One that was leaked has Iran using its own inspectors in certain military sites. This is the classic "fox guarding the henhouse" scenario. Yeah, of course they will be honest.
Lastly, at the end of the ten years, Iran is free to develop nuclear weapons. And we can all agree that they will, if they have not done so already.
So what does this agreement buy us? Maybe 10 years of a no-nuke Iran, IF they do not violate the agreement? And if they do violate the agreement, what happens? The parties sit down again and negotiate. Laughable.
Iran has correctly played Obama and Kerry as fools.
14
Yes, the sanctions worked...they got Iran to the negotiating table. Then what?
They were NEVER going to sign a deal that permanently prevented them from nuclear progress, both on the civilian side (which they will need in 20 years time as their oil runs out) or military. Right now, Israeli Jews have nuclear weapons, the Sunni Arabs have nuclear weapons (via Sunni Pakistan)...and the only power base in the region that is nuclear-free is the Shia Arabs and Shia Persians. If you lead the largest Shia country in the world, this is clearly not a state that can exist for ever...unless the next 10 years shows arms control for the other sides.
So we have 10 years to work to reduce the nuclear environment in the Middle East. Why DOES Israel need nuclear weapons these days? It certainly cannot be overrun via conventional war. Why DO we continue to give aide to an unstable, terrorist-linked Pakistani government without requiring them to disarm their nukes?
Your problem is that you cannot put yourself in other's shoes...Iran faces threats on all sides, and is the only non-nuclear power. If over the next 10 years we have worked to reduce the overall level of nuclear arms in the region, perhaps we can convince Iran that they don't need to develop their own.
They were NEVER going to sign a deal that permanently prevented them from nuclear progress, both on the civilian side (which they will need in 20 years time as their oil runs out) or military. Right now, Israeli Jews have nuclear weapons, the Sunni Arabs have nuclear weapons (via Sunni Pakistan)...and the only power base in the region that is nuclear-free is the Shia Arabs and Shia Persians. If you lead the largest Shia country in the world, this is clearly not a state that can exist for ever...unless the next 10 years shows arms control for the other sides.
So we have 10 years to work to reduce the nuclear environment in the Middle East. Why DOES Israel need nuclear weapons these days? It certainly cannot be overrun via conventional war. Why DO we continue to give aide to an unstable, terrorist-linked Pakistani government without requiring them to disarm their nukes?
Your problem is that you cannot put yourself in other's shoes...Iran faces threats on all sides, and is the only non-nuclear power. If over the next 10 years we have worked to reduce the overall level of nuclear arms in the region, perhaps we can convince Iran that they don't need to develop their own.
1
And, without the agreement, we have 3 months of a 'no-nuke Iran.'
1, The issue of Trust is an important one. Is the USA a country the Iranians can trust? We are the ones that engineered the overthrow of a democratic government there in the 1950s and installed the Shah of Iran.
2. If any body has been played a fool perhaps we can look at who invited Netanyahu to address Congress without following established protocol. Boehner and his cohort played right into the hands of a conservative faction of Israeli politicians.
3. In ten years Israel could undo many of the practices and policies that have generated such hostility in the Middle East. The Palestinians and other Arabs within the borders of Israel need to be treated as normal human beings and enjoy full citizenship within their homeland. Undue the ghetto that is the Gaza Strip and stop appropriating the lands of the Palestinian residents of Israel.
4. What does the agreement buy us? It sends a signal to the world that the USA will work in partnership with other nations to treat all nations in the Middle East with fairness. This should provide time for the nations there to step up to the plate and manage their own affairs, diplomatically. Israel is not the fifty-first state of the United States. Israel must take a more pragmatic approach to its own destiny and not expect neverending support of their more belligerent activities from the USA. That is not an anti-semetic view. That is reality.
2. If any body has been played a fool perhaps we can look at who invited Netanyahu to address Congress without following established protocol. Boehner and his cohort played right into the hands of a conservative faction of Israeli politicians.
3. In ten years Israel could undo many of the practices and policies that have generated such hostility in the Middle East. The Palestinians and other Arabs within the borders of Israel need to be treated as normal human beings and enjoy full citizenship within their homeland. Undue the ghetto that is the Gaza Strip and stop appropriating the lands of the Palestinian residents of Israel.
4. What does the agreement buy us? It sends a signal to the world that the USA will work in partnership with other nations to treat all nations in the Middle East with fairness. This should provide time for the nations there to step up to the plate and manage their own affairs, diplomatically. Israel is not the fifty-first state of the United States. Israel must take a more pragmatic approach to its own destiny and not expect neverending support of their more belligerent activities from the USA. That is not an anti-semetic view. That is reality.
1
Thank you Mr. President and thank you Secretary Kerry. The world can breathe easier no thanks to the obstructionist party of "NO".
35
Now I can breathe-------what a relief! The Americans who have more love, alligience and loyalty to any other country should migrate to that country. We, the loyal citizens demand to our politicians that they should never let any foreign leader to interfere, intervene or meddle in our internal politics and affairs. Anybody collaborate with foreign leader to meddle in our internal affairs is a traitor and the act is be treason. Iran deal is not perfect but no deal with adversary can be perfect or upto expectation.
24
I've always admired the tenacity and leadership of Nancy Pelosi. She has been isntrumental in passing Obamacare and now the nuclear agreement. She will go down as one of the most influential political leaders.
26
It must be that the president is tired of war in the Middle East. Israel has for a long time wanted us to regime change Iran like we did for them in Iraq. For Israel Iran is an irritant. They want to be the honchos in the Middle East and they're fearful of Iran in that regard. But keep your on on things going on there: a U.S. , Israeli run Middle East is what the neo cons and the Israelis want. Regime change might still be in the cards if the U.S. Can do it cheaply. We only want countries in the world who are friendly to us. Watch out China, Russia and a good part of Latin America.
1
Where did American sovereignty go and when did Israeli, Kenyan, Saudi, et al Senators arrive to take seats formerly held by US citizens? Mr Netanyahu's assault on workings of US Constitution with help of Obama haters and certain acclaimed senate heroes, suggest that U.S. Taxpayers should facilitate continuance of his government while he undercuts ours.
But this episode of attempting to push USA into a potential war has awakened new majorities rising within the system to questioning the why of this annual Entitlement.
But this episode of attempting to push USA into a potential war has awakened new majorities rising within the system to questioning the why of this annual Entitlement.
The irony is that Bush strengthened Iran when he took Saddam Hussein out of the picture. Of course he was too stupid to reflect on that probability when he was screaming for war after 9/11.
"Secretary of State John Kerry sought to reassure skeptics that the Obama administration would have “zero tolerance” if Iran violated any of accord’s provisions." Just like the red line that Obama drew regarding Assad's use of chemical weapons?
6
Well it's good thing the agreement will have 19 years left of its life when Obama leaves office, isn't it?
Senator Schumer and Israel feel this is a bad deal. I'm not an expert on this issue, but something tells me a country located in the effected region and a respected senator are saying don't do the deal, I have to believe the deal is not a good deal.
1
Perhaps you did not hear the remarks of former Senator Richard Lugar, who for many years was the Senates most respected authority on nuclear non-proliferation.
5
pete said: "Senator Schumer and Israel feel this is a bad deal. I'm not an expert on this issue, but something tells me a country located in the effected region and a respected senator are saying don't do the deal, I have to believe the deal is not a good deal."
First off, Schumer is FOR the deal. He knew it would pass without his vote. He, and others, are just pandering to their Jewish constituents.
First off, Schumer is FOR the deal. He knew it would pass without his vote. He, and others, are just pandering to their Jewish constituents.
What is the difference between Netanyahu and Schumer except one is the PM and the other one a Senator ? They're the 2 sides of the same coin.
So the Republicans are once again spared the consequences of their actions.
10
All (particularly Republicans) who oppose this deal as a bad one need to answer a simple question:
If this is such a very bad deal, why did George W. Bush not negotiate a better deal, with his "superior" tactics, notably by beginning the "negotiation" by stating publicly that Iran was part of an axis of evil. Oh, by the way, did that tactic work with other members of the axis of evil?
If this is such a very bad deal, why did George W. Bush not negotiate a better deal, with his "superior" tactics, notably by beginning the "negotiation" by stating publicly that Iran was part of an axis of evil. Oh, by the way, did that tactic work with other members of the axis of evil?
13
This was a foregone conclusion. But everyone had to play out the hand. The last thing Republicans had on their mind was being responsible for killing the deal and giving Iran an excuse to continue along a path to a bomb, and forcing the US to attack Iran. But they knew full well that Democrats would execute a full press to sustain a veto. The GOP just breathed a sigh of relief now that the plan worked. So, what was the real motive? The first, was to paint Dems as anti Israel and split the Jewish vote. They accomplished that. The second is dependent on Iran being caught violating the agreement which will give them ammunition to use against Democrats any time in the next 10 years.
6
Obama is anti-Israel. No one had to paint him that way. I say that as a lifelong Democrat.
I am an American citizen and I vote in an American election. I am not going to elect the Israeli prime minister. I think Israel ought to apologize not only to Obama but to ME. I am an American Jew and it is becoming harder and harder to fuse my Judaism with what is going on seven or eight time zones from here
Now that the die is cast for passing the nuclear deal, the real question is “now what?” Because all we have done is award Iran $150 billion, allow it to buy new weapons, allow it to keep and store its centrifuges, ensure that none of its hardened facilities get dismantled, allow it to have unrestricted enrichment after only 10 years (unless they cheat of course), allow it to self-inspect and still refuse to disclose past military activities of its nuclear program.
3
So... Obama claims victory with an empty statement from Kerry "If Iran decides to break the agreement, it will regret breaking any promise it has made". I'm sure that supreme leader is laughing at what fools we are.
4
Thank you Mr. President for a new generation of peace and prosperity shared by the US and Iran. I hope that Israel and Palestine will enjoy peace and prosperity together sometime soon.
21
A better deal is possible! Has anyone read the piece in the Atlantic? It's NOT a WAR/NO WAR situation as Obama and Kerry have led us to believe! Read this from the Atlantic, a bastion of liberal thought! http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/iran-deal-congr...
3
This deal can be stopped at any time if the Iranians do not hold up their end of the bargain. I'm with Obama and the other intelligent Democrats on this one. Unfortunately, the war weary American public and the do nothing Republican congress did not want him to go into Syria and now we have to deal with Isil.
3
"enough votes to put the agreement in place over fierce and united Republican opposition."
this kind of thing could have been happening since 2009. i am glad sanity prevailed, but really? we have lost a lot of precious time and ground on many fronts because of the lack of will to tell the republicans where to get off and what to do once they have done so.
this kind of thing could have been happening since 2009. i am glad sanity prevailed, but really? we have lost a lot of precious time and ground on many fronts because of the lack of will to tell the republicans where to get off and what to do once they have done so.
9
Only in our twisted government would a little over one third of the Senate being for something be deemed a victory for the ruling party, that is supported by this News Organization. Did I misunderstand? That a majority are not for it? This is Party over Country again. That's what we get. Party over Country.
5
Kerry says, "But we can guarantee that if Iran decides to break the agreement, it will regret breaking any promise it has made.” Oh yeah, I am sure they are quaking in their
We have a gun control problem in the US and we have a nuclear weapons control problem in the world. I am not sure how we, any nation, can face our children. So I don't see this as fantastic; it is more of the same, shuffling the same deck of cards.
We have a gun control problem in the US and we have a nuclear weapons control problem in the world. I am not sure how we, any nation, can face our children. So I don't see this as fantastic; it is more of the same, shuffling the same deck of cards.
2
quaking in their boots.
But anyway, the only people who believe that Iranians are ducking from Kerry's "hard ball" are Americans.
But anyway, the only people who believe that Iranians are ducking from Kerry's "hard ball" are Americans.
Given the moronic and suicidal nature of the Israeli leaders, US should await a spat of terror attacks probably in US and/or in countries allied with the US by Israeli-sponsored terror groups. World must be vigilant.
6
Improving the devastated economy of Iran and make this crude oil giant to freely move into the global scenario will change its outlook internal and external. Mr.Obama who intends to set right the errors of the past needs support. The senators who make negative criticism on Mr.Obam's policies to think of the USA where there was no formidable presidential candidate to face the challenges in 2008. No doubt, Mr.Obama has brought the best out of the worst but largely the occurrence in the middle east is the sequence of the errors of the era of both Bush by the USA's intervention in Iran - Iraq , Iraq- Kuwait and invasion in Iraq by hanging Mr.Sadam Hussein. The next challenge to the USA is arising from its own NATO members by immigrants - influx into Europe from middle east.
3
Now Mr. Obama (and Secretary Kerry) can be granted a Nobel Peace Prize that he actually deserves.
13
Iran deserved a chance to prove that it has come a long way from the revolution of 1979 and will contribute to peace and non proliferation. Trust but verify still holds true to ensure that Iran will not acquire a nuclear weapon. President Obama, Secretary Kerry and the foreign minister of Iran deserve much credit for negotiating and securing the Iran nuclear deal. Its a historic day for world peace.
17
So, he claims victory by getting 34 out of 100 Senators? That's totally illogical. He has no idea how to build consensus or teams. That's why he knew he could not do this as a treaty but as another executive action. Had a Republican President done the same, the NYT would have claimed he/she was actin like a king/queen. The Democratic Senators would have revolted with Bobby Byrd walking around with a Constitution in his suit pocket claiming treason. Life is totally out of control and the country is tearing apart.
5
President Obama has quietly continued to work toward the acceptance of the Iran deal with the remaining undecided senators. There was no victory dance no celebrations. Let's see how many of the 10 more Democratic senators support this. I'm sure not one of the Reoublican senators will be enlightened enough to "give piece a chance."
1
I don't know where you have been for the past 7 years but any sign of agreement with the president happens to be the death knell of the politician in the GOP
Schumer and the rest of the "Israel First" Lobby haven't given up - and Schumer has long been the Bag Man for AIPAC so he's got a lot of money to throw around.
13
Unprecedented levels of military assistance to Israel in the future, according to Sec. Kerry. I wonder whether Netanyahu's handwringing and ugly public lobbying of our Congress wasn't just squeezing more dollars out of our already incredibly generous contributions to them. I guess the agreement is worth the price, whatever that may be. It's just a shame when you have to 'buy' support from an ally.
16
Israel already has enough military assistance from us. It shouldn't get more--it actually should get none. It has built its own lucrative military industry with our tax dollars, so why do we give it assistance when we have pressing needs in our own country?
Netanyahu spoke in front of the American Congress in order to go against our president and demonstrate Israel's power. Instead, he demonstrated conclusively Israel's lack of power. The treaty was the right thing to do for the U.S. and the world.
I hope Netanyahu feels this as the slap in the face that it is. Republicans gave him carte blanche to try to undermine the power of the American presidency. Shame on them all.
I hope Netanyahu feels this as the slap in the face that it is. Republicans gave him carte blanche to try to undermine the power of the American presidency. Shame on them all.
27
"Secretary of State John Kerry sought to reassure skeptics that the Obama administration would have “zero tolerance” if Iran violated any of accord’s provisions."
What's he going to do, draw a red line in the sand?
What's he going to do, draw a red line in the sand?
3
Our country (and the world) should be grateful that Obama is our president.
22
Some argue that since Israel has an arsenal of nuclear weapons, it will attack Iran on its own; yet no one suggests how Israel would accomplish this without endangering its own citizens by exposing them to the fallout and other uncontrollable negative effects of such an action. Further, am I to infer that Israel has no concern for what the rest of the world thinks? Please say.
4
I think Netanyahu does not represent his own country's best interests.
For those who criticize Obama, Kerry, and the Iran treaty, next time Mr. Netanyahu visits Congress ask him: how does he justify Israel's membership in the exclusive club among the United Nations states who have never ratified the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, together with India, Pakistan, and South Sudan? States whose leadership in the world is recognized as beacons of peace, liberty, and justice among diverse peoples.
12
Republicans have no credibility on this issue (and others too). How come not a single minded senator or House rep. will vote for this accord? Can’t they think by themselves or are they all stupid and need to be told what to say and vote? This has nothing to do with this accord; it all has to do with Mr. Obama. On the other hand, some Democrats will vote no.
9
After the reigning pundits declared this deal dead on its arrival at the US Senate, the President methodically lines up the necessary support and proves them wrong. Of course, very few of these "news manufacturers" will even NOTICE they've been proven wrong -- they're not paid to be right, only loud.
13
The President of the Democrats has a psychotic need to win. Using the tools of ObamaCare to threaten, bully, plea, and buy sufficient votes. ObamaCare has been a disaster, which is not at an end with prices increasing, co pays increasing and deductibles increasing while quality suffers. But that fiasco is only economic (and some of our health and lives BUT HE WON). Iran can, with missiles and a nuclear weapon, destroy Israel and part of the United States. Will the present or future Ayatollahs do that? Or do they really want to join the world, enjoy the wealth they've stolen from the people, and stop the "kill Americans" ranting? Your life is now or soon going to be at risk from that question!
Http://www.periodictablet.com
Http://www.periodictablet.com
3
Now that the Iran agreement appears to be safely in hand, we should recognize and extend a huge hand of appreciation for the tireless effort of John Kerry for bringing this about. Without his unswerving commitment in the face of often seemingly unsurmountable obstacles this would have never happened. He may not have logged as many airline miles as Hillary, but he will be remembered for this huge accomplishment.
Another thought: when are we going to insist that Israel come clean about its nuclear weapons? It is their unacknowledged presence that is a major motivation for Iran to also have some. As the agreement with Iran is implemented and Iran acts in good face, we should negotiate a disarmament agreement with Israel also. Otherwise Israel’s weapons will remain an incentive for Iran (and potentially otheres) to continue to have some also.
If this strategy proves successful, it would be huge step in the direction of world wide elimination of nuclear weapons: Pakistan, India, North Korea?, and eventually Britain, France, Russia and yes, also the US.
Another thought: when are we going to insist that Israel come clean about its nuclear weapons? It is their unacknowledged presence that is a major motivation for Iran to also have some. As the agreement with Iran is implemented and Iran acts in good face, we should negotiate a disarmament agreement with Israel also. Otherwise Israel’s weapons will remain an incentive for Iran (and potentially otheres) to continue to have some also.
If this strategy proves successful, it would be huge step in the direction of world wide elimination of nuclear weapons: Pakistan, India, North Korea?, and eventually Britain, France, Russia and yes, also the US.
16
This whole situation is very enlightening. On the one hand we have those in the American Jewish community who believe that Jews are a nationality, as does Benjamin Netanyahu and on the other side, we have those Americans who believe that Judaism is a religion and their nationality is American. To Netanyahu and most Jews in the Middle East, their life and history support their view that Jews are a nationalality. They believe that the only place that every Jew belongs is in Israel. Unlike most of the American Jewish community who have zero interest in changing their nationality.
Ultimately, I believe that time will prove that the forward movement outlined in the Iran Deal will save the USA from more endless, winner- less, expensive wars. This is NOT 1932 in Germany nor is it 1936 with the western European leadership crumbling under Hitler's imperial dreams.
It is time for all of us to start to live in the twenty-first century, face reality and move with careful, patient steps. Those who oppose the Iran Deal are working against the best interests of the USA, the people of Israel and the future of our children. Shame on them!
Ultimately, I believe that time will prove that the forward movement outlined in the Iran Deal will save the USA from more endless, winner- less, expensive wars. This is NOT 1932 in Germany nor is it 1936 with the western European leadership crumbling under Hitler's imperial dreams.
It is time for all of us to start to live in the twenty-first century, face reality and move with careful, patient steps. Those who oppose the Iran Deal are working against the best interests of the USA, the people of Israel and the future of our children. Shame on them!
17
Not to rain on anyone's parade or anything, but from what I know about the whole situation, which is admittedly not as much as I should, the phrase "peace in our time" springs to mind.
3
Since it would seem to have no relevance to the present situation, the question why comes to mind.
1
Another enemy created by by pre-1990's USA intelligence operations. Gone, no more propaganda for the military industrial complex to use demanding gold for bigger and better killing tools.
5
I agree with the president that we should not allow IRAN to get a nuclear weapon..But I also agree with the opposition, that IRAN cannot be trusted and they, most likely, will attempt to cheat on the agreement..As such, I am led to believe that IRAN will be attempt to develop a nuclear weapon with or without and agreement…But unfortunately, with the agreement they will have more resources(money) to achieve this goal, and not only continue, but expand their terrorists endeavors...
1
Iran's support of terrorism pales in comparison to the Saudi's and other gulf states, as well as Israel's terrorizing of the Palestinians, and yet those countries are our close allies. Hypocritical much? Being butthurt over the Iranian Revolution is not a valid reason to continue to demonize Iran(who are far from a perfect bastion of humanism and liberty), but are still relatively modern by mid-east standards and are potentially a huge ally in the fight against Sunni extremism. And btw, so what if they get a nuclear weapon, it's not as if they would use it and assure their own destruction, it would simply be a deterrent just as Israels and other countries nuclear arsenals are. For example even unstable and jihadi-friendly Pakistan has nukes but doesn't use them. I can hardly imagine a nuclear armed Iran would be more dangerous than nuclear armed Pakistan. Imo the standoff between nuclear armed India/Pak is far more dangerous to the world.
This is really very simple. If as the republicans recommend the US decides to oppose the Iran deal and unilaterally impose sanctions the US will be alone in the world community. The other major nations will not support sanctions and so the US sanctions will be ineffective. Sounds familiar with the US unilateral invasion of Iraq in 2003 under the Bush administration which costs a lot of American lives and $ but in the end achieved very little. At least Obama is being realistic and willing to work with the community of nations to solve a common problem. After all its a negotiation. You won't get everything you want but all parties are better off than fighting another war.
4
A commenter points out that Americans have been sold a bill of goods for years on the "cost-free" sanctions:
"When Iranian oil hits the international market ... everyone will joyfully have more disposable income and finally take family vacations..."
When the deal was first announced, various economists predicted prices at US gas pumps would drop 20 cents per gallon. How could that happen, I wondered, when our government has been telling us for years that the sanctions have hurt Iran but not US consumers? Looks like they hit US consumers pretty hard -- and that's just gas at the pump. Prices will also drop for heating oil (just in time for winter) and for all other forms of petroleum products.
Contrary to our government's assurances, US consumers have suffered from these absurd sanctions, and that suffering is about to end.
"When Iranian oil hits the international market ... everyone will joyfully have more disposable income and finally take family vacations..."
When the deal was first announced, various economists predicted prices at US gas pumps would drop 20 cents per gallon. How could that happen, I wondered, when our government has been telling us for years that the sanctions have hurt Iran but not US consumers? Looks like they hit US consumers pretty hard -- and that's just gas at the pump. Prices will also drop for heating oil (just in time for winter) and for all other forms of petroleum products.
Contrary to our government's assurances, US consumers have suffered from these absurd sanctions, and that suffering is about to end.
2
The headline is very disceptive... you mean he has enough votes to veto it. But it is not even a treaty and can be overturned very easily. But in the mean time Iran can make their bomb (because of the deals soft inspectional wording) and the Middle East will be shoved into an atomic bomb race, which will only lead to disaster. You don't have to go to war to stop Iran, you need only drop a few tunneling bombs on the right targets, which is much better than enduring an atomic war in the ME or sending troops. Iran won't obey this "deal" and Obama won't do anything about it. I don't trust this administration.
4
Great American is making stuff up:
"Indeed, Iranian clerics and politicians have recently lost all their inhibitions in publicly declaring their intent to destroy the State of Israel without nary a raised eyebrow from America, Europe, Russia or Asia."
Wow! Lost all of their inhibitions, eh? If that's so, I'll bet you can cite an example or two, eh?
"Indeed, Iranian clerics and politicians have recently lost all their inhibitions in publicly declaring their intent to destroy the State of Israel without nary a raised eyebrow from America, Europe, Russia or Asia."
Wow! Lost all of their inhibitions, eh? If that's so, I'll bet you can cite an example or two, eh?
2
"I don't even understand the GOP's position on this."
To understand it, you might try asking Senator Charles Schumer, or perhaps Congressman Elliott Engel. They're not members of the GOP, but their positions are exactly the same.
Try as you might to make this look like a Republicans v. Democrats issue, keep in mind that people have been trying for over a decade to do that for the Iraq War. That's now called a "Republican" war even though 29 out of the 50 Democratic Senators approved it.
Bet you didn't know that, eh?
To understand it, you might try asking Senator Charles Schumer, or perhaps Congressman Elliott Engel. They're not members of the GOP, but their positions are exactly the same.
Try as you might to make this look like a Republicans v. Democrats issue, keep in mind that people have been trying for over a decade to do that for the Iraq War. That's now called a "Republican" war even though 29 out of the 50 Democratic Senators approved it.
Bet you didn't know that, eh?
"To understand it, you might try asking Senator Charles Schumer"....Or maybe you should ask former Senator Richard Lugar (Republican) who for many years was the Senates acknowledged expert on nuclear non-proliferation.
1
As a life long liberal Democrat, I personally plan to never again vote for either Shumer or Steve Israel, my representative, who also announced against the Iran deal.
I will never vote for any Republican while that party holds it current views so I will just skip the Senate and Congressional votes when Shumer and Israel run.
I hope that enough people withhold their vote so that both parties get the message. Just imagine an election where no one voted for either candidate although many people showed up and voted for the rest of the tickets ( just as in Jose Saramago's novel)
I will never vote for any Republican while that party holds it current views so I will just skip the Senate and Congressional votes when Shumer and Israel run.
I hope that enough people withhold their vote so that both parties get the message. Just imagine an election where no one voted for either candidate although many people showed up and voted for the rest of the tickets ( just as in Jose Saramago's novel)
9
That's all right because I will never vote for Gillibrand again and have emailed her about it.
Thank you Mr. President and SOS Kerry for guiding the country towards a diplomatic victory instead of the failed policies of the past/Republican Presidents who gave us Wars in Middle East, but not a single victory. They may have thought that their mission was accomplished, I wonder what their mission was.
If the current state of affairs in Afghanistan and Iraq are any indication of their mission, god help us if they come back to run the Country.
The Political discourse on this treaty if nothing else showed a lot of individuals of how they perceive our national interest, some through their religious affiliations and others through their income expense statement (AIPAC, Sheldon Adelson etc.)
Elections, particularly the primaries are a good way to through the bums out and maybe 13,500 democratic voters would be sufficient to throw out Cory Booker and Menendez. New York voters would have to decide for themselves about Schumer.
If the current state of affairs in Afghanistan and Iraq are any indication of their mission, god help us if they come back to run the Country.
The Political discourse on this treaty if nothing else showed a lot of individuals of how they perceive our national interest, some through their religious affiliations and others through their income expense statement (AIPAC, Sheldon Adelson etc.)
Elections, particularly the primaries are a good way to through the bums out and maybe 13,500 democratic voters would be sufficient to throw out Cory Booker and Menendez. New York voters would have to decide for themselves about Schumer.
11
I hope as a foreign correspondent who covers the World that it is the RIGHT decision because the longer term potential alternative results are UNSPEAKABLE ! and may well bite in the butt horifically those who supported it when relations inevitably turn sour again !
1
The Republicans need to show some spine, reject Obama's deal in the House and Senate, and force an Obama veto.
Since the Iran Deal is strictly about Obama's mad dash to the history books, a idiotic and dangerous legacy grab, the GOP needs to deny it and allow this to go down in history as roundly rejected by the American people through our elected representatives.
Since the Iran Deal is strictly about Obama's mad dash to the history books, a idiotic and dangerous legacy grab, the GOP needs to deny it and allow this to go down in history as roundly rejected by the American people through our elected representatives.
6
Flash to Al Pacino character, shrieking to the judge: "You're out of order! You're out of order! You're out of order!"
1
"The Republicans need to show some spine, reject Obama's deal in the House and Senate, and force an Obama veto."
In all likelihood that's exactly what's going to happen. President Obama will veto it. His veto, however, will be sustained.
I am surprised you didn't know this. All this excitement of today was about Sen. Mikulski's 34th vote, enough to sustain Obama's impending veto.
In all likelihood that's exactly what's going to happen. President Obama will veto it. His veto, however, will be sustained.
I am surprised you didn't know this. All this excitement of today was about Sen. Mikulski's 34th vote, enough to sustain Obama's impending veto.
Headline should read;
"Obama Clinches Vote to Secure Delayed Iranian Nuclear Weapon Development and Accelerated Financing of Iranian Conventional Weapons Development and Distribution to Worldwide Terrorism Networks."
"Obama Clinches Vote to Secure Delayed Iranian Nuclear Weapon Development and Accelerated Financing of Iranian Conventional Weapons Development and Distribution to Worldwide Terrorism Networks."
4
What other choice was there, but to ratify the deal, at this time? All of the shouting and hand-ringing from the right-wing of the Jewish community and the Republicans offered no rational strategy that would be an alternative. It was just "NO!" I see nowhere in the agreement that the state of Israel is bound by this deal: it is a deal between the U.S. and Iran. Israel and Netanyahu are free to negotiate their own deal with Iran or declare war. It is their sovereign right to act in their own interests, as it is OUR sovereign right to act in OUR interests; despite Bibi's effrontery that makes him think he can upbraid OUR President and address OUR congress, in OUR capital.
Obama has scored two diplomatic victories that brought U.S. foreign policy out of the 1950's and into the modern age, with opening ties to Cuba and Iran. Obama knows it is better to talk than posture. What we've been doing has not worked. That's a profound lesson for Israel, and the Republican Party, as well.
Obama has scored two diplomatic victories that brought U.S. foreign policy out of the 1950's and into the modern age, with opening ties to Cuba and Iran. Obama knows it is better to talk than posture. What we've been doing has not worked. That's a profound lesson for Israel, and the Republican Party, as well.
6
It would be impossible to negotiate a better agreement at this point. Very simply, Russia and China -- and perhaps the UK, France and Germany -- would not go along with it and if we imposed tougher sanctions we would be acting unilaterally and without consequence, i.e., we can decline to sell something to Iran but they can buy it from Russia or China.
What, therefore, is the solution? Israel should launch a preemptive strike to pulverize Iran's nuclear facilities. It will be terrible: Innocents will be killed, and it might not be successful; indeed, it might result in a unification of the Muslim world (They tend to violently ossilate between pan-Muslimism and tribalism) and the destruction of the State of Israel.
But Israel has no choice but to attack. Under this agreement, Iran will get herself a bomb fairly soon, and she will use it and murder Israel's approximately 6 million Jews. A familiar number, isn't it.
What, therefore, is the solution? Israel should launch a preemptive strike to pulverize Iran's nuclear facilities. It will be terrible: Innocents will be killed, and it might not be successful; indeed, it might result in a unification of the Muslim world (They tend to violently ossilate between pan-Muslimism and tribalism) and the destruction of the State of Israel.
But Israel has no choice but to attack. Under this agreement, Iran will get herself a bomb fairly soon, and she will use it and murder Israel's approximately 6 million Jews. A familiar number, isn't it.
2
Pray that we et the 41 votes needed to prevent this from coming to the floor of the Senate. We now know that the JCPOA will go through. Debating this on the Senate floor will be the most absurd, useless circus possible. It will rival the futile attacks on the ACA, and will give Ted Cruz, Tom Cotton and Lindsay Graham a platform to campaign--Cruz and Graham for President!
Please, undecided Democratic Senators, spare us this indignity. even if you are skeptical, come out in favor of supporting the JCPOA. We already look ridiculous before the world. Don't let us sink to the sewer in a display of rabid partisan politics that will do nothing good for anyone, but will make the GOP look even more impotent.
And GOP Senators, please preserve what dignity you have left, cut your losses and move on to more important legislation.
Please, undecided Democratic Senators, spare us this indignity. even if you are skeptical, come out in favor of supporting the JCPOA. We already look ridiculous before the world. Don't let us sink to the sewer in a display of rabid partisan politics that will do nothing good for anyone, but will make the GOP look even more impotent.
And GOP Senators, please preserve what dignity you have left, cut your losses and move on to more important legislation.
10
Many have asked, how can a country (Israel) have as many nuclear bombs and weapons as it wants and still demand that other countries get rid of theirs? And,why aren't these countries who are asked to remove or stop making nuclear weapons not demanding that Israel removes all of theirs?
13
Oh, whee! I am wondering who pays when this leads to war? Iran hasn't made any secret of their desire to kill all Jews, not just Israeli's. Iran is forming defense pacts with Russia and China, pretty obviously to make attacking them for any reason a trigger to war between Russia and China and the U.S. likely. That frees Irsn to pursue its nuclear program and arms buildup, preparatory to war with Israel. I could be wrong, but I don't think so / I think Obama and the Bloodthirsty progressives have launched us on a path to a global war.
1
This seems to be a no brainer but the haters are going to hate. Most who are against this seem to think this is only Obama's negotiations. They fail to see five of the most powerful nations on earth and the U.N. are all in agreement with Obama representing America.
Most who are against this deal are the same people who were wrong about Iraq (this includes Netanyahu who completely disrespected the president when coming to speak to congress) and want to go to war with Iran and anyone else they deem a threat.
Thank God for Obama as he gives peace a chance. And thank God the neocons will not have the opportunity to place us in another senseless war.
Most who are against this deal are the same people who were wrong about Iraq (this includes Netanyahu who completely disrespected the president when coming to speak to congress) and want to go to war with Iran and anyone else they deem a threat.
Thank God for Obama as he gives peace a chance. And thank God the neocons will not have the opportunity to place us in another senseless war.
11
Sad, sad day for this country. Victory for Islam.
2
The proponents of this agreement insist that reason is on their side and no rational person would fail to support it. But delve a tiny bit deeper. Ms. Mikulski insists that we must support it because the coalition that imposed the sanctions is fraying. But what if Iran reneges on its commitments? Will the frayed coalition display the will to impose the snap-back sanctions? Other proponents of the treaty (such as Thomas Friedman) insist that Iran would not dare to violate its commitments because of the threat of military action which President Obama has insisted is still on the table. So this saber rattling is acceptable, but opposing the agreement can only lead to war according to the Presiden. This from an administration that sets red-lines but doesn't enforce them.
Clearly, an agreement consists of what's on the paper as well as each side's perception of how the other side will react in case of violation. If anything, this is more important than the words on paper. As usual, the signals that the Obama administration is sending in this regard are quite confused.
Clearly, an agreement consists of what's on the paper as well as each side's perception of how the other side will react in case of violation. If anything, this is more important than the words on paper. As usual, the signals that the Obama administration is sending in this regard are quite confused.
1
Good to know at least 33 in the Senate are above politics and aren't willing to enter war first, ask questions later.
6
Like the Helsinki accord in 1975, this may allow the people of Iran to get rid of/vote out the fundamentalists. The fundamentalists, as with Bibi, revel in the thought that it is "them or me". This deal shows how wrong that argument really is. I hope the next Iranian election tosses the fundamentalists out of office.
9
Enough already, if we were able to sign nuclear pacts with our then archenemy the USSR, then shouldn't be too much of a stretch to take the sign an accord with Iran.
If Republicans continue to deny an opportunity for Iran to redeem itself to the international community, it also means denying millions of Iranians an opportunity to make a better life for themselves. Desperate and impoverished citizens are prime targets for radicalization.
If Republicans continue to deny an opportunity for Iran to redeem itself to the international community, it also means denying millions of Iranians an opportunity to make a better life for themselves. Desperate and impoverished citizens are prime targets for radicalization.
10
Opposition based on an assumption of bad behavior makes little sense: Unless, of course, one is casting about for any excuse to promote military action over diplomacy between Iran and world powers.
3
This Iranian deal is clearly a very bad deal. It releases billions and billions of dollars Iran can use to spend on more terrorist mayhem not only in the middle east but also in Europe, afrika and the USA. Furthermore, the inspection/verification scheme is a fraud and will never work. Congress should not approve it. It is shocking that oboma would want such a poor deal as his legacy in view of the fact that all of his foreign policy has been an unmitigated disaster from one end of the globe to the other.
Don't vote for Clinton, the master architect of bad deals, especially her own.
Don't vote for Clinton, the master architect of bad deals, especially her own.
2
This is just some Kabuki theater. Those who have to show their displeasure do so knowing that the deal is done. Those who support it, will make some noises about it being imperfect. The whole thing was predetermined when Mr. Obama was re-elected in 2012. Without another campaign to run, he reverted back to his ideological roots and made the deal he indicated he would make before his election in 2008. It is unrealistic for the Congress to subvert the President's authority on the foreign policy issue. The problem is with the President, or to be more precise, the electorate who voted for him (including many Jews). Lack of historical awareness, naiveté, and ideology have delivered one of the key foreign policy failures of the young 21st century. The US is not solely responsible. Weak, bloated and soft Europe has played a key role as well. But all will reap the results. Alas, Israel will reap them first.
2
The Republican Guardsman who control Iranian Industries and control terrorism on 5 continents will be throwing one helluva party to celebrate the signing of the "Delayed Nuclear Weapon Development and Accelerated Conventional Arms Development and Accelerated Terrorism Funding Treaty".
God Help Us.
God Help Us.
6
I feel great respect to the president and his wisdom. There are a lot of people in the government who criticized Iranian Nuclear Deal, who think that the consequences will be awful. Guess who are these people! Right, they are republicans. That's why keep calm and be sure that Obama is right in his decision
16
The self-proclaimed "Iran Nuclear Deal" would more appropriately be called the "Islamic Republic of Iran Economic Recovery Act." Lifting the sanctions and unfreezing assets will give Islamic Iran $150,000,000 to use as they see fit.
6
When all is said and done, Obama has said and done it all. I believe that he will eventually be considered one of the greatest presidents, especially considering what he has brought this country back from, both domestically and internationally, and the opposition that he has faced throughout. Every speech he makes and trip he takes of late has been so dead-on and essential. He has hit his stride. Appreciate him while he leads. He's that special.
39
First of all, a truly welcome development for the world ! I continue to be baffled whether the naysayers on this deal are living in the 21st century or some fantasy in which the US is the only upholder of "freedom" and peace".
This deal was not negotiated by the President Obama alone. Do not forget that this was a deal forged by the P5+1 group of six world powers namely China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States; plus Germany with Iran.
These are all major nations with interests and politics of their own (often not aligned with our interests). If we were to walk away, we could do absolutely NOTHING if any or all of the group went ahead to remove sanctions against Iran. Here is a chance to work with all countries which should be a positive step in and of itself.
This deal was not negotiated by the President Obama alone. Do not forget that this was a deal forged by the P5+1 group of six world powers namely China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States; plus Germany with Iran.
These are all major nations with interests and politics of their own (often not aligned with our interests). If we were to walk away, we could do absolutely NOTHING if any or all of the group went ahead to remove sanctions against Iran. Here is a chance to work with all countries which should be a positive step in and of itself.
24
One GOP thread in the discussion of migrants and refugees is that the best long term solution is to make the countries of origin better, so people don't flee. Engaging Iran is just that, re-integrating Iran into the world economy and most likely improving the quality of life for people in Iran and the region.
But the GOP is against that too. It get really tiring, this whole process of blaming, finding faults, and never doing anything.
BTW, Senator Schumer is a real DINO in all this.
But the GOP is against that too. It get really tiring, this whole process of blaming, finding faults, and never doing anything.
BTW, Senator Schumer is a real DINO in all this.
23
When this vote is done, Newt Gingrich flunky, former American, current Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer's credentials need to be pulled and he needs to be ejected from this country permanently.
This should have been done before the speech to Congress he arranged for Bibi. But, better late than never.
This should have been done before the speech to Congress he arranged for Bibi. But, better late than never.
30
It appears to me that the President is just playing a hunch that a regime dominated by religious zealots with a 35-year history of murder, corruption and cheating on nuclear deals will change their behavior this time. From what we've seen over the last six years, I don't have much confidence in the President's hunches.
I am sort of surprised, though, that the sheep in the Democratic congressional delegation don't have a greater sense of self-preservation after what happened to them when they went over the cliff with him on Obamacare.
I am sort of surprised, though, that the sheep in the Democratic congressional delegation don't have a greater sense of self-preservation after what happened to them when they went over the cliff with him on Obamacare.
7
Could you provide even one example of Iran "cheating"
Obamacare has been working quite well, from everything Ive heard. I doubt the president imagines the ayatollah will suddenly become a rosy playmate, but as in politics always, the question is "what's the alternative?".
To Obamacare: just let healthcare costs continue spiraling upwards, while millions remain uninsured, and people who are already sick cant find any way of getting real help?
to this deal: attack Iran? or what? keep unilateral sanctions in place while Iran simply opens up towards russia and china? remember it was Obama diplomacy that set up the international sanctions in the first place. Step 1: set up tight international sanctions, step 2: offer to soften these sanctions if Iran does what you want. That is exactly what Obama just did, and it looks like its working quite well.
Until those opposed to the deal present a viable alternate idea, than what exactly are they doing?
To Obamacare: just let healthcare costs continue spiraling upwards, while millions remain uninsured, and people who are already sick cant find any way of getting real help?
to this deal: attack Iran? or what? keep unilateral sanctions in place while Iran simply opens up towards russia and china? remember it was Obama diplomacy that set up the international sanctions in the first place. Step 1: set up tight international sanctions, step 2: offer to soften these sanctions if Iran does what you want. That is exactly what Obama just did, and it looks like its working quite well.
Until those opposed to the deal present a viable alternate idea, than what exactly are they doing?
Jonathan Tobin, writing in Commentary Magazine today:
"From this moment forward, every act of Iranian-sponsored terrorism, every instance of Iranian aggression and adventurism as well as the Islamist regime’s inevitable march to a nuclear weapon can be laid at the feet of a Democratic Party. With a few exceptions, the Democrats fell meekly behind a president determined to prioritize détente with Iran over the alliance with Israel and the need to defend U.S. interests. By smashing the bipartisan consensus that had existed on Iran up until this year, the Democrats have, in effect, become the hostages of the ayatollahs. This is a decision that will haunt them in the years to come."
"From this moment forward, every act of Iranian-sponsored terrorism, every instance of Iranian aggression and adventurism as well as the Islamist regime’s inevitable march to a nuclear weapon can be laid at the feet of a Democratic Party. With a few exceptions, the Democrats fell meekly behind a president determined to prioritize détente with Iran over the alliance with Israel and the need to defend U.S. interests. By smashing the bipartisan consensus that had existed on Iran up until this year, the Democrats have, in effect, become the hostages of the ayatollahs. This is a decision that will haunt them in the years to come."
8
Republicans never seem to want to be part of solutions these days. They look only for opportunities to carp and whine about how they were "left out", and the only options which seem acceptable to them involves bombing something.
I am glad that that dead political philosophy is being rejected. Again.
I am glad that that dead political philosophy is being rejected. Again.
What an erroneous, overblown statement. Clearly Jonathan Tobin knows nothing about the politics of the Middle East, nor about Iran. I guess he missed the Green Movement, when Iranians came out en masse and peacefully protested in order to put a progressive, reformist president into office. These hopeful people who want to live in a free society just as much as we do risked their lives to bring about change in Iran, and these are the people who we are supporting with this deal. The Green Movement dominated the news for months. I guess Tobin ignores current events that don't synch up with his distorted beliefs.
If he wants to discuss state-sponsored terrorism, he would do better to look toward our oil-supplying regional allies in Saudi Arabia, as per today's Thomas Friedman Op-Ed: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/02/opinion/thomas-friedman-our-radical-is...®ion=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region
If he wants to discuss state-sponsored terrorism, he would do better to look toward our oil-supplying regional allies in Saudi Arabia, as per today's Thomas Friedman Op-Ed: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/02/opinion/thomas-friedman-our-radical-is...®ion=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region
The only effective counter to Iran among the Arab states was Iraq. If Iran is so much the devil incarnate, why was it necessary to destroy Iraq as a counterweight to Iran by the US-led invasion. Oh, I remember: non-existent WMDs. But at least no one can say Bush, as well as Netanyahu and all the other cheerleaders for that war, were Neville Chamberlains; idiots yes, but okay, not Neville Chamberlains.
9
the most critical point is the fact that this is not a deal the u.s. negotiated alone. even jeb bush understands the implications of "going it alone" - which is basically what the other members of the p5+1 have been telling our politicos is going to happen. the u.s. backing out would not mean we would be back to the starting point. no. other governments have already begun the process of moving forward. britain has re-opened its embassy. as documented elsewhere in nyt articles, businessmen from other countries - including israel - have started appearing in tehran to work their own deals. not concluding the deal would leave the u.s., not iran, out in the cold - and no longer as trusted by its own key allies - britain, france, germany - as it once was. yes, i deliberately left out israel as a trusted ally, because, for now, there is no trust between our governments.
21
You know, I*ve got new for you. There are Jews--I among them--who value our humanity above our ethnicity, and who can honor our heritage without being held hostage by a wretched little theocracy that is antithetical to the democratic values of my country--America--as are the values of Saudi Arabia.
The Iranians have good reason--going back sixty years or so--to shout *Death to America.* We overthrew their democratically-elected government and inflicted the Shah and his secret police on them, all to protect oil interests for the US and Great Britain.
Think they*re crazy fanatics? The mullahs are no different from the hilltop rabbis in the West Bank. But most Iranians want to live a modern and mostly secular life. We and our policies inflicted the great backlash of the ayatollahs on them.
Thank God Europe is no longer the tail waved by the American donkey or elephant. Their people have more sense than ours, and they are tired of paying for our mistakes and our arrogance, and that of Israel.
Let us hope we can overcome our own theocratic idiots and learn to make peace in the world.
The Iranians have good reason--going back sixty years or so--to shout *Death to America.* We overthrew their democratically-elected government and inflicted the Shah and his secret police on them, all to protect oil interests for the US and Great Britain.
Think they*re crazy fanatics? The mullahs are no different from the hilltop rabbis in the West Bank. But most Iranians want to live a modern and mostly secular life. We and our policies inflicted the great backlash of the ayatollahs on them.
Thank God Europe is no longer the tail waved by the American donkey or elephant. Their people have more sense than ours, and they are tired of paying for our mistakes and our arrogance, and that of Israel.
Let us hope we can overcome our own theocratic idiots and learn to make peace in the world.
35
Ty for your sanity and un-biased rationale. When more people on all sides think like you and I; we will have world peace.
Glad to see the Iranian Deal pass in the Senate.
Would the NY Times please print the agreement in full for the readers to see what the Senate did pass today.I would love to read it!
Would the NY Times please print the agreement in full for the readers to see what the Senate did pass today.I would love to read it!
1
Israel has 300 nuclear weapons. It is the only nuclear nation in the Middle East. It does not need more American taxpayer dollars going to "unprecedented military assistance" while we cannot pay our own teachers and feed our own children.
Sanctions, not bombs, for Israel, until it, too, commits to a nuclear-free Middle East.
Sanctions, not bombs, for Israel, until it, too, commits to a nuclear-free Middle East.
27
Sanctions, until they stop oppressing the Palestinians.
Shame on all those who are for hatred and war over the hope of peace.
Senator Schumer and Democrats, I'm looking at you. You shame us all.
Iran is one of the world's oldest civilizations, and bringing them into the light is the best way to defeat absoilutism.
Hatred solves nothing, and we cannot bomb the whole world.
Senator Schumer and Democrats, I'm looking at you. You shame us all.
Iran is one of the world's oldest civilizations, and bringing them into the light is the best way to defeat absoilutism.
Hatred solves nothing, and we cannot bomb the whole world.
22
A successful veto to any resolution that rejects the nuclear deal with Iran will not only be a slap in the face of the fear-mongering Netanyahu but also a kick in the butt of the Republican stooges who prefer war to peace.
Despite many eminent scientists and former Israeli defence and intelligence officials who welcomed this deal, the AIPAC-driven Republican lawmakers wanted go against their own President and wanted to lick the boot of the Israeli PM who from the word get-go has been distorting the truth about the nuclear deal.
It is a shame that these elected American lawmakers throw to the winds the interest of America and its people and the world at large just to please Netanyahu's lobbyists - AIPAC - all for what? Campaign funds.
Shame on them. They should not be deemed as Americans.
Despite many eminent scientists and former Israeli defence and intelligence officials who welcomed this deal, the AIPAC-driven Republican lawmakers wanted go against their own President and wanted to lick the boot of the Israeli PM who from the word get-go has been distorting the truth about the nuclear deal.
It is a shame that these elected American lawmakers throw to the winds the interest of America and its people and the world at large just to please Netanyahu's lobbyists - AIPAC - all for what? Campaign funds.
Shame on them. They should not be deemed as Americans.
50
John Santiago.
It is obvious that you didn't read the Iran Nuclear Deal. The United States gains absolutely nothing from this deal.
I suggest you read the Deal, You will glean from it that Iran got every concession they wanted plus some.
There isn't a single person making any mention of the side deals. If the original Deal were not bad enough for the United States.
The majority of posts on this site are directly out of Obama and Kerry's talking points.
How long will it take for Iran to break the provisions of this deal?
GOD BLESS AMERICA
GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS
It is obvious that you didn't read the Iran Nuclear Deal. The United States gains absolutely nothing from this deal.
I suggest you read the Deal, You will glean from it that Iran got every concession they wanted plus some.
There isn't a single person making any mention of the side deals. If the original Deal were not bad enough for the United States.
The majority of posts on this site are directly out of Obama and Kerry's talking points.
How long will it take for Iran to break the provisions of this deal?
GOD BLESS AMERICA
GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS
1
This is the problem with the opponents of the deal. Their only defence: only they have read the deal and are fully comprehended with. Others, no. Any deal is a result of bargains. You give in some; I give in some. Remember, this is a deal about stopping Iran from pursuing it's purported ambition of building a nuclear bomb and preventing it from acquiring the technology and wherewithal to manufacture nuclear arsenal and put in place mechanism to ensure that Iran does not violate those undertakings. It is not about getting the freedom of American prisoners. That can come about in due course through process of negotiation through diplomatic and other channels.
TO STEVE - New York:
Finding fault with AIPAC, Mr. Netanyahu or the IDF, for example, is not the same as the "Anti-Semitism" you are accusing some of the posters here (including me) of expressing. They are very different sentiments.
Finding fault with AIPAC, Mr. Netanyahu or the IDF, for example, is not the same as the "Anti-Semitism" you are accusing some of the posters here (including me) of expressing. They are very different sentiments.
54
Totally different!!!
When Iranian oil hits the international market- in two years oil prices will fall below $20 dollars a barrel and average national gasoline prices will be $1.85 a gallon- except in California where we will continue to pay over $3.00 regardless. Even if oil were free, CA gas would still be over $3.00 per gallon. Anyway, you won’t be hearing anyone crying about Iranian nuclear programs because everyone will joyfully have more disposable income and finally take family vacations- all will be happy. Except here in California where we will continue to pay over $3.00 for a gallon of gas.
12
If you think the price of gas is the only thing you need to worry about, you haven't been paying attention.
Wake up. Energy, too, needs to move forward, towards renewables.
We cannot burn out way to peace and survival. Please wake up.
Wake up. Energy, too, needs to move forward, towards renewables.
We cannot burn out way to peace and survival. Please wake up.
6
Right! I see no reason for Iran to use this weapon on the United States. There is no profit for Iran to do that. All these gossips is just a fear, which was spread by the Conservative party
2
Oklahoma and other states dependent on oil and gas for many jobs and tax income will not be thrilled, either, at what will most likely happen here, and I say that as someone whose job depends in part on the industry. But even so, I believe that this agreement may be the key to a new way for us in the ME, away from depending on the Saudis, who make deals with us while supporting the worst of the terrorists abroad through money and otherwise. Iran is also the enemy of ISIS, arguably doing more than we are against them now. So if others can lay down their lives for our nation's good, I can sorrowfully lay down my job if I must.
2
In our lifetime, the reality of 'endless war' has prevailed as the dominant political reality in the Middle East. And how well has that worked? Credit is due to President Barack Obama for taking the risk of a negotiated settlement to the nuclear arms race that was cast a spectre over the region for all these years. Let the opposition to this agreement re-read Eisenhower's words (1961) on the buildup of the Military Industrial complex that prevails in our 'War-shinton' culture - ""In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist."
19
"Finally they are making the better decision."
I agree entirely, but this comment suggests there was ever a realistic possibility that Congress would block this deal. No such possibility exists or ever has. Obama has always known that he had the votes if push ever came to shove. All he needed was 1/3 in either house of Congress to override his veto, and he made clear on Day 1 that he'd exercise that veto if necessary.
This is a done deal, and that was clear when this 60-day review period began. Time to move on.
I agree entirely, but this comment suggests there was ever a realistic possibility that Congress would block this deal. No such possibility exists or ever has. Obama has always known that he had the votes if push ever came to shove. All he needed was 1/3 in either house of Congress to override his veto, and he made clear on Day 1 that he'd exercise that veto if necessary.
This is a done deal, and that was clear when this 60-day review period began. Time to move on.
8
Nuclear weapon capability is a red herring. Nobody will use one as an offensive weapon because its source of origin can be easily deciphered. The bigger issue is what Iran will do with extra resources and this certainly will include more missiles to Hezbollah and their kin. North Korea has nuclear weapons and nobody cares because they don't have any more resources. Are we learning yet?
6
Your premise that "nobody will use [a nuclear weapon] as an offensive weapon" seems particularly specious since the Harry Truman did, and I can certainly imagine Adolph Hitler using one if he had had one, and then there's North Korea . . .
People who will strap on a vest filled with explosives and blow themselves up to kill their enemies are NOT going to deterred from using nuclear weapons. I'm pretty sure you progressives just launched a Third World War.
The Republican congressional leadership have gotten exactly what they wanted. If their members voted down the agreement, which had been negotiated by the six major world countries and endorsed by the UN Security Council, they would look really silly (sillier?). Now they can go home and tell their supporters that they voted against it but, well, Obama. Thank Senator Corker (R-TN) for structuring the thing as a disapproval instead of an approval.
If President Obama's 34 senators hold the line, the veto of a disapproval will be upheld. Better, if seven more senators will support the President, a disapproval will not even get out of the Senate, and it's a bigger win for sanity.
If President Obama's 34 senators hold the line, the veto of a disapproval will be upheld. Better, if seven more senators will support the President, a disapproval will not even get out of the Senate, and it's a bigger win for sanity.
27
We still have to see what the Republicans in Iran have to say about this.
7
They supposedly hate it just as much as the Republicans in the U.S. supposedly hate it. Birds of a feather........
The focus of most seems to be the threat that Iran poses to Israel.The Iranians have behaviour in Lebanon, Iraq and Syria amply demonstrate their desire to become the dominant power in the wider region.The nuclear genie has been irrevocably been unleashed and Saudi Arabia, amongst others will not sit back to face dominance from an embolden and resource rich Iran, with nuclear weapons. When they have advanced their missile range to reach Washington, what will a future Americain response be?
7
I can understand Europe, China and Russia placing their economic interests ahead of world security and safety, these nations have never demonstrated any backbone. All these nations have already flown their heads of State as well as corporate leaders to Iran to negotiate business contracts with the Republican Guardsman who control most of the Islamic Republic of Iran's industries.
Indeed, it's well known, and has been recognized by most of the European, American, Chinese and Russian leaders that the money Iran receives will undoubtedly continue to fund Iranian State Sponsored Terrorism in South America, North America, The Gulf States, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, Egypt, Yemen, etc. Indeed, Iranian clerics and politicians have recently lost all their inhibitions in publicly declaring their intent to destroy the State of Israel without nary a raised eyebrow from America, Europe, Russia or Asia.
What puzzles me is that why so many of our elected officials in America have signed onto this deal since the USA has no real economic benefits in signing onto this delayed nuclear weapon and accelerated conventional development deal with Iran.
Many bold diplomatic efforts to prevent bloodshed by totalitarian regimes have failed, and few have succeeded in the past 100 years. With no more governor on it's terrorism engine, I'm afraid we've released, funded and ensured a maelstrom of continued and accelerated Iranian terrorism on the world.
Indeed, it's well known, and has been recognized by most of the European, American, Chinese and Russian leaders that the money Iran receives will undoubtedly continue to fund Iranian State Sponsored Terrorism in South America, North America, The Gulf States, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, Egypt, Yemen, etc. Indeed, Iranian clerics and politicians have recently lost all their inhibitions in publicly declaring their intent to destroy the State of Israel without nary a raised eyebrow from America, Europe, Russia or Asia.
What puzzles me is that why so many of our elected officials in America have signed onto this deal since the USA has no real economic benefits in signing onto this delayed nuclear weapon and accelerated conventional development deal with Iran.
Many bold diplomatic efforts to prevent bloodshed by totalitarian regimes have failed, and few have succeeded in the past 100 years. With no more governor on it's terrorism engine, I'm afraid we've released, funded and ensured a maelstrom of continued and accelerated Iranian terrorism on the world.
10
What nonsense. Iran has never threatened to "destroy Israel." As if they could. Thanks to US taxpayers Israel has one the most powerful militaries in the world, and 200 or more nuclear weapons. Iran is second-tier at best and has NO nuclear weapons. There is no reason behind opposition to the deal, only the desire to please to please Israel and its lobby. Disgusting!
How do you spell relief? A veto proof-majority on the Iran deal!
22
No doubt, the Republican Guards are relieved that this delayed nuclear weapon and accelerated conventional weapons and terrorism development and funding deal with Iran will be a windfall for the Republican Guardsman who control most of Iran's industries.
2
After reading a ton of opinion from all sources...pro and con , I 'm convinced that those willing to block this accord had no reasonable alternatives that improve the chances of avoiding hot intervention. The US and Israel, can at any time just decide that Iran is cheating, presents an imminent threat, and either go for heavy sanctions or direct military action...the accord gives some breathing room for Iran's leadership to be leveraged by internal forces that desire a ' normalization ' and a secure economic future. Iran will be a serious nuisance despite whatever is done...and diplomacy in this case, is far better than war. If you want war then line up and sign up for something that would be far worse than Iran having the bomb...BTW, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia ( probably ) and Israel already have nuclear weapons.
13
Interesting, so who is working on our nuclear deal? We are the only country in history to ever drop a nuke on people.
6
Many people fault Chuck Schumer for his anti-deal position. I don't fault him or anyone else for opposing the deal based on principle. Though I think it's a good deal, I respect the opposing view. What concerns me about Schumer's opposition is that it might have reflected his slavish devotion to Israel/AIPAC, not principle. If that's the case, as I strongly suspect, then Schumer deserves harsh criticism.
27
One can't say for sure, but the timing of Schumer's announcement made it pretty clear that he was opposed based on politics and saving his own skin with some of his big donors. That's why he opposes raising the low tax rate on carried interest, hedge fund managers and the like. His suggestion that we go back and get a better deal firmly established him as a better friend to Israel and pro-Israel donors than he is to New Yorkers or American. Let's face it, Chuck Schumer has spent so long in Washington he's had the principles washed out of him.
11
Dude. It's Chuck Schumer. Of course it's political calculation.
I suspect that Israel sometime before November 2016 will launch its own strike against Iran under the pretense that Iran threatened it. That then will draw in the U.S. because we act as Israel's big brother no matter what, and the next thing you know we'll have full scale war, with Russia siding with Iran. Obama, of course, will be blamed because the argument will be that he got it all started with the Iran accord, and the nation then will elect its next commander-in-chief on who it thinks can manage the new war.
4
I hope not - I hope this slippery slope is seen and avoided. More courage to stand up for the US is needed
I very much doubt that. Israel has had lots of chances to bomb Iran, and seriously considered it a few years ago but backed off.
"Leaving aside Mr. Schumer's ... support of the Iraq War ..."
One would never know it from reader comments in the Times, but Schumer was hardly alone among Democratic senators in supporting the Iraq War. Though that's often portrayed these days as a "Republican" war, most Democratic senators (29 of them, to be precise) voted for it, including most of the Democratic leaders and well-known senators (e.g. Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Chuck Schumer).
When the Iraq War started going badly, several senators tried to explain away their pro-war votes. Hillary Clinton, for example, said she thought Bush was going to ask a second time before actually attacking Iraq; not sure where she got that idea, as Bush was quite clear about that. Others – John Kerry, for example – said they'd changed their minds, though Kerry acknowledged that he'd been "for the war before he was against it" (a line he delivered with a smile and a wink, as if the Iraq War were just some big joke).
Fortunately for all of us, the votes of these senators were recorded. They can try to rewrite history, but we shouldn't forget how they conducted themselves when the chips were down.
One would never know it from reader comments in the Times, but Schumer was hardly alone among Democratic senators in supporting the Iraq War. Though that's often portrayed these days as a "Republican" war, most Democratic senators (29 of them, to be precise) voted for it, including most of the Democratic leaders and well-known senators (e.g. Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Chuck Schumer).
When the Iraq War started going badly, several senators tried to explain away their pro-war votes. Hillary Clinton, for example, said she thought Bush was going to ask a second time before actually attacking Iraq; not sure where she got that idea, as Bush was quite clear about that. Others – John Kerry, for example – said they'd changed their minds, though Kerry acknowledged that he'd been "for the war before he was against it" (a line he delivered with a smile and a wink, as if the Iraq War were just some big joke).
Fortunately for all of us, the votes of these senators were recorded. They can try to rewrite history, but we shouldn't forget how they conducted themselves when the chips were down.
7
Yes, many Democratic politicians believed the Bush/Cheney lies, too.
1
Just a shoutout to Senator Joe Donnelly from Indiana. Indiana is the reddest of the red states, and in general Donnelly is a conservative Democrat who can't be counted on to support a lot of Democratic initiatives. Yet it was his courageous bellweather support of the President and the Iranian deal that allowed a lot of other Democrats to support the deal. Joe Donnelly, by supporting a President who is unpopular in Indiana, and Joe, who is on the receiving end of withering Jewish TV attack ads in the state, may have sacrificed his Senate seat in the process. Kudos to Joe Donnelly for showing political courage.
54
If there is any good news in this so-called nuclear agreement, it's that the President is still young enough to see this farce all the way through to its end. He may think his legacy will be this deal, or ObamaCare. But, within the span of the terms, Iran will be fully armed with enough nuclear, and non-nuclear, weapons enough to wreak havoc wherever they want, unless as in the past, the Israelis act on their own in the interim to "slow" their efforts at developing a bomb.
Also, by the time ten to twelve more years pass, John Kerry, by then in his '80s, may be of less than perfect recall, and won't remember the details of this awful give-away program of which today he is so proud. Trust me, whatever negative events happen will be somebody else's fault.
Also, by the time ten to twelve more years pass, John Kerry, by then in his '80s, may be of less than perfect recall, and won't remember the details of this awful give-away program of which today he is so proud. Trust me, whatever negative events happen will be somebody else's fault.
13
So maybe you're going to be proven right. But Iran was headed toward nukes even without this deal. Most scientists believed they were about three months away from having a working nuke. The deal may or may not work, but you make it sound like Obama gave Iran a nuclear program. That's not the case. Iran has had a nuclear program for years and was on the threshold of having working weapons.
1
Fox nonsense.
My sense of the situation is that those voting against the agreement have been praying all along that enough Senators would step up to protect them from their folly and give them the political cover they need to look good to their constituents. Any alternative interpretation requires that those voting against the agreement are blinded by their ideology and therefore unfit to lead the nation.
22
Maybe those voting for this deal are blinded by their ideology, too? Sorry, only the opposing side of DISCUSSION is blinded by whatever. Good argument...
War is not an achievement. War is not something "you just try on for size." Give peace a chance. We are the only nation that has that choice, and, to Prime Minster Netanyahu's credit, he knows that part of American history well. What would Israel do without us? He needs us more than ever. It's scary out there. But, today, the Democratic Congress and our President decided that, in this case, they need us in peace, not war. The Middle East is already burning. This treaty is a flicker in a very dark tunnel. The US and our allies need every flicker we can muster up. Congratulations to the President and our allies. We have kept a place at this table and will not run away when the fact-checking gets tough.
28
It is depressing to consider that the US will provide billions of dollars in arms to Israel, Saudi and our other Middle East allies promised by Secretary Kerry to counter the release to Iran of a treasure trove of terror and the inevitable nuclear arms that the US is facilitating.
This, along with the pandering to Black Lives Matter and the consequent war on cops, readily explains why otherwise clear thinking Americans are buying firearms and other gear necessary to outfit the militias that will become necessary to defend against the consequences of Obamism.
Sure, so-called assault rifles are no protection against future Iranian nuclear tipped missiles, but that is all that will be left to most Americans in the form of national defense.
This, along with the pandering to Black Lives Matter and the consequent war on cops, readily explains why otherwise clear thinking Americans are buying firearms and other gear necessary to outfit the militias that will become necessary to defend against the consequences of Obamism.
Sure, so-called assault rifles are no protection against future Iranian nuclear tipped missiles, but that is all that will be left to most Americans in the form of national defense.
4
Hey, as long as the militias stay in Cedarburg--they can all go to the Chocolate Factory, unarmed, after a hard day of marching--the rest of us are fine with that.
5
There is no "war on cops". It is a War on Women, Blacks, Hispanics, Gays.
As for the rest of it. . . yes, paranoid delusion seems real and justified to the person experiencing it
As for the rest of it. . . yes, paranoid delusion seems real and justified to the person experiencing it
1
It will be a great deal - until the moment it stops being so.
In about 5 years we will know just how good or bad this deal is.
All the back slapping and self praise will look foolish when the deal is not held to.
We can see a history of such deals not being held to - or did we never learn that history in school? There was such a deal in place just a few years before WWII, but many do not remember that or never learned about it.
N Korea, Cuba, and similar nations were sanctioned and got weapons, but did not have a national zeal to destroy the non-believers. Iran does, and demonstrates so every week.
The only blessing is that the majority of liberals live in target areas, and conservatives live mostly outside of target areas. If the deal fails - Darwin will be proven correct yet again.
In about 5 years we will know just how good or bad this deal is.
All the back slapping and self praise will look foolish when the deal is not held to.
We can see a history of such deals not being held to - or did we never learn that history in school? There was such a deal in place just a few years before WWII, but many do not remember that or never learned about it.
N Korea, Cuba, and similar nations were sanctioned and got weapons, but did not have a national zeal to destroy the non-believers. Iran does, and demonstrates so every week.
The only blessing is that the majority of liberals live in target areas, and conservatives live mostly outside of target areas. If the deal fails - Darwin will be proven correct yet again.
5
The error is in allowing the liberals and other lunatic dreamers from achieving positions of decision making authority to have put this country in this position in the first place.
7
Do you imagine Iran wants to be blown to kingdom come? Because that's what would happen if they were to drop nuclear weapons on Israel or anybody else – mutually-assured destruction.
5
The Bush administration ignoring Iran worked well until it didn't also. Attacking Iran would probably work well until it didn't also. Remember that deliriously spectacular night watching U.S. forces bomb the heck out of Baghdad? That worked really well until it didn't.
Your talking points sound good on paper. Until they don't.
Your talking points sound good on paper. Until they don't.
2
In spite of members of congress colluding with a foreign head of state and reaching out the US’s enemies for the purpose of undermining US foreign policy, actions I thought were tantamount to treason, and not to mention the ~$130 million dispersed by Israeli government lobbyists and individual contributors to buy support from congress and launch a media terror campaign targeting US citizens, sanity has for once prevailed. This is one of the few bright spots in the appalling spectacle of dysfunction displayed by the US political process this year.
28
Since when is it treasonous to listen to the strongly held opinion of our major ally that will be affected by this arrangement? All Netanyahu did was speak to congress. He did not exert any financial or political pressure. He was doing his job. I wish our president was doing his.
6
First "Bibi" tried to interfere with our 2012 presidential election and now with our government's negotiations with Iran. If this is "doing his job", he's apparently not very good at it.
4
"major ally" - what a joke. What has Israel ever done for this country?
With this Iran deal, Obama will go down in history as the Neville Chamberlain of our time. Those who claim that this deal is better than no deal miss the crucial point. Even if Iran keeps their end of this agreement, this deal grants permission to Iran to have nuclear weapons in 10 years. Even if a better agreement could not be obtained, at least permission would not have been given and the world would be free to pursue other strategies to obstruct Iran's quest for nuclear weapons. With this deal, no efforts will be made to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons 10 years from now.
Adding insult to injury is Obama's agreement to pay Iran over $100 billion now. Much of than money will be used to finance more Iranian sponsored terrorism against Israel and the US.
Even if Iran keeps their end of the agreement, in 10 years Israel will be faced with threatened extinction and extermination of its Jewish population. Israel will have little practical alternative but to use nuclear weapons against Iran.
Obama has sown the seeds of the world's first nuclear war. If it occurs, I hope Obama lives long enough to see the fruits of his betrayal of the American people and the people of Israel.
Adding insult to injury is Obama's agreement to pay Iran over $100 billion now. Much of than money will be used to finance more Iranian sponsored terrorism against Israel and the US.
Even if Iran keeps their end of the agreement, in 10 years Israel will be faced with threatened extinction and extermination of its Jewish population. Israel will have little practical alternative but to use nuclear weapons against Iran.
Obama has sown the seeds of the world's first nuclear war. If it occurs, I hope Obama lives long enough to see the fruits of his betrayal of the American people and the people of Israel.
12
Other treaties, deals, and limits prohibit Iran from having a nuclear weapon in 10 years. The world (and the U.S. and Israel) is (are) still "free to pursue other strategies to obstruct Iran's quest for nuclear weapons".
Obama isn't paying "Iran over $100 billion". Those are Iranian funds that were locked up (mostly in other countries) until now. Those other countries are already normalizing relations. WTH have you been anyway?
Obama isn't paying "Iran over $100 billion". Those are Iranian funds that were locked up (mostly in other countries) until now. Those other countries are already normalizing relations. WTH have you been anyway?
It's telling that the oil and gas lobby has, in the past week or so, stepped up efforts to try to get the ban on the export of crude oil from the US lifted. Those who wanted war have essentially had to move from trying to generate hysteria about a supposed imminent nuclear attack by Iran to saying, "Okay, fine, we'll lift the sanctions, but at least let US oil companies sell their product overseas." This argument was only about security on its surface; the real interests at stake were the balance of power in the Middle East and the effect of bringing Iranian oil back on the world market.
3
The oil and gas lobby are always full out on pressing for the export ban to be lifted. They'll hook their demands to anything that moves. Their goal is to sell US and Canadian crude on world markets, having us compete as consumers with people all over the world, so we can pay three times or more what we do now for the resources extracted from our own home ground. Not hard to see why they want it. Much harder to see why we'd allow it.
5
This news, of course, is about one of the two most important achievements of Obama presidency. Along with normalizing relations with Cuba, this move shows that diplomacy can produce peaceful, positive changes.
It also proves that sometimes taking a principled position means facing down overwhelming opposition and not backing down. Obama should be commended for both of these achievements.
The very fact that the agreement has reduced the chance of a US attack on Iran is significant to world peace.
Even the US out of the deal it will not make much difference, when Europeans, Russia and China now facing the prospect of mutually-beneficial trade with Iran, will hardly support reimposing trade embargo.
Great gain to world peace is that the elimination of sanctions, an act of war, opening up opportunities for trade with Iran. a victory for people-to-people contact, business ventures, tourism etc.
Many in American Media have been playing devil's advocate demonizing Iranians. Distorted wrong propaganda will unravel with increase in people to people contacts
Writing in, Swords into Plowshares Ron Paul says "Our unwise policy with Iran is a perfect example of what the interventionists have given us—60 years of needless conflict and fear for no justifiable reason. This obsession with Iran is bewildering. If the people knew the truth, they would strongly favor a different way to interact with Iran".
It also proves that sometimes taking a principled position means facing down overwhelming opposition and not backing down. Obama should be commended for both of these achievements.
The very fact that the agreement has reduced the chance of a US attack on Iran is significant to world peace.
Even the US out of the deal it will not make much difference, when Europeans, Russia and China now facing the prospect of mutually-beneficial trade with Iran, will hardly support reimposing trade embargo.
Great gain to world peace is that the elimination of sanctions, an act of war, opening up opportunities for trade with Iran. a victory for people-to-people contact, business ventures, tourism etc.
Many in American Media have been playing devil's advocate demonizing Iranians. Distorted wrong propaganda will unravel with increase in people to people contacts
Writing in, Swords into Plowshares Ron Paul says "Our unwise policy with Iran is a perfect example of what the interventionists have given us—60 years of needless conflict and fear for no justifiable reason. This obsession with Iran is bewildering. If the people knew the truth, they would strongly favor a different way to interact with Iran".
28
Apart from the fact that it was almost surely the best obtainable deal. the United States would have looked like a nation of fools if it had spent more than a year negotiating, along with the world's most powerful countries, a nuclear deal with Iran and then failed to ratify it and lift sanctions. Of course those other countries would resume trading with Iran, so all US leverage over Iran would be lost and its overall world influence significantly diminished.
29
President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize continues to be deserved. Removing most of our troops from the Middle East stopped that continuous litany of names and faces of U.S. military personnel killed overseas. The president's successful negotiations with international partners to remove chemical weapons from Syria meant that ISIS did not have stockpiles it could have caused even more destruction with. Normalizing a relationship with Cuba after 50 years of a failed policy meant that the U.S. and one of its near neighbors could work together more constructively.
And now, a significant achievement in calming the relationship between Iran and the U.S. in partnership with other world powers which will limit nuclear development in an unstable region should help balance some of the powers in the Middle East and support opposition to ISIS.
Congratulations, Pres. Obama, Secretary Kerry, Secretary Moniz, and all the international negotiators and experts who have worked so hard towards this goal.
And now, a significant achievement in calming the relationship between Iran and the U.S. in partnership with other world powers which will limit nuclear development in an unstable region should help balance some of the powers in the Middle East and support opposition to ISIS.
Congratulations, Pres. Obama, Secretary Kerry, Secretary Moniz, and all the international negotiators and experts who have worked so hard towards this goal.
25
While I support any form of deliberation, the angst that went into this deliberative approach was over the top. From a purely rational standpoint, this settlement was a no-brainer, from a political standpoint it becomes rocket science.
7
Thirty four out of 100 senators have decided Americas fate in regard to the Iran nuclear negotiations in direct opposition of American voters, the majority of whom are opposed to the deal. Strange form of democracy we have here.
6
Dep[ends on your favorite poll: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/20/56-percent-of-p...
7
Uh...I think you made up that last part, about the voters...there was no vote cast by any voters outside of The House and Senate. "Representative" democracy, now that is a little strange, I agree...
That "strange form of democracy" is called a "republic."
6
According to several academics and analysts, an Iranian bomb would have little, if any, geopolitical effect and may, according to Foreign Affairs, help restore a healthy balance of power. The Israelis, of course, feel otherwise. But I'm not aware of any prominent American who foresees Iranian use of any bomb it might develop,. In particular, Iran is surrounded by weaker and friendly countries. And the fear of its use against Israel ignores the fact that even Iranians love their children.
Bush's obsession with weapons of mass destruction lead to a terrible war. Obama's obsession with WMD has caused him to bargain away the best sanction program the U.S. has ever enforced, which could have weakened the clerics, enhanced popular human rights, and restrained Iran from supplying weapons to extremist allies, all of which would be more beneficial than stopping work on a bomb that may never be developed and will never be used.
Bush's obsession with weapons of mass destruction lead to a terrible war. Obama's obsession with WMD has caused him to bargain away the best sanction program the U.S. has ever enforced, which could have weakened the clerics, enhanced popular human rights, and restrained Iran from supplying weapons to extremist allies, all of which would be more beneficial than stopping work on a bomb that may never be developed and will never be used.
3
If they get a bomb and use it, they will be obliterated. Mutually assured destruction worked fine on the Soviets and it will work fine with the Iranians. Fifteen years is a long time: luxury consumer goods, Internet porn and idiotic TV will destroy the Iranians just the way they corrupted the Russians. If they get out of line, we reserve the right to bomb them, or invade them, the way we reserve the right to bomb or invade everybody; meanwhile, we can plant plenty of spies among the inspectors, and of course, our pals the Israelis are in he neighborhood. Sorry war criminal/profiteer Cheney, no Halliburton profits for you and your criminal friends here, you'll have to sell your inflated bottled water elsewhere.
1
I suspect many of the opponents of the agreement, including Republicans, are secretly breathing a sigh of relief that the deal will go forward. If Congress rejected the deal, multilateral sanctions would have collapsed and there would be zero inspectors. This was clear from the very beginning. This was always a purely political exercise.
18
An Iranian explosively formed penetrator killed my son in Iraq. Iran has been at war with the US since the revolution. The leadership of Iran would wipe both the is US and its allies from the Earth. Only a fool would enter into s contact with its enemy, out countenance such action. This is anything but a political exercise. It is life and death.
4
In terms of US foreign policy, who your ally is today may be your enemy tomorrow or vice versa.
I regret your son died. But the question I ask is whether it was necessary for your son to even be in Iraq in the first place.
Not having this agreement would pretty much guarantee that a lot more American sons and daughters would suffer the same fate as your son did. Do you want that to be your son's legacy? Or to give peace a chance?
By the way, if the Iranians really wanted to stick it to the West, then all they need do is to close the Strait of Hormuz with a couple of low tech torpedo boats. They don't need a nuclear bomb to do that.
I regret your son died. But the question I ask is whether it was necessary for your son to even be in Iraq in the first place.
Not having this agreement would pretty much guarantee that a lot more American sons and daughters would suffer the same fate as your son did. Do you want that to be your son's legacy? Or to give peace a chance?
By the way, if the Iranians really wanted to stick it to the West, then all they need do is to close the Strait of Hormuz with a couple of low tech torpedo boats. They don't need a nuclear bomb to do that.
3
Learn Farsi quickly folks. The Iranian century has begun with America's blessing. Iran will be calling the shots from now on.
6
Wow, that would be very impressive race to hegemony for a country whose current yearly GDP almost approaches that of Washington (state).
6
The "Iranian century"? This sort of nonsensical hyperbole will and can only be taken seriously by the deeply uninformed. The assertion that Iran "will be calling the shots" (whatever that means) is pure gibberish.
6
and russia will 'bury us' (60's) and japan will buy up rockefeller center (8o's), and china ())'s) will dominate the world markets, and saddam will release the bomb and the mushroom cloud.... america is the greatest, strongest country in history and we should start act accordingly- with the morals of Gen, George Marshall and the steadfastness of Franklin Roosevelt.
9
I felt such a sense of relief when I heard this on car radio while driving. It's like I could breathe a little easier. We - the entire world - needed this deal with Iran. Now I hope that the young Iranian majority can lead their land into the bigger world and give them the opportunities they so desire. Never underestimate the power and energy of young people who want to live their lives the best way possible. And I so hope the nations who came to this agreement will watch Iran very carefully.
29
Though the old sanctions were not perfect. But they did keep Iran from directly waging war with it's neighbors for the last twenty years despite their attitudes towards the US and Israel.
This "deal" is shady at best. I feel their is a lot more unsaid. It is recently that the Iranian are able to police themselves and we are to take their word on it. Not to mention if Israel feel that they are close to a bomb, they may just preemptively strike all known nuclear sites. We all know if they did then that would mean another bloody war in the region.
This rush to create a treaty with no forethought is foolhardy at best. I think we can do better then this. This whole situation makes me think of this quote from HON. Philandee Ohase Knox.
"I am vitally concerned in the peace of this world, and peace we must have if it be attainable. But, Mr. President, I am convinced after the most painstaking consideration that I can give, that this treaty does not spell peace but war " war more woeful and devastating than the one we have but now closed."
This "deal" is shady at best. I feel their is a lot more unsaid. It is recently that the Iranian are able to police themselves and we are to take their word on it. Not to mention if Israel feel that they are close to a bomb, they may just preemptively strike all known nuclear sites. We all know if they did then that would mean another bloody war in the region.
This rush to create a treaty with no forethought is foolhardy at best. I think we can do better then this. This whole situation makes me think of this quote from HON. Philandee Ohase Knox.
"I am vitally concerned in the peace of this world, and peace we must have if it be attainable. But, Mr. President, I am convinced after the most painstaking consideration that I can give, that this treaty does not spell peace but war " war more woeful and devastating than the one we have but now closed."
Cynical thought: the Iranians negotiated "in good faith" to get sanctions removed and access to frozen assets totaling $100+ billion. Once those assets are brought back, Iran then cheats on the deal and recommences building the bomb. They have no fear of sanctions being reimposed since the G5+1 will never agree to it, and they have no fear of military retaliation since Obama is feckless in this regard.
Crazy logic? I'm not so sure.
Crazy logic? I'm not so sure.
6
Iran is already getting those sanctions lifted because as it turns out, you can't control what other countries do.
Also, just so we are clear on how banking works, it's pretty hard to pull that quantity of money out of a bank, so if they cheat, most of the money will get frozen again.
Also, just so we are clear on how banking works, it's pretty hard to pull that quantity of money out of a bank, so if they cheat, most of the money will get frozen again.
3
Thank you to President Obama and those senators who voted in accord. It's another symbol of this administration's courageous and mature approach to genuine diplomacy.
23
This news makes me very glad and proud of Obama and the Senators who have supported him on this important Iran nuclear deal.
25
Shame on Mr. Boehner and his Republican cult for inviting Mr. Netanyahu to address Congress in their despicable effort to undermine President Obama and American diplomacy. Shame on Mr. Cotton and his Republican cult for their open letter to Iran in their effort to undermine President Obama and American diplomacy. Shame on AIPAC as well.
I am deeply grateful for the courage and vision of President Obama who has withstood the gutter sniping and shameful acts and words of Republicans throughout the entirety of his Presidency. President Obama is a man of enormous integrity, vision, and courage who has acted in behalf of America's best interests. In ten years, fifty years, a hundred years, and beyond President Obama will be seen as a transformative leader by objective historians. Boehner, McConnell, Cotton, Cruz, and their fellow Republicans will be judged harshly as people who zealously opposed moving America towards a better future and, certainly, who did not act in the best interests of the United States.
I am deeply grateful for the courage and vision of President Obama who has withstood the gutter sniping and shameful acts and words of Republicans throughout the entirety of his Presidency. President Obama is a man of enormous integrity, vision, and courage who has acted in behalf of America's best interests. In ten years, fifty years, a hundred years, and beyond President Obama will be seen as a transformative leader by objective historians. Boehner, McConnell, Cotton, Cruz, and their fellow Republicans will be judged harshly as people who zealously opposed moving America towards a better future and, certainly, who did not act in the best interests of the United States.
31
Hugh O'Malley - "Shame on Mr. Boehner and his Republican cult for inviting Mr. Netanyahu to address Congress in their despicable effort to undermine President Obama and American diplomacy."
I'd wait a year or two before tossing the word shame around since the Iranian government is so trustworthy.
I'd wait a year or two before tossing the word shame around since the Iranian government is so trustworthy.
Hugh, Thank you for putting eloquently into words what I wanted to say myself. Obama has weathered incredible attacks from the right-wing over his presidency and his graceful and respectful handling of these child-Republicans has worked to expose their raw hatred, bigotry and quest for controlling power.
1
Three cheers for President Obama and the Democrats who supported this. While the hard liners in Iran and in the United States implicitly favor the status quo (or worse, war), true leadership has emerged victorious and delivered a bill that significantly reduces the chances of war with or a nuclear-armed Iran.
22
This deal is going to lead to a war with Iran and this is how it will happen.
First, Hillary will become our next President. She will run on a promise to abide by the agreement whereas the Republican whoever he is will promise to scuttle it and then go to Plan B, which can be nothing but giving Iran an ultimatum: Destroy your nuclear weapons program or we will destroy it for you. Since Americans don't want to believe that is necessary, they will give Hillary the nod.
Second, the Iranians will use their signing bonus and their new wealth from the lifting of sanctions to cause even more trouble in the Middle Esst, giving more support to Assad and Hezbollah, and they will cheat on the deal in order to move closer to a weapon.
Third, Hillary will tolerate it for awhile but then will decide that Iran is in fact going to go for the bomb and she will ask the Congress for authorization to take out Iran's nuclear facilities and its regime if necessary and she will get it. The Republicans will all support her and enough Democrats to give her the necessary support and the war will be on unless of course the Iranians decide that Hillary is deadly serious and agree to give up their nuclear weapons without a fight. And they might thus proving that Obama could have gotten them to give up their weapons now if he had given them such an ultimatum now.
On the other hand, the Mullahs might figure like Saddam that Hillary is bluffing and won't attack. But of course she will.
First, Hillary will become our next President. She will run on a promise to abide by the agreement whereas the Republican whoever he is will promise to scuttle it and then go to Plan B, which can be nothing but giving Iran an ultimatum: Destroy your nuclear weapons program or we will destroy it for you. Since Americans don't want to believe that is necessary, they will give Hillary the nod.
Second, the Iranians will use their signing bonus and their new wealth from the lifting of sanctions to cause even more trouble in the Middle Esst, giving more support to Assad and Hezbollah, and they will cheat on the deal in order to move closer to a weapon.
Third, Hillary will tolerate it for awhile but then will decide that Iran is in fact going to go for the bomb and she will ask the Congress for authorization to take out Iran's nuclear facilities and its regime if necessary and she will get it. The Republicans will all support her and enough Democrats to give her the necessary support and the war will be on unless of course the Iranians decide that Hillary is deadly serious and agree to give up their nuclear weapons without a fight. And they might thus proving that Obama could have gotten them to give up their weapons now if he had given them such an ultimatum now.
On the other hand, the Mullahs might figure like Saddam that Hillary is bluffing and won't attack. But of course she will.
6
I wish these solutions were not even couched as "Obama Clinches" or one side wins. We all win when agreements are made that just might indicate we have evolved past clubbing each other over the head for food, territory or mating rights.
8
People of good faith and intelligence can agree or disagree with this deal. Only the future history will make a final judgement on its wisdom.
But one thing is certain. This deal is now bought, paid for, and owned in full by Obama and the Democratic Party. If it works, his legacy will be strong and Democrats will point back to the time they showed great wisdom in how to deal successfully with an unyielding theocratic enemy while avoiding war. If it fails and Iran secretly builds nuclear weapons (as did North Korea also after a negotiated agreement never enforced) or tries to anyway leading to war in the Mideast, he and the Democrats will be compared to Neville Chamberlain.
But one thing is certain. This deal is now bought, paid for, and owned in full by Obama and the Democratic Party. If it works, his legacy will be strong and Democrats will point back to the time they showed great wisdom in how to deal successfully with an unyielding theocratic enemy while avoiding war. If it fails and Iran secretly builds nuclear weapons (as did North Korea also after a negotiated agreement never enforced) or tries to anyway leading to war in the Mideast, he and the Democrats will be compared to Neville Chamberlain.
7
Note that latter scenario can already happen without this deal.
2
More good news from the White House. Obama will be regarded as one of the most effective Presidents ever! Thanks Mr. President.
Toeing the hard line would only produce more hard-liners. Here and in the Middle East. I've know a half dozen Iranians over the last three decades and they all were for peace, they were pro-US, and they were all but one of the highly educated peace-loving and hardworking folks.
Iran was a natural ally until the country had a conservative revolution since the US supported torture and that despot the Shah. The hardliners were able to hang on for so long because we made things worse by throwing our support behind Saddam Hussein. We should have helped the Iranians instead!
Get over the hostage crisis. That was a long time ago and our own hard liners had their fingerprints all over that crime, Reagan rode the thing into Office and now we see where our blind support of right-wing aggression leads - right into the third world where we become the peasants - so welcome the new peace and freedom for all. Time to reclaim our own rights!
Toeing the hard line would only produce more hard-liners. Here and in the Middle East. I've know a half dozen Iranians over the last three decades and they all were for peace, they were pro-US, and they were all but one of the highly educated peace-loving and hardworking folks.
Iran was a natural ally until the country had a conservative revolution since the US supported torture and that despot the Shah. The hardliners were able to hang on for so long because we made things worse by throwing our support behind Saddam Hussein. We should have helped the Iranians instead!
Get over the hostage crisis. That was a long time ago and our own hard liners had their fingerprints all over that crime, Reagan rode the thing into Office and now we see where our blind support of right-wing aggression leads - right into the third world where we become the peasants - so welcome the new peace and freedom for all. Time to reclaim our own rights!
19
"That was a long time ago and our own hard liners had their fingerprints all over that crime". Think you could sell that to any of the ex- hostages?
1
We'll soon find out how much Mikulski's vote was purchased for and what we've sold our future security for.
6
She has already announced that she is nt running for re-election. There is no "purchase" involved.
1
Let this be a turning point in American foreign policy that one day used to be based on fairness and respect for other nations. Consider the alternatives if this bill could have failed to pass. Our European allies and other friendly nations would have gone their own ways and whatever clout we still have left over other nations would have almost become non-existent.
Here is a serious lesson for the Republicans. You need to bring back your party to its original core values. Lincoln would be turning in his grave at the sorry state it has descended into. Conversely, the Democratic Party should get rid of opportunists and turncoats such as Chuck Schumer and others who are more concerned about Israel than this country.
Here is a serious lesson for the Republicans. You need to bring back your party to its original core values. Lincoln would be turning in his grave at the sorry state it has descended into. Conversely, the Democratic Party should get rid of opportunists and turncoats such as Chuck Schumer and others who are more concerned about Israel than this country.
26
The GOP's opposition to this deal is of course totally binary (if Obama is for it, then they must be against it - and vice versa), wholly zero-sum and transparently disingenuous. It's exactly like the Republican calls to "repeal and replace" Obamacare. Just as they hold a fundamental belief that people are not entitled to healthcare, they have a fundamental objection to negotiating with Iran on anything. It's a fact that the Iranian government is repressive, anti-democratic and is a regional adversary, but we deal with regimes like that because it's in our interest to do so. Not because we like them.
Many - if not most - Republicans in Congress do want a war or use military force at some level to deal with Iran. But they're just afraid of the potential consequences of owning such a policy, especially in a presidential election year. So, this deal lets them off the hook to rant and talk tough from the sidelines while offering no viable alternatives, let alone rational criticisms of the deal.
Many - if not most - Republicans in Congress do want a war or use military force at some level to deal with Iran. But they're just afraid of the potential consequences of owning such a policy, especially in a presidential election year. So, this deal lets them off the hook to rant and talk tough from the sidelines while offering no viable alternatives, let alone rational criticisms of the deal.
15
Brian - you demonstrate exactly how limited your own view is -
you only see the binary - the polarization you have been fed in the media
Most people do not share the lack of focus you claim they have, and as long as you can not see or grasp what they see, for you it remains binary.
You have been educated to only see the polar opposites, with no clue as to the real reasons behind the media displayed positions.
Your loss.
you only see the binary - the polarization you have been fed in the media
Most people do not share the lack of focus you claim they have, and as long as you can not see or grasp what they see, for you it remains binary.
You have been educated to only see the polar opposites, with no clue as to the real reasons behind the media displayed positions.
Your loss.
1
There is turning point to everything. This week is the beginning of the End for the AIPAC cartel traitors! Politicians are no longer “scared” of their intimidations and bullying tactics. They have reached and lost BIG that most Americans now know their shenanigans.
America is tired of fighting wars in the Middle East for Netanyahu’s bidding! Enough is ENOUGH!
America is tired of fighting wars in the Middle East for Netanyahu’s bidding! Enough is ENOUGH!
29
I am pro-Israel and pro-Middle East peace. Sadly, I can no longer be both. The ever more swiftly emerging information coming to light about the Israeli systematic persecution of or possible genocide against Palestinians and Arabs in general leads me to the conclusion that Israel's Prime Minister is dedicated to sabotaging peace as long as the USA supports him. There is no argument for no agreement over this agreement with Iran. Are we next going to spill our American blood over Natanyahu's political stance against Iran? Israel is fast losing ground worldwide on its moralizing stance against the "enemy." It has already allegedly committed crimes against humanity in Gaza in the world court of opinion.
331
Israel's prime minister has sadly done a good job of confounding the real issues that plague the Middle East. But even on its worst day, Israel doesn't come close to committing the atrocities Muslim-led regimes commit against each other. That's why so many people are risking their lives to escape these repressive countries for the freedom and safety of Germany. Kind of ironic when you think about it, don't you think?
There are sanctions against Rusia for giving a helping hand to partisants in
Ukraine, Israel is occupying a foreign state ( according to the UN ) and the
US just smiles, promises everlasting help and delivers more weapons to prolong the occupation.
Where us justice ?
Ukraine, Israel is occupying a foreign state ( according to the UN ) and the
US just smiles, promises everlasting help and delivers more weapons to prolong the occupation.
Where us justice ?
It is with the greatest of sadness that I recommend this post
Obama is a victorious by his ability now to Veto the will of the majority of congress and the majority of the American people.
That is the new normal for a decaying country he controls
That is the new normal for a decaying country he controls
5
Republican senate has no reason to oppose this deal!!!!!
4
The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather of that party, not always the majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections.
—The History of Freedom in Antiquity, Lord Acton 1877
—The History of Freedom in Antiquity, Lord Acton 1877
2
The most recent Washington Post poll shows that 56% of Americans support the deal and 37% oppose. So Obama is actually vetoing to support the will of the majority of Americans.
But as a Republican, I don't suppose facts matter much to you. You'd rather toss around uninformed barbs.
But as a Republican, I don't suppose facts matter much to you. You'd rather toss around uninformed barbs.
1
The great thing about the negotiated deal is the strong indication it offers that negotiations can replace war and strife. The Republicans for decades have played the nationalist card, the interventionalist card. They have sucked voters in by appealing to their war and defense 'manhood'. This is also the explanation for the voting demographics: women see through this while white males do not (statistically).
What the Republicans and the current crop of rightwing Israelis fear is successful negotiations. The GOP fears the loss of their old vote getter and the rightwing Israelis fear losing their ease of territorial 'acquisition' from the Palestinians and the Syrians. They have both succeeded in stymying peace talks for decades.
Repeat: there really is no fear of nukes in this battle -- it is the fear of successful peace talks. There is no fear of nukes because the whole world knows who holds that hand.
What the Republicans and the current crop of rightwing Israelis fear is successful negotiations. The GOP fears the loss of their old vote getter and the rightwing Israelis fear losing their ease of territorial 'acquisition' from the Palestinians and the Syrians. They have both succeeded in stymying peace talks for decades.
Repeat: there really is no fear of nukes in this battle -- it is the fear of successful peace talks. There is no fear of nukes because the whole world knows who holds that hand.
22
I really don't understand. If we sign this agreement, and things go badly wrong, we can still resort to the last refuge of the incompetent - violence - down the road. Let's give this agreement a chance. All the other nations signing on to it are willing to try; it's not like we're alone here.
25
I am in support of the Iran Deal. There are two major reasons why. Those in opposition say Iranian government hardliners and the mullahs who call the shots will start building bombs in 10 years. These naysayers have not taken into consideration the fact that 88.5% of the Iranian population is under the age of 54. The median age of the current Iranian population is 29.8 years. In 10 years - 34.8, by 2025 - 42.2. If one knows anything about the youth of todays's Iran one would know they have been 'Islamed' to death. They want to move away from a restrictive theocracy and grow as a democracy. Read what the youth there are engaged in today. It is mostly in direct contrast to what the revolution set out to establish back in 1979. These young people will be the decision makers 10+ years from now, not the current aged regime.
The other consideration is that of who will wield the power in the Middle East once Iran 'rejoins the world'. Our current ally in the Middle East is Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia gave us 15 of the 9/11 hijackers. Many of the Taliban were educated in Saudi-financed madrassas in Pakistan that teach an austere, rigid form of Islam, Wahhabism, which is rooted in Saudi Arabia. The enemy taught in these madrassas is America. Al Queda is closely associated with Saudi Arabia's fostering and funding of the interpretation of religion in violent ways.
I, for one, hands down prefer Iran as our ally and the power in the Middle East over Saudi Arabia..
The other consideration is that of who will wield the power in the Middle East once Iran 'rejoins the world'. Our current ally in the Middle East is Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia gave us 15 of the 9/11 hijackers. Many of the Taliban were educated in Saudi-financed madrassas in Pakistan that teach an austere, rigid form of Islam, Wahhabism, which is rooted in Saudi Arabia. The enemy taught in these madrassas is America. Al Queda is closely associated with Saudi Arabia's fostering and funding of the interpretation of religion in violent ways.
I, for one, hands down prefer Iran as our ally and the power in the Middle East over Saudi Arabia..
15
Maybe limiting Iran's enrichment capability for 15 years will work and in the intervening period all the young people that deep down are Americans just like you and me will take power and give up any plans to develops nuclear weapons and long range missiles. But don't count me as someone naive enough to think that we should just close our eyes and cross our fingers and hope that everything will just work out on its own in the absence of continued assertive American foreign policy.
The stakes are too high. if there is any chance of a nuclear war or terrorism in our lifetime, I think its most likely to come from an Islamist state or group. Remember with Iran, we are talking about nuclear weapons in the hands of an anti-American fundamentalist Islamic theocracy that has been engaged in several current and recent proxy wars in the region. I don't know about anyone else, but watching the news, I don't really think that anti-American fundamentalist Islamic theocracies should be given the benefit of the doubt these days in terms of promoting peace, stability and liberal democracy. I've seen a few too many execution videos purporting to be justified based on the tenets of Islam. And that line of thinking goes for Turkey, Syria, Qatar, Palestine and Saudi Arabia too.
The stakes are too high. if there is any chance of a nuclear war or terrorism in our lifetime, I think its most likely to come from an Islamist state or group. Remember with Iran, we are talking about nuclear weapons in the hands of an anti-American fundamentalist Islamic theocracy that has been engaged in several current and recent proxy wars in the region. I don't know about anyone else, but watching the news, I don't really think that anti-American fundamentalist Islamic theocracies should be given the benefit of the doubt these days in terms of promoting peace, stability and liberal democracy. I've seen a few too many execution videos purporting to be justified based on the tenets of Islam. And that line of thinking goes for Turkey, Syria, Qatar, Palestine and Saudi Arabia too.
5
Times readers, let's be honest about the Iran Nuclear Deal.
Barack Obama declared the Obama Doctrine in a speech here in Washington, at American University.
Obama declares that the way forward is to simply overlook what is known about Iran and nations that harbor global Islamic extremists. Obama believes he can charm, smile and nice Iran into peace.
Somehow through the magic of hashtags, Instagram likes and pats on the back, Iran will stop chanting "Death to America" and start singing Maroon 5 songs.
Lift the sanctions, let Iran develop nuclear weapons, give Iran global legitimacy, don't mention the US hostages, give Israel the middle finger. All these things are going to "nice" Iran into becoming a US ally.
I am not kidding. This is the Obama Doctrine, as stated by Obama and his supporters. Gambling global security on Obama's selfies.
It's insane.
Barack Obama declared the Obama Doctrine in a speech here in Washington, at American University.
Obama declares that the way forward is to simply overlook what is known about Iran and nations that harbor global Islamic extremists. Obama believes he can charm, smile and nice Iran into peace.
Somehow through the magic of hashtags, Instagram likes and pats on the back, Iran will stop chanting "Death to America" and start singing Maroon 5 songs.
Lift the sanctions, let Iran develop nuclear weapons, give Iran global legitimacy, don't mention the US hostages, give Israel the middle finger. All these things are going to "nice" Iran into becoming a US ally.
I am not kidding. This is the Obama Doctrine, as stated by Obama and his supporters. Gambling global security on Obama's selfies.
It's insane.
13
DCBarrister you're out of touch.
This deal delays Iran for AT LEAST a full decade.
Go back to pouring coffee.
This deal delays Iran for AT LEAST a full decade.
Go back to pouring coffee.
11
Well said!
Unfortunately the record will not show that the U.S. supporters of this
are supporting it because it is easier than not. A loyal US ally will be abandoned as a consequence, but the supporters are indifferent to their fate. The Iranian contribution is laughable. I guess no one is supposed to notice this example of US "leadership"! The odd thing is that they are taking steps not to leave a record of the vote that might spoil the legacy in days to come, when is exposed as the blunder that it is. If it's so good, why are they ashamed of it?
Unfortunately the record will not show that the U.S. supporters of this
are supporting it because it is easier than not. A loyal US ally will be abandoned as a consequence, but the supporters are indifferent to their fate. The Iranian contribution is laughable. I guess no one is supposed to notice this example of US "leadership"! The odd thing is that they are taking steps not to leave a record of the vote that might spoil the legacy in days to come, when is exposed as the blunder that it is. If it's so good, why are they ashamed of it?
4
What a bunch of inaccurate information and fear-mongering hooey. Anyone, with little effort, can find numerous quotes from the President indicating that he holds no illusions about Iran and that Iran remains an enemy of the US. That said, the President hates the insanity and horrors of war and has found a way to buy some time. I would hope you don't mislead your clients the way you have tried to mislead the readers of your comment.
6
As a woman and admirer of Barbara Mikulski, I'm very happy that the announced the deciding vote ! Symbolic that the longest serving woman Senator, and a role model to many of us, did it!
20
don't count chickens, etc.
It is almost laugahble to read responders hailing this event as a great day for world peace. The strategy employed is parallel to the economics of today. Print, borrow & print more, hoping somehowal the debts will be paid off in some rose colored future. Iran is expected to abide by a less than stringent agreement and is expected to behave afterwards. It has never acted in good faith and constantly calls for an end to the US and Israel. As for Mr. Obama's legacy, he should be careful what he wishes for. In the ME your enemy is either at your feet or at your throat. Not learning this simple lesson has cost the US much treasure & lives.
5
Aptly named commenter - to those who do not know behaima means animal in Hebrew
3
It is almost laughable to read words that betray the power of fantasy and ideology trumping history. Cheney and Bush, in the single biggest blunder of the twenty-first century so far, already cost us thousands of lives and trillions of dollars, and sown the seeds for a protracted battle with enemies they have empowered.
What people are hailing is the try diplomacy first approach of Obama versus shoot first and ask questions later approach of the former administration and every single Republican running for the Presidency.
What people are hailing is the try diplomacy first approach of Obama versus shoot first and ask questions later approach of the former administration and every single Republican running for the Presidency.
6
You can kind of see Iran's point.
In the case of the United States, the CIA and the British engineered the overthrow of a democratic government in Iran in 1953 and installed the Shah, who lasted until 1979. That was 26 years of rule by a brutal dictator.
In the case of Israel, Iran and others support the political freedom of the Palestinians in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza to peacefully and by democratic means take power. That would mean the end of Israel, but it would not be by war. Iran has never threatened Israel militarily.
Iran has bargained for the right to enjoy the billions of dollars it earns from oil sales, to use nuclear power to generate electricity without emitting carbon, and rejoin the world as a sovereign nation. In exchange, it granted the world the right to monitor its use of nuclear technology.
Seems fair to me. As it seemed fair to our partners in negotiation and to the President and Secretary of State of the United States. And to over 100 other countries.
Time will tell whether this is a good deal or a bad deal. But it is a fair deal, and I'm glad some Americans had the courage to agree to it.
In the case of the United States, the CIA and the British engineered the overthrow of a democratic government in Iran in 1953 and installed the Shah, who lasted until 1979. That was 26 years of rule by a brutal dictator.
In the case of Israel, Iran and others support the political freedom of the Palestinians in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza to peacefully and by democratic means take power. That would mean the end of Israel, but it would not be by war. Iran has never threatened Israel militarily.
Iran has bargained for the right to enjoy the billions of dollars it earns from oil sales, to use nuclear power to generate electricity without emitting carbon, and rejoin the world as a sovereign nation. In exchange, it granted the world the right to monitor its use of nuclear technology.
Seems fair to me. As it seemed fair to our partners in negotiation and to the President and Secretary of State of the United States. And to over 100 other countries.
Time will tell whether this is a good deal or a bad deal. But it is a fair deal, and I'm glad some Americans had the courage to agree to it.
3
Congratulations to President Obama, John Kerry, all citizens of the U.S., Israel and the world. We now have a chance to change the direction of Iran, the Middle East and the world for the better. While it was a coalition of nations that formulated the deal, this was one of President Obama's goals from the beginning of his Presidency. Well done! Well done!
22
Hallelujah! What a relief. I am willing to bet that even the republicans are relieved, since they (and the democratic dissenters) can go back to their AIPAC handlers and say they did their best! Seriously, this is the best possible outcome, in my opinion. I pray and hope that Obama is proved correct!
28
No accord is perfect. But this accord is worth it.
In fact, the U.S. literally led the world, including Russia and China, on this issue.
The opposition to the accord is purely ideological, and the ideology of the opposition can be summed up in one word: No.
In fact, the U.S. literally led the world, including Russia and China, on this issue.
The opposition to the accord is purely ideological, and the ideology of the opposition can be summed up in one word: No.
33
Well that's a relief. At least in this instance, American politics may not quite live up to its recent reputation for being as destructive as possible of American interests. The more shame on Senator Schumer for not being enough of a statesman to enlighten his constituents rather than a mere politician caving to their worst fears.
23
Only time will tell about this.
4
as with any legislation or treaty . . .
2
Now that this disagreement will shortly be out of the way, the Republicans will then be able to fully concentrate their efforts on more important items, such as the renaming of Mt McKinley through executive decree.
4
Thank you Senator Mikulski for joining with one of my Senators, Jeff Merkley, in support of the accord. Still hoping Senator Ron Wyden will step forward to help ensure its (and our) survival.
8
Perhaps Mr. Netanyahu, the rookie senator from Arkansas, and the rest of the Republican senators need to take a refresher course on civics and governance. Bravo Mr. PresidenTt
38
I am almost too overjoyed to write, but I want to express my gratitude to Senator Mikulski and the others - including my own, increasingly impressive, Senator Gillibrand - who have stood up in the face of tremendously difficult pressure, from both internal and external forces, to scuttle this important step toward a more peaceful world. It should be apparent to all that the current exodus of the homeless and hopeless into Europe is the direct result of the instability brought to the middle east by our long-failed policies and military actions in that region.
So thank you all who have brought reason and cool heads to the table. I wish you well in the face of the continued opprobrium that I expect will come your way in the days before the Republicans introduce their attempt to bring down this historic agreement.
So thank you all who have brought reason and cool heads to the table. I wish you well in the face of the continued opprobrium that I expect will come your way in the days before the Republicans introduce their attempt to bring down this historic agreement.
11
So Charles Schumer drove the caucus into wall for no reason? That can't be good for his chances at the Harry Reid Retirement After-Party.
10
Nice to see that the United States will be joining the rest of the world for once.
21
Fabulous news. A great achievement by Kerry and Obama.
It makes you think, "What Israel could have done in the way of peacemaking" without the long dark reign of Netanyahu neo-conservatism.
This success should defeat the Republicans in 2016. It is proof that we need more Democrats and less Republicans in foreign policy.
It proves what Democrats can do when Republicans are neutralized.
Good government, prudent government; Republicans tried to prove that it couldn't be, and they almost constructed a self-fulfilling prophesy, but in the end Obama and good will triumphed.
8 more years of Democratic presidential leadership coming in 2016.
Hey, why not Kerry, why not Hilary, why not Biden. Any of these will bring success to the United States. One thing we don't need is another burn em at the stake Republican theocrat!!
It makes you think, "What Israel could have done in the way of peacemaking" without the long dark reign of Netanyahu neo-conservatism.
This success should defeat the Republicans in 2016. It is proof that we need more Democrats and less Republicans in foreign policy.
It proves what Democrats can do when Republicans are neutralized.
Good government, prudent government; Republicans tried to prove that it couldn't be, and they almost constructed a self-fulfilling prophesy, but in the end Obama and good will triumphed.
8 more years of Democratic presidential leadership coming in 2016.
Hey, why not Kerry, why not Hilary, why not Biden. Any of these will bring success to the United States. One thing we don't need is another burn em at the stake Republican theocrat!!
17
It is still not to late for Senator. C. Schumer of New York to show some sense and vote for the BEST INTERESTS OF THE US and now support the Iran Treaty. His pandering to the Israeli lobby is a disgrace. I am sure that most American Jews would understand his weakness and forgive him his time on the easy path.
Chuck should not be US Senate Majority leader to come if he does not switch
his position and join (or at least support) the filibuster against the anti-treaty know-nothing fools/bigots.
Chuck should not be US Senate Majority leader to come if he does not switch
his position and join (or at least support) the filibuster against the anti-treaty know-nothing fools/bigots.
11
I seem to remember Obama during his first debates seeking the democratic nomination telling us we just needed to talk to Iran. They were surely just as focused then as they are now on acquiring a nuclear weapon.
As much as I hate the deal that the Obama administration has made the pragmatic solution is to move on and live with the deal. International sanctions are going to fall apart if the congress succeeded in blocking the deal.
So as a Pragmatist first and Republican second I am glad the Senate votes are there for Obama. There is no good way out of this
As much as I hate the deal that the Obama administration has made the pragmatic solution is to move on and live with the deal. International sanctions are going to fall apart if the congress succeeded in blocking the deal.
So as a Pragmatist first and Republican second I am glad the Senate votes are there for Obama. There is no good way out of this
4
perhapsmthe only sensible Republican alive . . . .
I offer all the negotiators - particularly Secretary of State Kerry - and President Obama a heartfelt thanks for their dogged pursuit of peace and a realistic, diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear issue. The Administration showed exceptional maturity, leadership and excellent judgment, and most of all, a loyalty to the American people: looking out after their best interests, not the interests of a militant Israeli leader. The irony is that the agreement with Iran will protect the Israeli people far more effectively than Netanyahu's aspiration of manipulating the U.S. government to in turn drag the American people into another pointless war.
18
There are many things -- some now and some later -- that supporters of Israel will need to do in response to this horrific deal.
For openers, we should be calling and writing our Senators and Congressional representatives -- including the ones who have signed on to the deal -- urging them to demonstrate their ongoing support for Israel by supplying it -- before the end of September --with blockbuster bombs capable of destroying Iran's nuclear bomb factories.
For openers, we should be calling and writing our Senators and Congressional representatives -- including the ones who have signed on to the deal -- urging them to demonstrate their ongoing support for Israel by supplying it -- before the end of September --with blockbuster bombs capable of destroying Iran's nuclear bomb factories.
6
what a great way to advance peace -- more bombs. I'll be writing MY reps and senators to thank for not listening to people like you.
1
They have nukes, they should just use those. Why not just go ahead and do it today?
@pnut -- I'd like to avoid radiation in the area. It's an environmental thing for me.
2
Great day!!
Thank you Mr. President!!
I am really sick but more tired of war across the globe!
I was 24 with 9/11 happened and I am now 38 and still going through the same news every day!
It is time now to really give my generation a break - Really need some peaceful days to enjoy life with my wife and kids without any bad news which become as part of our life as the daily shower!
Thank you Mr. President!!
I am really sick but more tired of war across the globe!
I was 24 with 9/11 happened and I am now 38 and still going through the same news every day!
It is time now to really give my generation a break - Really need some peaceful days to enjoy life with my wife and kids without any bad news which become as part of our life as the daily shower!
21
Samir: I totally agree. All generations deserve to live in peace. The only problem is that the terrorists, dictators, et. al. did not get the memo. That is the problem: most of us what and need peace, but the minority (and their weapons and hatred) seem to ruin it for the rest of us.
My city is usually near the top in best places to live and you know what about 7-8% are Muslim and I don't fear a thing. Their kids shovel my snow and the parents are no different than my other neighbours for when headscarves are worn it seems an accent peace rather than a religious constraint.
2
I agree with you Samir, I am tired too of the endless conflicts and war. We need to give it a break. I welcome this peace accord with Iran.
1
The right never learns. Before there was a deal they were against the deal. Netanyahu's attempt to hijack our government backfired. These guys are no longer good politicians. A wise politician would have at least made us think they wanted a deal. Sending a letter to Iran and inviting Bibi to speak in the well of the house was really a boneheaded move. The biggest of the boneheaded moves was to have Dick Cheney blast the deal. What true Dem would side with Cheney? These are the same guys who think they will get Hispanics to love them in 2016. Why not just flip a coin, heads its Clinton tails its Biden. Whoever wins the coin toss gets the Presidential Suite. I understand why Trump is mopping the floor with these guys. Not very bright!
18
So many of those who oppose this agreement seem to long for some sort of total national humiliation and subjugation of Iran - total disarmament. The opponents, by and large, seem heedless of the lessons of the Treaty of Versailles of 1919, forced on Germany by ultimatum by the allied nations. The resulting national humiliation created fertile conditions for the rise to Hitler and his National Socialist Party.
This agreement respects Iranian sovereignty and national pride. It's unlikely to produce the kind of simmering humiliation and resentment that became prevalent in post-WWI Germany, and in post-1953 Iran after our CIA staged a coup and deposed Iran's democratically-elected Prime Minister Mosaddegh. The opposition seems to entirely ignore lessons of history.
While the agreement is not perfect, it is a good starting point. America and the other world nations have 15 years to work on perfecting the agreement. Israel has 15 years during which to normalize relations with Iran, but are they capable of doing so?
This agreement respects Iranian sovereignty and national pride. It's unlikely to produce the kind of simmering humiliation and resentment that became prevalent in post-WWI Germany, and in post-1953 Iran after our CIA staged a coup and deposed Iran's democratically-elected Prime Minister Mosaddegh. The opposition seems to entirely ignore lessons of history.
While the agreement is not perfect, it is a good starting point. America and the other world nations have 15 years to work on perfecting the agreement. Israel has 15 years during which to normalize relations with Iran, but are they capable of doing so?
17
A step towards peace and stability for our family and relatives in Israel and Iran.
12
As Tom Friedman's article points out today in the Times, essentially, a vote against the Iran nuclear deal is a vote for the terrorist organizations that Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi Salafist extremism spawned: al-Qaeda and then ISIS. In contrast, a vote for the deal is a vote for giving peaceful engagement and economic forces a chance to enhance moderate forces in Iran.
18
Before Obama’s Iranian Agreement we had:
-Sanctions that were working.
-Inspections that were slowing down but not preventing the development of
nuclear weapons.
Now we have:
-No sanctions
-The release of $150 billion dollars or the equivalent of giving Iran $8 trillion
dollars to fund terrorism based on GDP.
-Iran will now conduct their own nuclear weapons inspections and use their
own inspectors to report violations.
-No inspections of suspected nuclear sites for at least 3 weeks with these
inspections being subject to appeal.
-Ability to export oil and other products to fund weapons production.
-Secret side agreements we know nothing about.
This is a lose, lose deal for everyone except the Iranians who continue to chant “Death To America” Obama is now giving them the means to accomplish their goal.
-Sanctions that were working.
-Inspections that were slowing down but not preventing the development of
nuclear weapons.
Now we have:
-No sanctions
-The release of $150 billion dollars or the equivalent of giving Iran $8 trillion
dollars to fund terrorism based on GDP.
-Iran will now conduct their own nuclear weapons inspections and use their
own inspectors to report violations.
-No inspections of suspected nuclear sites for at least 3 weeks with these
inspections being subject to appeal.
-Ability to export oil and other products to fund weapons production.
-Secret side agreements we know nothing about.
This is a lose, lose deal for everyone except the Iranians who continue to chant “Death To America” Obama is now giving them the means to accomplish their goal.
12
We had inspectors in Iran, but now we won't because of this treaty - is that what you're saying? Do I have that right?
And, the inspectors we had there we slowing their nuclear program down? That's also what you're saying?
I thought so.
And, the inspectors we had there we slowing their nuclear program down? That's also what you're saying?
I thought so.
1
Don, sanctions were not working at all except to get them to the table. From the time sanctions started till the Interim Agreement signed with Iran and the P5, they went from 300 centrifuges to 19,000. Only with the Interim Agreement have we seen a decrease. How you equate $150 billion (of their money) with $8 trilllion I do not know. Without a deal there are no inspections. With the deal, we have the most intrusive inspections regime of all time.
1
So sad that a President can make deals with (aka buy votes) so that a minority of American lawmakers are controlling the majority. Since when were Democrats against Democracy? I guess we know the answer. When they want something the American people don't want and the majority of lawmakers don't want. I wonder what he bought the votes with. I guarantee the 33 will get reelected with his promises.
3
Last time I did the math, 50 PLUS votes is a majority. If you can't handle being on the losing side, fine, but please don't invent facts.
1
The sad fact in the evolution of the Far Right in this country is that there has been no consideration of whether the current diplomatic solution to the Iran nuclear threat is good for the world or good for the Middle East or good for U.S. foreign relations. The only consideration is denying the Democrats and, especially, this current interloper in the White House any foreign policy achievement (a historic one at that). After the brutal incursion into Iraq which strengthened Iran's influence in the region, the Republicans only wanted to exacerbate the situation. If Netanyahu is against it then the Republicans are against it. Doesn't get much more complicated than that for them.
12
It's no coincidence that the loudest opponents of this deal all happen to be running for the Republican primary at the moment. They fell over themselves to sound more hawkish than each other, and along with their brethren in the Senate ignored the fact that they were offering zero credible alternatives.
Unfortunately many voters are easily swayed by the John Wayne approach of diplomacy where thought and nuance take a back seat to bravado. Thankfully a bare minimum of senators exhibited some sense, although it's embarrassing for the nation that it was as close as this.
Unfortunately many voters are easily swayed by the John Wayne approach of diplomacy where thought and nuance take a back seat to bravado. Thankfully a bare minimum of senators exhibited some sense, although it's embarrassing for the nation that it was as close as this.
10
I am so delighted to see this will happen. The Middle East, as we all know, becomes increasingly more problematic for this country. We really have no business being there any more. And we certainly don't need to be supporting the Israeli government's hostile position and that government's nosing into Washington politics. I suspect many GOP senators never even read what Secretary of State Kerry worked so hard, with his team, to negotiate. One more point for the president I greatly admire. A president who hasn't always made the right decisions. But who at least thinks issues through.
9
And what are they going to do when China and Russia and some of our allies do not support continue trading embargo? In addition, noticed how Senator Schumer has avoided the media since his "stealth" type announcement on that late Friday afternoon! Yet, he wants to be the next Democratic Senate Leaders, I don’t so! It is unfortunate that both Senior Senators decided that they still feel that they needed to join the political game playing republicans that never read the treaty before voicing against the agreement in order to pander to Netanyahu and his racist elected minority that does not represent the large majority of the good Jewish people in the communities of Israel and United States. To paraphrase, Jon Stewart, “ Isn’t it interesting to note that when President Bush took us to war, any criticism by patriot Americans was shouted down as treasonous? “But when this president that republicans don't like has the country poised on the same precipice, no transgression, no matter how immaterial and ridiculous, is not too small to cite as evidence that this President isn't as American as they are.”
4
The fact is there are a lot of Republicans who want to see this deal implemented, but for political reasons want to vote against it. That is why they approved the mechanism by which they are voting not to approve the treaty, but to disapprove it, which the President will veto. With 34 votes in favor, the Senate will not be able to override his veto of the measure to disapprove the treaty, so the treaty will stand. It is sad that not a single Republican has the courage to vote for a treaty they believe in, but we have to at least give them credit for finding a way to let it pass even though they are voting against it. The true tragedy is when good policy doesn't pass because of political selfishness.
3
If this deal is ultimately successful, we may have averted a potentially terrifying future. But the impact, if unsuccessful, seems almost irrelevant. Iran was going to build a bomb, undoubtedly in places where bunker busters and Sen Cotton's bravado would have no impact. Crippling sanctions (as opposed to the sieve that existed previously) only exist because all parties, including Russia and China, agreed to enforce them, while we negotiated. Releasing sanctions is a risk that may lead to a short term increase in terrorist activity, but there is strong likelihood that, if the deal fell through and we strengthened the hand of the Irani hard-liners, that would occur anyway. More than half of the population is under 35 and have become increasingly vocal, despite repression. One can hope that a cultural crack and some trust can further weaken fundamentalists (on both sides), who appear to believe that war is the solution.
2
Reaching enough votes to sustain a presidential veto is good news, but the achievement of the Iran nuclear agreement is so important for the future stability of the Middle East and is so clearly in the best interests of Israel and the United States that we ought to keep pushing for broader support.
More Democrats should announce their votes for the agreement, and so should those Republicans in the Senate who care more about being on the right side of history than about denying a diplomatic victory to President Obama.
More Democrats should announce their votes for the agreement, and so should those Republicans in the Senate who care more about being on the right side of history than about denying a diplomatic victory to President Obama.
1
Great victory for the American people who are sick of the proponents of war in the Middle East! Life is precious, be it Iranian or American. Tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi women, children and elderly were the unnecessary victims of the folly of Bush and Cheney, and the world is a lot more chaotic and unsafe as a result.
Kudos to J Street and those in Israel who have not bought into Netanyahu's warmongering! He has done a great deal to undermine his credibility by first interfering in our presidential election and then feeding the disdain that many Republican lawmakers have for our President largely because of his racial background. The media will never address that reality but many Americans will never forget Netanyahu's folly.
Kudos to J Street and those in Israel who have not bought into Netanyahu's warmongering! He has done a great deal to undermine his credibility by first interfering in our presidential election and then feeding the disdain that many Republican lawmakers have for our President largely because of his racial background. The media will never address that reality but many Americans will never forget Netanyahu's folly.
9
Was the outcome ever in doubt? Obama's conscious surrender to Iran and sellout of American allies or the sake of a highly implausible strategic goal was assured at the outset. As is typical of this presidency, constitutional principles and precedent were blithely set aside in an agreement with Senators Corker and Cardin, and acquiesced to by a supine Congress. Under normal circumstances (but the abnormal is the norm under the reign of Obama) promoters of the deal would have had to obtain a supermajority: but with the Administration's declaring that it had to be assured of a victory just to permit Congress to play its constitutionally mandated role the end was contained in the means.
Given the string of half-truths, unanswered questions and side-deals that have been part and parcel of the way that Obama/Kerry have worked "the deal," the GOP has every moral right to interrupt this monstrosity and with poetic justice use the "nuclear option" to kill this nuclear deal. Vote it down with a simple majority in the Senate. Then we'll see if Obama orders tanks to surround Capitol Hill.
Given the string of half-truths, unanswered questions and side-deals that have been part and parcel of the way that Obama/Kerry have worked "the deal," the GOP has every moral right to interrupt this monstrosity and with poetic justice use the "nuclear option" to kill this nuclear deal. Vote it down with a simple majority in the Senate. Then we'll see if Obama orders tanks to surround Capitol Hill.
5
"Obama's conscious surrender to Iran and sellout of American allies".....Don't I remember that Britain, France, and Germany were part of the negotiating team? Oh wait, maybe they are not our allies.
11
As yes--Bob Corker, that Commie rat. Exactly.
By the way, a note on our system of government, and what the "Times," article is about?
See, first of all and strictly speaking, the Iran deal is an "agreement," not a "treaty." That means the Senate doesn't quite get a clear shot at disapproval; instead, they get to vote on a "resolution of disapproval," and whether or not to approve the fraction of the sanctions that Congress voted for can be lifted or not.
They'll probably vote against the Prez on both, given the composition of the Senate and current campaign politics. However--and isn't this nice?--the government's set up so that their vote can be "vetoed," by the President, and then the Senate needs a two-thirds majority to override that veto.
Mikulski's announcement means that they do no have the votes to override. Sorry you disapprove of the American government mapped out by the Constitution.
just so's ya know, jefferson et al set things up to cover exactly such situations. They feared the "tyranny of the majority," so this is an example of, "checks and balances," in which one part of governmental power fights against another precisely to ensure that one group can't stomp through things.
In other words, no tanks necessary, thank ahura-mazda. This is our politics, and has been all along.
Man, I wish the loud right-wingers would learn some darn history, maybe even read the Constitution.
By the way, a note on our system of government, and what the "Times," article is about?
See, first of all and strictly speaking, the Iran deal is an "agreement," not a "treaty." That means the Senate doesn't quite get a clear shot at disapproval; instead, they get to vote on a "resolution of disapproval," and whether or not to approve the fraction of the sanctions that Congress voted for can be lifted or not.
They'll probably vote against the Prez on both, given the composition of the Senate and current campaign politics. However--and isn't this nice?--the government's set up so that their vote can be "vetoed," by the President, and then the Senate needs a two-thirds majority to override that veto.
Mikulski's announcement means that they do no have the votes to override. Sorry you disapprove of the American government mapped out by the Constitution.
just so's ya know, jefferson et al set things up to cover exactly such situations. They feared the "tyranny of the majority," so this is an example of, "checks and balances," in which one part of governmental power fights against another precisely to ensure that one group can't stomp through things.
In other words, no tanks necessary, thank ahura-mazda. This is our politics, and has been all along.
Man, I wish the loud right-wingers would learn some darn history, maybe even read the Constitution.
1
I trust you supported the "morality" of the Iraq War 100% and still do.
Was there any point in college, when you were learning all those other big words, that you came across the word hypocrite?
Since when has the Republican party represented ANY morality, other than more money, more money, more money?
Was there any point in college, when you were learning all those other big words, that you came across the word hypocrite?
Since when has the Republican party represented ANY morality, other than more money, more money, more money?
In the face of--yet again--bipartisan opposition and the misrepresentation of facts bordering on fear mongering, this President has demonstrated a level head and a perfect and clear understanding of simple axiom in diplomacy : in order to proceed forward, you need to advance a couple of inches at at time. The alternative is to simply not move at all and that was not an acceptable outcome in this situation. We should applaud his efforts, along with those of Secretary Kerry. This deal is a unilateral win.
12
Maybe I'm crazy, or blind or possibly both.
I just don't see any benefit from this deal for the safety of America, I am all for peace but handing over hundreds of billions of dollars to a country with their past and recent history with terrorist organizations and expect them to use this wealth to do something good seems delusional. Why isn't there an agreement in this deal that directly references peace once the sanctions have been lifted and all their accounts are unfrozen?
It appears that this deal is more like a gamble, and we are depending on Iran's honesty when it comes to their nuclear program.
God help us
I just don't see any benefit from this deal for the safety of America, I am all for peace but handing over hundreds of billions of dollars to a country with their past and recent history with terrorist organizations and expect them to use this wealth to do something good seems delusional. Why isn't there an agreement in this deal that directly references peace once the sanctions have been lifted and all their accounts are unfrozen?
It appears that this deal is more like a gamble, and we are depending on Iran's honesty when it comes to their nuclear program.
God help us
8
Handing it over? Well, yes, since it's money that Iran is owed from the sale of its oil, the US and other nations are handing it over. Countries around the world had no problem doing business with Iran in the first place, despite its reputation. Seems only fair to pay up under the circumstances.
1
The "Safety through War" contingent is heard from, I see. Well, no need to tremble, really, John. If you want to be scared, you might consider that Pakistan, North Korea, China, and others already have nuclear arsenals, or that Donald Trump might soon have his chubby finger on enough nukes to destroy the world. That's scary.
2
based on the 2014 elections and the fact that Donald trump's leading in the Republican polls, I have no trouble whatsoever with the proposition that John Q. Public is blind as a bat.
A lot can be accomplished when mature adults work hard at something. Thank you President Obama and Secretary Kerry. Let the clown car that is the Republican campaign honk its horn and spin in circles for the next year. I look forward to more progressive policies and action by President Obama.
17
Every American mother should be grateful for this agreement. It means they may not have to sacrifice their child in a needless war against Iran. And if war becomes necessary then they know their child's sacrifice will not have been in vain. At the least, we are giving peace a chance. That, is the right thing to do.
17
Congratulations, Mr. President. You've now earned your Nobel Peace Prize.
15
Great. Permits the rest of them to freely vote their conscience, ie whatever will help them best for their next election.
2
All 301 Republicans are voting their consciences? Give me a break.
It really is remarkable. The whole nuclear matter was a chimera. Iran clearly knew that if they used nuclear weapons or were about to they would be toast. This was not about causing a nuclear arms race. Saudi Arabia, for example, knows the US and Israel will protect them. The real Middle East issue was and is "Sunni vs Shite". ISIS is now lead by former Bath leaders(Sunni) of Saddam Hussein. We, unfortunately, excluded them from the post Fall of Iraq government at our peril. The coalition would never have continued anyway. Other countries were financially losing far more than the US. We got the best deal possible under the existing not imaginary circumstances.
6
Between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Iran is our ally in fighting Sunni extremism.
Peace ....... through capitulation to the enemy! And it took all of 34 Dem Senators.
10
Amen Melissa!!!!
1
Yes, just like Reagan and Nixon repeatedly "capitulated" to the Soviet Union by signing arms control agreements with them. The Soviet Union was a far bigger threat to the existence of the US than IRAN ever could be. The fact that two very conservative Republican presidents understood that it made sense to negotiate with them really shows just how extreme and out of touch with reality the current Republican Party is.
It seems peace is always a "capitulation" to a Republican.
I guess "war" is the one and only answer to any and all questions.
I guess "war" is the one and only answer to any and all questions.
John Kerry and his team deserve the gratitude of Americans and Iranians. This treaty gives Iran a path to rejoin the international community under clear and enforcable conditions, and a future that favors political pluralism that will deminish the power of religious leaders. For the U.S., it dramaticially decreases the chances for military (overt or covert) action against Iran, and in the Mid-East in general, while serving the interests of Israel as well. To reject this treaty would have not only reduced our leverage in the region, it would have set us apart from every other country that hopes prevent another nuclear power from emerging.
6
What are the Christian reactionaries complaining about? If they are right, and God knows in their own minds they're *always* right, this advances the timetable of The Rapture, Armageddon, Christ's return and Kingdom on Earth, and all that other fun stuff from their mythology.
18
As someone who is not an American I am positively amazed by the power of some lobbies to warp public policies towards their goals. This is an excellent example of that. Even the supporters appear to be carefully calibrating their support in fear of retribution.
6
Stunning that the Obama acolytes could actually suggest that now that the deal is done, " the administration should commit to a policy of coercive diplomacy — major steps to keep Iran on the defensive and push back against its growing power in the Middle East". Delusion is the word that comes to mind .. you've just forced through an agreement that is 3:1 opposed by the Congress and gives $100B+ to the Iranian regime to sponsor more terrorism, yet now is the time to get "tough". Amazing
9
Delusional is the opposition to this deal
1
It is the executive's prerogative to conduct foreign policy, not the Congress - that they have any say at all in this case was a sop to the right that no Republican president would ever have lowered himself to extending.
That lame duck memo seems to have been lost in the shuffle.
1
Basically this is Israel's prize for their last war with Gaza.
1
Amongst my local Congressional Democrats, I want Senators Schumer and Menendez, Representatives Lowey and Maloney to spell out precisely what information about Iran they were personally privy to, which others were not, that made them say no support. In a related topic, I hope that Senator Gillibrand and Representative Nadler can also explain what it means to stand up to the AIPAC/Netanyahu pressure, which presumes American legislators work to do their bidding.
12
Given that the deal is now a fait accompli, I have one question for opponents. Would you rather:
(a) The deal succeeds, despite your opposition and a non-nuclear Iran joins the world of nations; or
(b) The deal fails, Iran develops nuclear weapons, and increases support for terrorist entities?
Judging from the comments here, it appears that given the choice, some would be happier to say "I told you so" than to have peace.
(a) The deal succeeds, despite your opposition and a non-nuclear Iran joins the world of nations; or
(b) The deal fails, Iran develops nuclear weapons, and increases support for terrorist entities?
Judging from the comments here, it appears that given the choice, some would be happier to say "I told you so" than to have peace.
7
Larry if you really believe that there is any chance for peace with Iran, I have a State of Illinois I can sell you cheap.
There will be a lot of rejoicing today at J-Street headquarters and B.D.S. offices and Marxist political science departments all over the country. And who can blame them? A solid victory over Israel, AIPAC and the majority of the American people who opposed the deal; and one that actually puts Israel in danger of physical annihilation one-day in the not too distant future. With victories like this, who’s to say they won’t one day be able to get elected to something themselves?
9
Oh come now, Israel had the bomb, and the best trained, equipped army in the middle east. They will not get annihilated. Though, they should have been spending money on their own defesnes instead of interfering in our domestic politics.
13
A. Stanton: Right. Because those dumb Iranians don't know that Israel has a gazillion nukes already...
The Iranian people have suffered enough because of Western and Israeli interference in their political affairs. Israel is horrified at the thought of having to share the *modern theocracy* throne with another Middle Eastern nation.
Tough. The rest of us want peace.
The Iranian people have suffered enough because of Western and Israeli interference in their political affairs. Israel is horrified at the thought of having to share the *modern theocracy* throne with another Middle Eastern nation.
Tough. The rest of us want peace.
1
If we have any more "victories" like the Iraq War which decimated all physical and social infrastructure, killed hundreds of thousands of civilians and created millions of refugees who will never have a home again this country will be br finished
2
The backdrop to this deal, it seemed to me, was the question of war. In order to get a deal, the threat of war had to be, on some level, credible. But I don’t think there’s much doubt that the reason a deal was so appealing to the Obama administration is they think war with Iran would be a disaster.
As much as everyone, the Republicans, the Israelis, the Saudis are blaming President Obama for the deal, they should really be blaming the Russians and the Chinese and the Europeans who, in many ways, were pushing for a softer agreement than President Obama.
So lets rejoice with reservations as the deal will be a bigger problem for the next president. Part of the question for the next president isn’t just their position on the deal but their relationship with the Russians, the Chinese, and the Europeans.
As much as everyone, the Republicans, the Israelis, the Saudis are blaming President Obama for the deal, they should really be blaming the Russians and the Chinese and the Europeans who, in many ways, were pushing for a softer agreement than President Obama.
So lets rejoice with reservations as the deal will be a bigger problem for the next president. Part of the question for the next president isn’t just their position on the deal but their relationship with the Russians, the Chinese, and the Europeans.
Republicans could never answer the question posed by President Obama: what would happen if the U.S. rejected the deal signed by five other countries and supported by over 100 countries? Sanctions would end, inspectors would leave Iran, leaving the country free to build a clandestine bomb and still be the recipient of the $50 billion dollars that isn't ours to take in the first place.
Instead, the Republicans answered with disingenuous demands for a "better deal", like the release of Americans held in Iran, that wasn't a part of the negotiations. More subterfuge was the demand for instant and spontaneous inspections, as if the Iranians could mop up and secretly store fissure material as if it were a spilled coke.
All the conservatives had to do was listen to the science of Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, explaining away their irrational fears. As in climate change, Mitch McConnell's and John Boehner's incantation for all GOP to invoke was, "We're not scientists, man.
Do you remember after 9/11, President Bush stood at New York Harbor and invoked the let's all come together and remember that we're all Americans where politics stop at the water's edge shtick? That only applies when Republicans hold the White House, otherwise, they'll conspire with Bibi Netanyahu , a foreign agent, to scuttle the agreement.
And all for presidential political gain, as they go about discrediting the president at every turn, determined to deny Obama his legacy. How sad.
Instead, the Republicans answered with disingenuous demands for a "better deal", like the release of Americans held in Iran, that wasn't a part of the negotiations. More subterfuge was the demand for instant and spontaneous inspections, as if the Iranians could mop up and secretly store fissure material as if it were a spilled coke.
All the conservatives had to do was listen to the science of Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, explaining away their irrational fears. As in climate change, Mitch McConnell's and John Boehner's incantation for all GOP to invoke was, "We're not scientists, man.
Do you remember after 9/11, President Bush stood at New York Harbor and invoked the let's all come together and remember that we're all Americans where politics stop at the water's edge shtick? That only applies when Republicans hold the White House, otherwise, they'll conspire with Bibi Netanyahu , a foreign agent, to scuttle the agreement.
And all for presidential political gain, as they go about discrediting the president at every turn, determined to deny Obama his legacy. How sad.
18
We see how well the US embargo with Cuba went; the US was the lone wolf while most other nations had free trade and open tourism to Cuba. The US, not accepting the Iran deal, would have just done the same thing.
I think, based upon the US and Iran history, since 1953, this was the best deal possible. People claim that we are dealing with a terrorist nation. Even though, from 1953 - 1979, what was the Shah? A terrorist that we backed while he repressed his people in the name of oil exports.
Meanwhile, we support that bastion of terror export, Saudi Arabia; also because of oil. A nation which was home to most of the people who attacked the US on 9/11. Who unleashed movements like ISIS, al Qaida, the Taliban, et. al. Who has been exporting a militant form of Islam, anti Christian, anti-Jewish for two centuries.
Finally, there is Israel, which still say they are defenseless in an area surrounded by enemies. Even though they posses nuclear weapons, advanced weaponry, a well trained army and a spy agency that is better than the CIA. In other words, they have the means to handle Iran. Not to mention their efforts to destabilize the region.
Thee Iran deal is the best that we could get, considering the circumstances. The idea that the US was able to sit at a table and talk face to face with Iran; is an accomplish unto itself.
Finally, passing the Iran deal is sending a message, telling Israel and Saudi Arabia to mind their own business and stay out of our internal politics.
I think, based upon the US and Iran history, since 1953, this was the best deal possible. People claim that we are dealing with a terrorist nation. Even though, from 1953 - 1979, what was the Shah? A terrorist that we backed while he repressed his people in the name of oil exports.
Meanwhile, we support that bastion of terror export, Saudi Arabia; also because of oil. A nation which was home to most of the people who attacked the US on 9/11. Who unleashed movements like ISIS, al Qaida, the Taliban, et. al. Who has been exporting a militant form of Islam, anti Christian, anti-Jewish for two centuries.
Finally, there is Israel, which still say they are defenseless in an area surrounded by enemies. Even though they posses nuclear weapons, advanced weaponry, a well trained army and a spy agency that is better than the CIA. In other words, they have the means to handle Iran. Not to mention their efforts to destabilize the region.
Thee Iran deal is the best that we could get, considering the circumstances. The idea that the US was able to sit at a table and talk face to face with Iran; is an accomplish unto itself.
Finally, passing the Iran deal is sending a message, telling Israel and Saudi Arabia to mind their own business and stay out of our internal politics.
20
"…with the security of Israel and the stability of the Middle East potentially at stake."
HA! There hasn't been any stability in the Middle East since the village idiot and his neocon puppet masters invaded Iraq.
HA! There hasn't been any stability in the Middle East since the village idiot and his neocon puppet masters invaded Iraq.
19
It's saddening to see the most highly recommended comments full of venom directed at "AIPAC traitors" and "warmongers" and their "lapdogs" or "paid employees" in Congress, doing "Netanyahu's bidding".
Anti-Semitism is an illness driven by the need to find conspiracies and demons to revile. These commenters may not be anti-Semitic, but they are afflicted with the same illness. It's a shame that the comments are seen as civilized discourse, rather than as vicious and slanderous.
Anti-Semitism is an illness driven by the need to find conspiracies and demons to revile. These commenters may not be anti-Semitic, but they are afflicted with the same illness. It's a shame that the comments are seen as civilized discourse, rather than as vicious and slanderous.
40
I think some of those quotes are from Jews who happen to disagree with Netanyahu and other pro-Israel hardliners. I also think it's wrong to equate opposition to right-wing Israeli politics with antisemitism. There is a lot to dislike about Netanyahu in my opinion, and yes, he does present himself as a warmonger. This means I'm ill?
8
it is saddening to see commenters dismayed and disheartened over Congressional embrace of the position of a foreign power without regard for the interests and security of the United States painted with the reprehensible bile of anti-semitism for taking positions that have to do with public policy, not with religion, ethnicity, or national origin. If patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels asserting anti-semitism is a vulgar, dishonest attempt to discredit legitimate disagreement. Or would we regard it as honest, healthy, vibrant manifestations of democracy were Iranian mullahs to stand in front of Congress calling for a rejection of American policy while adherents distributed campaign contributions, financed public announcements and "fact-finding" trips to Iran, appeared on television broadcasts expressing grave concern about the seriousness and mental health of Israel's elected leadership, and encouraged primary challenges to Members of Congress skeptical of Iranian intentions? It is a shame that assertions of anti-semitism receive any hearing least of all when they represent unprincipled attacks on the right to challenge the motives and actions of policy-makers.
4
I have always been a supporter of Israel, but I find PM Netanyahu to be a danger to Israel and the world. Like the U.S. Republicans he is out of touch with the way the world works in the 21st Century. I only hope that he behaves reasonably and doesn't decide to start WWIII on his own. I view him as a maverick and not part of the fabulous state of Israel or its people.
4
I hope this is the beginning of the end of Bibi Netanyahu's headlock on US foreign policy. Netanyahu knowingly spreads lies and distortions about US foreign policy to serve his own purposes and to undermine the president of the United States... Our senators and congressman who knowingly embrace those lies and distortions are committing a low-grade form of treason. Let's remember that at election time.
46
KEEPING IT THOUGHTFULLY HONEST: Kudos to our responsible and wise Democrat Senators! Many of us American are sick and tired of political game playing at the expense of our United States interests! So the wise choice is keep Iran from having a Nuke instead of choosing the most dangerous and irresponsible decision to risk another war. I ask Schmer and Mendenez as well as the republican chicken hawks how are they going to pay for this war? And what are they going to do when China and Russia and some of our allies do not support continue trading embargo?
8
Good news for the US, and those of us who are tired of Republican war hawks and craven Republican Senators who don't seem to mind sending our young on senseless military missions to the mideast while allowing Israel to guide their foreign policy decisions. It is hard to believe 47 Republican senators attempted to undermine a proposed nuclear nonproliferation deal between President Barack Obama and representatives of five other major powers and the Iranian government. Even harder to believe is continued Republican opposition to the Iran deal despite the fact that the five other countries involved in the negotiation will lift sanctions even if the US refuses to honor the agreement. Why Republicans want to shoot themselves, US businesses and the rest of us in the foot just to please the Israeli blowhard Netanyahu and the warhawk, neocon element of the GOP is a puzzle. Could it be Republicans would go this far to make sure Obama "fails" even if it means the US fails? Shame on Senate Republicans and those Democrats that are too craven to stand up to the Israeli lobby. Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia supports the Iran deal and I am hoping Senator Mark Warner will announce his support soon.
19
Saddam was a US ally in the 1980s. Look what happened there. Middle East politics are fluid and, in fact, the US is as much a tool to politicians nations as vice versa, particularly in the art of bombast. (And they all support one terrorist group or another, do they not? Including the Saudis, our current allies, for now...)
Perhaps I'm alone in thinking there's a good chance we'll look around in a decade and realize Iran has turned out to be our best ally, particularly in the fight against ISIS. The Iranian hardliners and clerics spew their rhetoric, but I don't think their views represent those of the Iranian people.
This deal, which will improve lives for ordinary Iranians, could very well be the key that enables the Iranian people to be heard.
Time will tell, but my feeling is that the war of words between the US and Iran is far more about rhetoric than any heartfelt animosity. They have no reason to trust us, and we have no reason to trust them, but at this point in history we have little reason to be sworn enemies, either. Such are the contradictions inherent in Middle East politics.
Perhaps I'm alone in thinking there's a good chance we'll look around in a decade and realize Iran has turned out to be our best ally, particularly in the fight against ISIS. The Iranian hardliners and clerics spew their rhetoric, but I don't think their views represent those of the Iranian people.
This deal, which will improve lives for ordinary Iranians, could very well be the key that enables the Iranian people to be heard.
Time will tell, but my feeling is that the war of words between the US and Iran is far more about rhetoric than any heartfelt animosity. They have no reason to trust us, and we have no reason to trust them, but at this point in history we have little reason to be sworn enemies, either. Such are the contradictions inherent in Middle East politics.
16
You will never hear thank you from the Cheney crowd if it succeeds but over half of Iran is under 30, mostly college educated, unemployed and faceable to the West. It is a powder keg that needs releasing at a normal rate. Because a few people yell "death to America" I hope we are not all judged by the "axis of evil" and Cheney
1
I am waiting for the candidates to begin to honestly discuss how they will monitor Iran for compliance and what they will do if Iran breaks the agreement. So far, only Kasich has said he honor the commitment of the agreement, and not tear it apart once elected. Sanders and Clinton are silent as is O'Malley. This deal was cemented the moment it was announced, in practice, if not in theory. The global delegations are talking to Iran about investments, joint ventures, and will not be swayed by US recalcitrance.
The deal is not perfect, but it is the best chance we have to keep nuclear weapons out of Iran. The undefined 'better deal' pushed by Netanyahu and the critics is a pipe dream, and not realistic at all. There is a wide variety of tools available for enforcement, some are proactive, some reactive...It will be up to the next 3 presidents to choose which course we take. I am not overwhelmed by the negativity coming from the GOP candidates, one of whom could win the election; or by the silence coming from Clinton and Sanders.
The deal is not perfect, but it is the best chance we have to keep nuclear weapons out of Iran. The undefined 'better deal' pushed by Netanyahu and the critics is a pipe dream, and not realistic at all. There is a wide variety of tools available for enforcement, some are proactive, some reactive...It will be up to the next 3 presidents to choose which course we take. I am not overwhelmed by the negativity coming from the GOP candidates, one of whom could win the election; or by the silence coming from Clinton and Sanders.
10
The deal is not perfect, but I'm hopeful. Remember the rising generation, who has only known the strictures of radical Islam - I don't think they want that.
*I* think that they are really looking to increased relations, obviously including economic, with the U.S. - its like the Soviets - when their people saw what it is we have, and how we can live - and I'm not just talking economic - they want that.
And like the Jinn of their own religious mythos, you can't put that back in the bottle once its gotten out.
*I* think that they are really looking to increased relations, obviously including economic, with the U.S. - its like the Soviets - when their people saw what it is we have, and how we can live - and I'm not just talking economic - they want that.
And like the Jinn of their own religious mythos, you can't put that back in the bottle once its gotten out.
My Senator- Michael Bennet- never had an opinion for his constituents. Everytime I called the canned message was that "he is reviewing it". If you cannot have some reasons for or against for consituents, then I am not sure what you are actually doing. I found it really lame - he lost some respect on this one.
11
"It's unclear if the European Union, Russia, China, India and others would continue sanctions if Congress rejects this deal. At best, sanctions would be porous, or limited to unilateral sanctions by the U.S.”
This is not accurate. It's pretty clear most would go along. Moreover, U.S. only sanctions are pretty formidable and have multiplier effects, which would necessarily involve other countries.
But think about the Senator's justification. It's procedurally based. It's like. We can't go back to renegotiate. The logistics won't work. That's unacceptable. What amateurs negotiated this deal?
For the life of me I don't understand how we are entering into a deal that includes not one of Mr. Obama's stated sine qua nons - the ones we heard repeatedly from his lips in 2012.
1) Iran will not get a nuke. (It's only delayed.) 2) Bilateral rollback for rollback on the same time schedule. (Iran gets much relief before it completes its obligations.) 3) Inspections anytime, anywhere. (Inspections on 24 day notice. In some cases none. In others, inspections by Iran!)
This is all very surreal. Mr. Obama and Mr. Kerry have just kicked the can down the road.
A can, not made of tin, but uranium and plutonium. And when their unfortunate successors pick it up they will have ZERO leverage.
This is not accurate. It's pretty clear most would go along. Moreover, U.S. only sanctions are pretty formidable and have multiplier effects, which would necessarily involve other countries.
But think about the Senator's justification. It's procedurally based. It's like. We can't go back to renegotiate. The logistics won't work. That's unacceptable. What amateurs negotiated this deal?
For the life of me I don't understand how we are entering into a deal that includes not one of Mr. Obama's stated sine qua nons - the ones we heard repeatedly from his lips in 2012.
1) Iran will not get a nuke. (It's only delayed.) 2) Bilateral rollback for rollback on the same time schedule. (Iran gets much relief before it completes its obligations.) 3) Inspections anytime, anywhere. (Inspections on 24 day notice. In some cases none. In others, inspections by Iran!)
This is all very surreal. Mr. Obama and Mr. Kerry have just kicked the can down the road.
A can, not made of tin, but uranium and plutonium. And when their unfortunate successors pick it up they will have ZERO leverage.
7
Surreal is the Cheney crowd that still wants to invade Iran. BTW it was not an "amateur" negotiator at all although it seems that the real amateurs who invaded Iraq didn't even know the difference between Sunni and Shia
2
What dreamworld are you living in? We imposed sanctions on Cuba for half a century and no one else paid any attention (except to get the trade that American business was losing). If we voted this down, it would be the same way. Also, the most important thing Iraq wanted from this deal wasn't to be able to buy iPads, Levi jeans, etc., from the United States. It was to sell their oil on the world market, and with this deal they can, whether we approved it or not.
re: most would go along, all I can say is, remember the League of Nations.
THAT didn't work out very well when the U.S. wasn't involved.
THAT didn't work out very well when the U.S. wasn't involved.
Thank you Mr. President and Secretary Kerry! You fought for peace against overwhelming opposition even from within your own party. It wasn't easy but sanity finally prevailed against all odds. This is indeed a very happy day!
28
Surely you are facetious.
1
34 votes out of 100 is a victory? I think it actually is, when you consider the Senate is largely composed of ideological idiots and party hacks. So you start by realizing that the Senate majority is a party inhabiting an alternative universe and dismiss them, then you work with Democrats who might have a scintilla of vision or courage. You win wit 34. So you lost, Schumer. No point in running down the count. It takes no courage to jump to the winning side. Take the plunge. You could talk about a dark night of the soul and a dawning light. And some day you might be majority leader.
19
Bravo for Jeremy Ben-Ami of J Street, a Jewish organization which understands that totalitarian-like, lock-step support and unquestioning allegience to the Israeli government can sometimes be harmful to the enlightened self-interest of the Jewish people, a Jewish organization that has the courage, intelligence, knowledge -- and the willingness to exercise freedom of thought and action -- to stand in loyal opposition when the facts on the ground warrant it.
65
I am sure Joseph McCarthy would be so please, instead of the "Red Scare" Israel has been nominated to be the pariah state by Ben-Ami and those hating.
It only makes sense to give it a chance. All the same options will remain.
18
Russia, China and Iran (by proxy) ALL have veto authority over snapback sanctions.
It only makes sense to give a deal that does NOT end Iran's nuclear program, stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons and does NOT stop Iran from financing global Islamic terror a chance?
Yeah if you're drunk.
It only makes sense to give a deal that does NOT end Iran's nuclear program, stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons and does NOT stop Iran from financing global Islamic terror a chance?
Yeah if you're drunk.
The GOP position on this treaty is exactly the same as every other one of their positions- If Obama is for it- we're against it. No thought, no reasoning, no critical thinking... just doing whatever Adelson, Koch brothers, etc want them to do and absolutely no regard for the people of the United States. They are a despicable bunch indeed and would have preferred an all out war with Iran instead of diplomacy- because the other 2 ME wars they started worked out so well.
It just galls them that Obama has so many accomplishments and his second term is not over. They tried every dirty trick in the book since day 1 of his presidency to make him a failure- and it would have broken a lesser person. Instead, Obama just keeps getting things done in spite of the know nothing-do nothing Congress.
It just galls them that Obama has so many accomplishments and his second term is not over. They tried every dirty trick in the book since day 1 of his presidency to make him a failure- and it would have broken a lesser person. Instead, Obama just keeps getting things done in spite of the know nothing-do nothing Congress.
66
I hope this 34th vote does not end the discussion. I have read and heard a lot about the good and bad of the agreement, more about the bad because the opponents have been much more vocal. What has been missing is serious analysis of the alternatives. If the Congress were to reject the deal and if they could over-ride a veto, what next? How would Iran be prevented from getting a nuclear weapon not just in fifteen years, but in the next year? The opponents have been remarkable muted on this question. It would be nice if the media, especially the NYT gave us meaningful analysis. I suspect that support for the agreement would grow if the alternatives were clearly laid out, but we still have not seen that.
5
Yes it's been laid out before. The alternative is another Mid East war with even less support than we had in Iraq.
This is not an agreement between the USA & Iran. It's an agreement with Iran & the rest of the world. The USA was just the leader of the negotiations. So if we reject it, we stand alone while everyone else starts trading with them. And since we haven't traded with them since Regan, any sanctions we put up by ourselves would be meaningless.
I hope this helps. :)
This is not an agreement between the USA & Iran. It's an agreement with Iran & the rest of the world. The USA was just the leader of the negotiations. So if we reject it, we stand alone while everyone else starts trading with them. And since we haven't traded with them since Regan, any sanctions we put up by ourselves would be meaningless.
I hope this helps. :)
1
I would like to think that future generations will commemorate today as a breakthrough in achieving world peace. But of course they will not, because no one remembers when something bad -doesn't- happen. They will remember the catastrophic wars and the glorious treaties, but not the quiet and assiduous diplomacy that prevented a nuclear Iran.
So for my own part I will thank our courageous President, and the Secretary of State who helped lay the groundwork for the deal. Hillary should be proud of this legacy.
So for my own part I will thank our courageous President, and the Secretary of State who helped lay the groundwork for the deal. Hillary should be proud of this legacy.
418
Unfortunately there is no reference to peace in the 156 page document.
thank you for your thoughtful comment- right on the mark! -- i have recently met several americans who have been in iran in the past few years. they all were astonished at the welcoming and openess of the people they met. no guarantees that this deal will change the islamic state, but certainly opens the opportunity for exchange that so many iranians long for. over 50% of the people were born after 1979.
few americans understand the 1954 cia history in iran, and even worse, the russian and british assault in the 40's that left thousand dead. persia/iran is not iraq or syria or for that matter saudi arabia- it is a 2500 year old culture, proud, literate, with a rich culture and deep national unity and pride.
few americans understand the 1954 cia history in iran, and even worse, the russian and british assault in the 40's that left thousand dead. persia/iran is not iraq or syria or for that matter saudi arabia- it is a 2500 year old culture, proud, literate, with a rich culture and deep national unity and pride.
2
The agreement only delays any potential pursuit of nuclear weapons by Iran.
First congratulations to Obama and the 34 Democratic Senators who put US national security ahead of partisan politics.
Obama's ability to effective govern, even thrive, vs. a right wing religious government GOP Congressional majority opposition gives us a lesson on electing Hillary Clinton in 2016 and how US can continue to make progress despite GOP majority based on voter suppression and gerrymandering.
Obama's ability to effective govern, even thrive, vs. a right wing religious government GOP Congressional majority opposition gives us a lesson on electing Hillary Clinton in 2016 and how US can continue to make progress despite GOP majority based on voter suppression and gerrymandering.
21
They have all put "national security" ahead of something, and severely at risk.
1
Eagles,
Don't you understand the meaning of this 'treaty'? We will no longer monitor or inspect the Iran nuclear development efforts. Your President is putting the Jewish Homeland (Israel) in grave danger of nuclear annihilation.
Why don't you care? IS this truly OK with you?
Don't you understand the meaning of this 'treaty'? We will no longer monitor or inspect the Iran nuclear development efforts. Your President is putting the Jewish Homeland (Israel) in grave danger of nuclear annihilation.
Why don't you care? IS this truly OK with you?
1
Yeah - but Hillary is no Obama.
She represents a return to Clintonian democrats that she will not distance herself from, at least so far.
She represents a return to Clintonian democrats that she will not distance herself from, at least so far.
1
Maybe we should have included the sale of 2,000 tow missiles to Iran to get GOP approval.
14
The Iran deal is a bad one. But will slow Iran's march to a nuclear weapon more than no deal. And while pulling them back into the world's economic system more fully will give them more money for nefarious deeds, it will also help those in need in Iran and give the country more of a stake in world peace. North Korea is far more isolated than Iran ever was. Have they given up on a nuclear program? No.
5
I think its a bad deal from this standpoint - it allows Iran to develop nuclear power for civilian uses.
Since I'm against nuclear power, I don't like that part of the deal.
Remember Fukushima.
Remember Chernoybl.
We don't need more of those - and believe me, those two are not the last of them.
Its a FANTASY to think that another such disaster, and its concomitant impact, will not occur.
Since I'm against nuclear power, I don't like that part of the deal.
Remember Fukushima.
Remember Chernoybl.
We don't need more of those - and believe me, those two are not the last of them.
Its a FANTASY to think that another such disaster, and its concomitant impact, will not occur.
Good for the U.S.! Good for the President! Good for the Secretary of State! Good for the Middle East! Good for world security! Good all around!
60
When you have a country as evil as Iran on the ropes, you finish the job and rid the country of evil misguided leadership. By taking the economic pressure off, Obama has unleashed very troublesome times ahead. Poor decision making, poor leadership. G-d help us all.
9
Right. Iran's population is more than twice that of Iraq and it is far more united (no sectarian division there). Its military is stronger than Iraq, and though most of its people don't hate the US right now, they sure will if we invade. Plus, the Iranians have a sophisticated worldwide intelligence network (again, compared to Iraq).
Do you understand why I keep comparing Iran to Iraq? Can you think back to what happens when the US removes "misguided leadership" in Middle Eastern nations? Nothing good ever comes from it, I'll tell you that, and I would include not only the Iraq example but also Syria, Egypt, and Libya, and for that matter Iran (circa 1953).
The funny thing is that Republican "leaders" in our country are just as forgetful or simply neglect the facts of history. Those facts matter and they should guide us going forward.
Do you understand why I keep comparing Iran to Iraq? Can you think back to what happens when the US removes "misguided leadership" in Middle Eastern nations? Nothing good ever comes from it, I'll tell you that, and I would include not only the Iraq example but also Syria, Egypt, and Libya, and for that matter Iran (circa 1953).
The funny thing is that Republican "leaders" in our country are just as forgetful or simply neglect the facts of history. Those facts matter and they should guide us going forward.
1
If there is one thing we know it is the the pipe dream of "rid the country of evil misguided leadership" that George Bush smoked was no guarantee of anything.
Tough talk with no actual solutions behind it.
Yesterday the NYT reported muscular declarations made by Iran.
Those were an obvious reaction to the muscular declarations made by Mr Obama, who was trying to satisfy Republicans and gain their positive vote and behavior.
But Republicans still boycott whatever the President does, in despite of the Constitution which require collaboration between MPs and President.
Iran will always be suspicious if US is suspicious, while US needs Iran to fight ISIS, since none of its supposed allies does (Egypt and Saudi Arabia).
So I would suggest no kidding with the Iran Nuclear deal, if USA doesn't want an useless permanent war status.
Those were an obvious reaction to the muscular declarations made by Mr Obama, who was trying to satisfy Republicans and gain their positive vote and behavior.
But Republicans still boycott whatever the President does, in despite of the Constitution which require collaboration between MPs and President.
Iran will always be suspicious if US is suspicious, while US needs Iran to fight ISIS, since none of its supposed allies does (Egypt and Saudi Arabia).
So I would suggest no kidding with the Iran Nuclear deal, if USA doesn't want an useless permanent war status.
4
Thank you, President Obama and Secretary Kerry. This the first sign of optimism I, an American of Jewish background, have had since the Camp David Accords for peace in the Middle East. This is potentially a major legacy moment equal to the Affordable Care Act and is worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize previously awarded and now finally redeemed. I hope the remaining Senate Democrat hold-outs will now sign on to peace and provide a filibuster proof majority to prevent the Senate from even rejecting the best hope for peace in the Arab world.
70
Had the administration not prevailed, the alternative would have been far worse than this less-than-perfect deal.
Deal or not, no country other than the US would have stuck with continued sanctions. Without a deal, Iran would have proceeded as before on the nuclear front, and reaped huge economic benefits at the same time.
The relatively young, well-educated and western looking Iranian population is the true future for that country, not the ayatollahs and the extremists. This deal strengthens the internal, domestic hand of that population, who were never a part of the "death to America" crowd. (Recall that only in Tehran, unlike other Islamic capitals, did the citizenry turn out in support of the US after 9/11.)
Although Iran still poses a regional threat to Israel and others, that threat is diminished. And should Iran renege, a military option is always available. In reality, Iran now knows it would certainly be on the losing side, and the consequences would be devastating.
Deal or not, no country other than the US would have stuck with continued sanctions. Without a deal, Iran would have proceeded as before on the nuclear front, and reaped huge economic benefits at the same time.
The relatively young, well-educated and western looking Iranian population is the true future for that country, not the ayatollahs and the extremists. This deal strengthens the internal, domestic hand of that population, who were never a part of the "death to America" crowd. (Recall that only in Tehran, unlike other Islamic capitals, did the citizenry turn out in support of the US after 9/11.)
Although Iran still poses a regional threat to Israel and others, that threat is diminished. And should Iran renege, a military option is always available. In reality, Iran now knows it would certainly be on the losing side, and the consequences would be devastating.
22
Wow for a change lobbyist and money did not get another war.... Peace won!!! American people and Israeli people won without a bullet being fired.... God bless America!!!
46
I work on Capitol Hill.
Thank goodness I am not working for one of the 34 senators who are supporting Obama's Iran Appeasement Deal.
If you work for Barbara Mikulski's office, here's a bit of free advice: Don't sign a long term lease here in Washington DC after 2016, and put UHaul's number on speed dial.
Thank goodness I am not working for one of the 34 senators who are supporting Obama's Iran Appeasement Deal.
If you work for Barbara Mikulski's office, here's a bit of free advice: Don't sign a long term lease here in Washington DC after 2016, and put UHaul's number on speed dial.
7
Hopefully the GOP deadbeats will be using up those U-Hauls.
1
Despite working on Capitol Hill, you should get out more often. Mikulski announced a while back that she is not running for another term. Let's see how Ben Cardin and Wasserman-Schultz vote now that Obama has the votes. Are they gonna vote for Obama or Nyet-an-yahoo? I ain't holding my breath!
1
Well, lawyer, you do not seem so well informed of a few basic facts. The most pertinent one here is she has already announced that she is serving her last years of her last term. I imagine her staffers are quite aware of that decision by the remarkable "Babs."
2
Very good news indeed. For once logic and sense prevail, and finally America is speaking a new language of power: cooperation. What a relief from the miasmic Bush years.
39
The point in my opinion is this: it was a failed policy. It didn't work. It is demonstrably provable that it didn't work. Time to change. All I can say is thank goodness for a president who has that insight, flexibility, and daring. This is the right thing to do.
30
"Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, is asking Democrats not to filibuster the resolution so that it can come to a final up-or-down vote."
Talk about hypocrisy!
Talk about hypocrisy!
21
Remember, it was Democrats, lead by Harry Reid, who have emasculated the filibuster as a tactic in the Senate.
Reading the article I was taken back to learn that Israel apparently now has a seat in the U.S. Senate (or is it in the House?). Our 51st state?
20
Not to worry. Israel will save us in same way they destroyed the Iraqi nuclear reactor years ago and later the Syrian reactor. Timely given the presence of ISIS.
Good idea. If it became a state, we would stop pouring our millions of tax dollars into it to support their military industry. It would start paying into the U.S. Treasury instead. Yeah, let's think about that. It couldn't be any more obnoxious as some of our existing states and the rest of us could just ignore it.
My appreciation to President Obama for following through his 2008 pledge to offer his hand to Iran's unclenched fist. The accords were not done hastily or for political expediency, but thoroughly because this was the best course, and done with the integrity of a man personally invested in bringing others to the table, rather than relying on military might.
58
The other side (which, this time, cannot be simply characterized as the GOP), lost for the same reason they have been losing through most of the Obama years: they did not present a reasonable, well-thought-out alternative. They didn't even try. Saying "This agreement is not good enough. We need to scrap it and start over" has become a joke. Republicans have not merely proven they cannot execute on ANYTHING -- they have proven they do not agree, or even approve, of the very concept of governing. I did not hear anyone opposed to the Iran deal present a solution to the single most important fact about the deal: the sanctions regime was on the verge of collapse (and the Russians waited, what, about 20 minutes before signing an arms deal with the Iranians.) Wake up, Republicans.
611
I'm impressed with your ability to reward Democratic filibustering and the NY Times for dropping a cone of silence over what many would consider very reasonable alternatives such as: tightening sanctions and giving the Europeans the choice of trading with the US or Iran; supporting the rebirth of Kurdistan by arming the Kurds who have proven themselves competent at self-government and in fighting ISIS; or giving Israel the means to take out Iran's nuclear facilities on their own without having to resort to the nuclear weapons which all liberals assume they have; or blockading Iran's ports until they end their nuclear program and support of Islamic terrorist groups.
1
good point. This has also been the Rs mantra about healthcare. "Repeal and replace Obamacare!" they shout. But when you ask them "replace it with what?" they have nothing to say.
2
A well-thought-out alternative?
The GOP doesn't offer alternatives.
The GOP doesn't offer thinking.
The GOP doesn't do anything well.
The GOP doesn't offer alternatives.
The GOP doesn't offer thinking.
The GOP doesn't do anything well.
1
The essence of the recent debate has been "we can't trust Iran". What I never understood is "why should Iran trust the US?"
The shameful 1953 Iranian coup d'état, known in Iran as the 28 Mordad coup, overthrew the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran Mohammad Mosaddegh in August 1953, and was engineered and orchestrated by the United Kingdom M5 and the United States CIA. This was because we didn't approve of Iran's decision to exert some control over their own oil.
We installed our puppet, the Shah, who assured the US wealth from the area's vast oil reserves, and set the groundwork for the eventual Iranian revolution and return of the Ayatollah.
So, "Why should Iran trust the US?"
The shameful 1953 Iranian coup d'état, known in Iran as the 28 Mordad coup, overthrew the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran Mohammad Mosaddegh in August 1953, and was engineered and orchestrated by the United Kingdom M5 and the United States CIA. This was because we didn't approve of Iran's decision to exert some control over their own oil.
We installed our puppet, the Shah, who assured the US wealth from the area's vast oil reserves, and set the groundwork for the eventual Iranian revolution and return of the Ayatollah.
So, "Why should Iran trust the US?"
44
It is a world of grays, not black and white. Why is there no room for self interest? Why take sides against your home, without even arguing the merits of the deal?
Add to that the establishment of extraterritoriality enjoyed by Americans in Iran, as well as the CIA's role in forming SAVAK and training its members.
There is also no denying that Jimmy Carter had a difficult decision regarding allowing the Shah into the US for medical care: do I turn my back on a valued ally, or incur the wrath of the Iranian people? That was also a factor in Iran's revolution.
This is yet another example where small minorities in two countries benefit from making bellicose statements to their own political and financial benefit, whereas the overwhelming majority of the citizens of both of those countries bear no ill will toward each other.
Curiously and ironically, Republicans would otherwise ordinarily leap at the opportunity to bring Iran back into the world economy as a major trading partner.
There is also no denying that Jimmy Carter had a difficult decision regarding allowing the Shah into the US for medical care: do I turn my back on a valued ally, or incur the wrath of the Iranian people? That was also a factor in Iran's revolution.
This is yet another example where small minorities in two countries benefit from making bellicose statements to their own political and financial benefit, whereas the overwhelming majority of the citizens of both of those countries bear no ill will toward each other.
Curiously and ironically, Republicans would otherwise ordinarily leap at the opportunity to bring Iran back into the world economy as a major trading partner.
What I find so misleading is that opponents of the Iran deal pontificate that our closest allies (read Israel and Saudi Arabia) oppose the deal.
To the contrary, our closest allies (UK, France and Germany) not only support the deal in toto, but helped negotiate the deal.
To the contrary, our closest allies (UK, France and Germany) not only support the deal in toto, but helped negotiate the deal.
33
Have you noticed, in today's America it's much easier to foster a war than close a deal for peace? Where were all these peace-nay-sayers in 2002 and 2003? Listen all warmongers out there!... This deal is not going to necessarily rob you from that opportunity! You can still go to war (not you personally, I mean you can send others, mostly young innocent people, to a war in the future)... There is plenty of chances for Iran to cheat. Iran, an otherwise peaceful country with an overwhelming majority of its people love the best values of America and the West, is now in the grip of some religious nuts. If you pull away from this deal, again the hardliners (never too far away) will find their way to the seat of power. For now please please "Give peace a chance"! Do it for the millions and millions of peace-loving western oriented, Iranians (whom you saw on the streets of Tehran calling for drastic change not long ago.
21
Cheney was on TV this morning saying the deal should have been a treaty, requiring the Senate to approve it by a 2/3 vote. I myself have never understood why it wasn't designated as such. In the many articles that have appeared in its pages, has the Paper of Record ever said anything about this?
Now we can expect some military action against Iran from Nethanyshu at some point. This man will remain stuborn and defiant even when defeated by democratic means.
4
If President Obama has ever owned up to a single one of the failures and mistakes of his
administration, it must have occurred while I was in the shower. As far as I know, he has fessed-up to nothing.
Not to his failure to make a dent against ISIS, not to his invisible red line against Assad, not to the increased racial tensions in this country, not to his complete misreading of the Arab Spring, not to his failure to effectively counter Putin, not to the massive thefts of classified government information by Chinese hackers, not to the enormously dangerous speculation that is now going on in our financial
markets, not to the failure to get a single thing done on the matter of gun control, not to his failure to get the country working on a massive overhaul of our nation's infrastructure. And I could easily go on.
So why do I bring these up here? Is it because I don’t like the man? Or fail to appreciate that he has done a few good things (not including Obamacare, which is still very far from right) and that Republicans have frequently stood in his way. No it is not. It’s because he is the President and is supposed to occasionally get a few hard things done right, which he has not.
And it’s because I know, sure as G-d makes little green apples, that on the day
the Ayatollah announces that he is the proud owner of ten atomic bombs, the President – true to his pattern --will begin blaming Mr. Netanyahu and AIPAC for the “catastrophic” failure of the deal.
administration, it must have occurred while I was in the shower. As far as I know, he has fessed-up to nothing.
Not to his failure to make a dent against ISIS, not to his invisible red line against Assad, not to the increased racial tensions in this country, not to his complete misreading of the Arab Spring, not to his failure to effectively counter Putin, not to the massive thefts of classified government information by Chinese hackers, not to the enormously dangerous speculation that is now going on in our financial
markets, not to the failure to get a single thing done on the matter of gun control, not to his failure to get the country working on a massive overhaul of our nation's infrastructure. And I could easily go on.
So why do I bring these up here? Is it because I don’t like the man? Or fail to appreciate that he has done a few good things (not including Obamacare, which is still very far from right) and that Republicans have frequently stood in his way. No it is not. It’s because he is the President and is supposed to occasionally get a few hard things done right, which he has not.
And it’s because I know, sure as G-d makes little green apples, that on the day
the Ayatollah announces that he is the proud owner of ten atomic bombs, the President – true to his pattern --will begin blaming Mr. Netanyahu and AIPAC for the “catastrophic” failure of the deal.
7
"No it is not. It’s because he is the President and is supposed to occasionally get a few hard things done right, which he has not"......Putting together an international coalition to back sanctions - including Britain, France Germany, Russia and China - to obtain an agreement which shuts down Iran's nuclear program for 15 years when they are only 6 months away from a bomb today....Oh, I am so sorry. that wasn't something hard; that was easy.
11
Stop watching too much of Homeland and 24! ;)
I actually love Homeland :)
I actually love Homeland :)
2
Is the Russia that has just agreed to sell a sophisticated missile system to Iran part of those international sanctions?
You're right--that was easy. Arms for our enemy from our enemy bought with US dollars from sanctions RELIEF. So easy. But not to worry...in five years (if not sooner) IRAN gets to buy ICBMs to deliver the nuclear weapons....that Obama tells us Iran won't develop because, under this deal, Iran gets to inspect their nuclear facilities and tell us they're not developing nuclear weapons. Peace in out time.....and it's so easy....
You're right--that was easy. Arms for our enemy from our enemy bought with US dollars from sanctions RELIEF. So easy. But not to worry...in five years (if not sooner) IRAN gets to buy ICBMs to deliver the nuclear weapons....that Obama tells us Iran won't develop because, under this deal, Iran gets to inspect their nuclear facilities and tell us they're not developing nuclear weapons. Peace in out time.....and it's so easy....
Treaty supporters in a nutshell: We and Israel are better off with this than without it. There is no alternative.
Opponents in a nutshell: I hate Obama! Now gimme that AIPAC money!
Opponents in a nutshell: I hate Obama! Now gimme that AIPAC money!
25
Obama supporters in a nutshell: A deal that endorses Iran's nuclear weapons program that was sold to the American people as a plan to dismantle Iran's nuclear program is somehow good.
Sane Americans: What you talkin' bout Willis?
Sane Americans: What you talkin' bout Willis?
The Democratic party will have itself to blame when this goes south, its just a matter of when not if. Everyone needs to remember the 2016 election cycle is around the corner and they will be held to accountable for their votes.We all know what happened in the 2012 election cycle, I am sure it will continue with a greater majority for the Republicans in the House and Senate.
4
What happens if it doesn't go south?
9
Good question. It's sad that we live in a time when good questions fall on deaf ears.
We will hear a deafening silence from all Republicans who opposed it. Some Democrats who opposed it will admit that they were wrong.
1
This is also a vote for rationality over fear. An Iran under an international accord is much preferable to an outlier nation.
29
Rather for wishful thinking over rational fear of a nuclear-armed terrorist state.
NY Times commenters here, sadly, display equal measures of willful intellectual dishonesty and ahistoricity. Yes, Obama won a victory here; the accord he engineered can't be veto-overriden (and likely can't be vetoed) or filibustered. But the federal legislature -- Congress overwhelmingly and the Senate by nearly two-thirds -- is *AGAINST* the accord. So is, increasingly, the American polity (to a substantive extent because of Netanyahu's address, and its clear ripple-effect, so go ahead and hate him, haters). International accords don't "stand" like legislation, particularly not when they are of this moment, and negotiated with bad-faith players (this one, arguably, the mother of all such entities, deemed by State Departments across both GOP and Dem. administrations as the planet's #1 exporter of terrorism, until Obama ordered the message altered). The "world" that won't stand for a re-negotiation is schematically and morally no different from the "world" that stood and stands idly by as malevolent forces obtain the critical mass needed to unleash aggression on that world. In the longer run, the people of the U.S., for all their naivete and mistakes and insularity and just plain spoiledness, figure out what's true and right and just and decent, and will unlikely elected a federal legislature willing to countenance a nuclear-armed and infrastructurally-terrorism-expanding Iran -- even if a sizable minority don't know any better.
6
You say the American polity is increasingly against the Iran Nuclear Deal. You are wrong. Americans seem split on the deal and the biggest predictor of how a voter feels about the Iran deal is how that same voter feels about President Obama's job performance. The deal has become fully politicized and most voters do not have any real sense of what the deal does--good or bad.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/opinions-about-the-iran-deal-are-more...
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/opinions-about-the-iran-deal-are-more...
1
Vote Schumer out in the democratic primary in 2016. He no longer represents the people of New York.
41
Another great victory achieved under difficult circumstances for my guy Barack. He has now earned his Nobel peace prize, and may deserve another. I predict that in five years these Iranian kids are going to drive the mullahs out of office and create the closest thing to a western democracy that can be had in the Muslim world. They will be one of our strongest allies, and a stabilizing force in the area.
17
Diplomacy in the Middle East is scary because it hasn't been used around these parts in a long time. It takes real leadership and faith - last seen at Camp David with Begin, Sadat and Carter.
President Obama has demonstrated rare leadership in first creating effective international sanctions - and then an end-game with an agreement of nuclear constraint. Having to overcome Un-American influence and obstructionism was inexcusable.
What I find puzzling is how our capitalist nation has dropped the ball on exploiting the opening of Iran for business. The money that fuels our economy - and dithering Congress - is made by being aggressive in international markets. Right now the Europeans, Russians and Chinese are way ahead. Maybe we've been distracted by our own sideshow.
President Obama has demonstrated rare leadership in first creating effective international sanctions - and then an end-game with an agreement of nuclear constraint. Having to overcome Un-American influence and obstructionism was inexcusable.
What I find puzzling is how our capitalist nation has dropped the ball on exploiting the opening of Iran for business. The money that fuels our economy - and dithering Congress - is made by being aggressive in international markets. Right now the Europeans, Russians and Chinese are way ahead. Maybe we've been distracted by our own sideshow.
13
Obama is sure trying to earn that Nobel Peace Prize he won at the beginning of his Presidency!
I am happy that diplomacy has won for now. Really, what was the alternative? More war?
At least we can give diplomacy a chance, and if the Iranians don't abide by their end, all options are still on the table including war.
I am happy that diplomacy has won for now. Really, what was the alternative? More war?
At least we can give diplomacy a chance, and if the Iranians don't abide by their end, all options are still on the table including war.
17
If the world's most powerful, well-armed nation cannot afford the careful application of diplomacy in dealing with sometime adversaries, then that nation lacks vision, strength, and greatness.
59
I hope that all the Senators and Congressmen who have opposed this deal will have enough grace to resign if this deal succeeds, but knowing the toxic US politics this will never happen.
11
All the evidence you need of the unworkability of unilateral sanctions is to look at the fifty some year embargo of Cuba. Congratulations to President Obama, shoulda been president Kerry and all the Democrats who stood up and gave peace a chance. Shame on Charles Schumer and Robert Menendez and all the reactionary Republicans of congress that panned the deal before the ink was on paper. Like the door to Cuba is now ajar so is the door to Iran. Now, let us not be misled by some false flag operation run by the "defense" industry or the Israelis over the next years to scuttle this deal.
12
The Iran Nuclear deal is a deal born out of the hegemonic policies of the 1950's. We took out an elected Iranian government that Iranians favored and replaced it with a government we liked. This deal is a chance to steer the future toward a potentially better political day. The alternative is...wait there is no credible alternative. If you want to hear a cogent analysis of why this deal is the best way forward listen to what former senator George Mitchell has said. Those opposed to this deal never asked the George Mitchell's of this world, they looked for myopic naysayers to support their unsupported claims. All the money and myopic chatter can't change facts.
12
“It’s unclear if the European Union, Russia, China, India and others would continue sanctions if Congress rejects this deal. At best, sanctions would be porous, or limited to unilateral sanctions by the U.S.”
It is clear that they will drop sanctions. The current circus in Congress only let's them vent. The "treaty" is not the usual approval of 2/3, but a disapproval if the Congress can override a veto.
The world will move on. It is the US that doesn't get it and has put on a charade to placate the tribalism of religiosity in the Middle East.
It is clear that they will drop sanctions. The current circus in Congress only let's them vent. The "treaty" is not the usual approval of 2/3, but a disapproval if the Congress can override a veto.
The world will move on. It is the US that doesn't get it and has put on a charade to placate the tribalism of religiosity in the Middle East.
1
What I can't forget is the multiple messes that "W" left for his successor. No matter where you look...New Orleans, Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, budget deficits, national debt, economic recession, climate change, etc. and, oh yeah, the Iran nuclear problem.
We are very fortunate that gun happy McCain and the elitist Romney did not become president. Obama hasn't been anywhere near perfect, but he's been sane, rational, and, yes, even productive despite all odds to the contrary.
We are very fortunate that gun happy McCain and the elitist Romney did not become president. Obama hasn't been anywhere near perfect, but he's been sane, rational, and, yes, even productive despite all odds to the contrary.
12
This is terrific news. Sanity has prevailed. Much of the republican opposition to the deal has been motivated by their continued efforts to prevent any successes by Obama.
It is also great news that this is a defeat for Aipac - the lobbying group that has put the Interests of Israel ahead of the strategic interests of the U.S. And indeed the rest of the world.
An unfortunate fallout of the opposition to the deal has been the promise of another $1 1/2 billion in aid to Israel bringing the total aid to Israel to $4 1/2 billion a year. I could come up with many more worthwhile projects to spend that kind of money on. I would start with using that money to feed the poor and undernourished around the world and here in the U.S. Of course the Republican brand of Christianity would not go for that - they prefer the sword over the plow shares.
It is also great news that this is a defeat for Aipac - the lobbying group that has put the Interests of Israel ahead of the strategic interests of the U.S. And indeed the rest of the world.
An unfortunate fallout of the opposition to the deal has been the promise of another $1 1/2 billion in aid to Israel bringing the total aid to Israel to $4 1/2 billion a year. I could come up with many more worthwhile projects to spend that kind of money on. I would start with using that money to feed the poor and undernourished around the world and here in the U.S. Of course the Republican brand of Christianity would not go for that - they prefer the sword over the plow shares.
8
Now that the 34 votes are in place and everyone knows that the agreement will go into effect, how many members of Congress will re-think their "no" position, which is based on knee-jerk partisan politics, and come around to voting "yes," which is the act of a statesman? Remember, Congress, history will judge you accordingly!
8
Thanks to Senator Mikulski for joining: 29 top American physicists; the IAEA; Britian, France, Germany, china and Russia; former Mossad figures like Efraim Halevy; Gary Samone (formerly of United Against Nuclear Iran); and so many others in supporting the Iran deal, rather than listening to Benjamin Netanyahu, who has spent years warning that Iran was mere months away from the bomb.
14
Time for New Jersey's Cory Booker to get in line!
Too bad Shummer and others caved into the right wing Jewish lobby...
I expect our senators to be senators from New York or New Jersey - not Tel Aviv...
Too bad Shummer and others caved into the right wing Jewish lobby...
I expect our senators to be senators from New York or New Jersey - not Tel Aviv...
14
Write it down. As soon as the Republicans have finished posturing for their base and have done their duly elected duty of opposing the President on the deal, the big businesses and government contractors they answer to will be lining up to do business with the "rogue" regime. Some contractors have reportedly been dealing with Iran for years even though there has been a trade embargo going back forever. Even the Donald will be trying to put up a tower, and expect Chaney and Halliburton to weasel their way into the action. You'll see the same as soon as the Cuban embargo is eventually lifted. In the end all the Republicans really care about is money and the welfare of their wealthy constituents.
What hypocrites!
Thank you President Obama for having the wisdom and courage to negotiate with our adversaries instead of constantly committing the country to seemingly endless wars.
What hypocrites!
Thank you President Obama for having the wisdom and courage to negotiate with our adversaries instead of constantly committing the country to seemingly endless wars.
19
Great news!
The deal between the P5+1 and Iran is in the best interest of America and in accord with it's values. That is also true for most of the world. The only exception is the nuclear weapons armed Israeli Goliath. America does not need nor deserve a tiny dependent morally legally questionable "ally" like Israel. This could have been a disastrous loss of American influence and power.
Now to bring all of the remaining Democrats in line for the deal so that Benjamin Netanyahu's Congressional troops can not even get to a vote due to a Democratic filibuster. The final kick in Bibi's arrogant posterior.
The deal between the P5+1 and Iran is in the best interest of America and in accord with it's values. That is also true for most of the world. The only exception is the nuclear weapons armed Israeli Goliath. America does not need nor deserve a tiny dependent morally legally questionable "ally" like Israel. This could have been a disastrous loss of American influence and power.
Now to bring all of the remaining Democrats in line for the deal so that Benjamin Netanyahu's Congressional troops can not even get to a vote due to a Democratic filibuster. The final kick in Bibi's arrogant posterior.
20
Surrendering to terrorists isn't an American value.
It's the Obama Doctrine.
It's the Obama Doctrine.
I am very pleased with this "over the top" announcement, although it makes me all the more embarrassed with the position taken by my senior Senator, Chuck Schumer.
He does nothing to explain why he is opposed to this admittedly imperfect agreement, but under the circumstances probably the best we are going to get. He fails to explain how he can blithely condone Israel's massive arsenal of atomic weapons, its refusal to join the IAEA or sign the NPT. And of course it allows NO inspections of its atomic facilities.
Well I think we all know the answer: the AIPAC's supremely effective checkbook lobbying. That's our Chuck!
He does nothing to explain why he is opposed to this admittedly imperfect agreement, but under the circumstances probably the best we are going to get. He fails to explain how he can blithely condone Israel's massive arsenal of atomic weapons, its refusal to join the IAEA or sign the NPT. And of course it allows NO inspections of its atomic facilities.
Well I think we all know the answer: the AIPAC's supremely effective checkbook lobbying. That's our Chuck!
40
I agree with your disillusion with our senator, and I wrote him to inform him that he had lost my vote and my respect. I got a reply, obviously a form letter penned to send to constituents of our mindset, which starts out sounding thoughtful but in the end paraphrases our good ally Netanyahu with a very weak argument. I don't buy it.
Thank you for writing to express your support for the Iran nuclear deal. After the deal was announced I spent three weeks carefully studying the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, reading and re-reading the agreement and its annexes, questioning dozens of proponents and opponents, and seeking answers to questions that go beyond the text of the agreement that will have real consequences and must be considered.
Advocates on both sides have strong cases for their point of view that cannot simply be dismissed. This has made evaluating the agreement a difficult and deliberate endeavor, and after deep study, careful thought and considerable soul-searching, I have decided to oppose the agreement.
I oppose the agreement, not because I believe war is a viable or desirable option - in fact, I have urged a return to the bargaining table - but because I believe Iran will not change, and under this agreement it will be able to achieve its dual goals of eliminating sanctions while ultimately retaining its nuclear and non-nuclear power.
Thank you for writing to express your support for the Iran nuclear deal. After the deal was announced I spent three weeks carefully studying the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, reading and re-reading the agreement and its annexes, questioning dozens of proponents and opponents, and seeking answers to questions that go beyond the text of the agreement that will have real consequences and must be considered.
Advocates on both sides have strong cases for their point of view that cannot simply be dismissed. This has made evaluating the agreement a difficult and deliberate endeavor, and after deep study, careful thought and considerable soul-searching, I have decided to oppose the agreement.
I oppose the agreement, not because I believe war is a viable or desirable option - in fact, I have urged a return to the bargaining table - but because I believe Iran will not change, and under this agreement it will be able to achieve its dual goals of eliminating sanctions while ultimately retaining its nuclear and non-nuclear power.
Schumer's comeuppance will happen when Clinton wins the white house, the democrats win back the senate, and Chuck gets passed over for leadership.
1
This is good news. For someone who grew up during the fear-mongering of the so-called Cold War the fact that we have a president sensible enough to reach out to our 'enemies' and negotiate peaceful solutions to conflict (Cuba and Iran) is a lifelong dream.
We made plenty of deals with the Soviet Union, none of them guaranteed by anything. If it weren't for the manipulations of AIPAC, the right wing Israeli government and their Republican toadies this would be hailed by all as the breakthrough it is.
Fear not Senator McCain and PM Netanyahu. There is always the option of starting the war you so crave. For the time being, though, we won't be sending more young Americans to their deaths to help prop up the right wing Israeli government. Enough Americans died in Iraq for the same cynical, craven, manipulative ends.
I am thankful that we now have a government that can see through such charades. I hope we are smart enough to elect as our next President someone wise enough to further distance this country from the Israeli right wing. They are no friends of this country. In fact, just the opposite. I would rather we take our risks with the Iranians. Without a return to more progressive government in Israel, in the long term the Iranians may grow to be better friends.
We made plenty of deals with the Soviet Union, none of them guaranteed by anything. If it weren't for the manipulations of AIPAC, the right wing Israeli government and their Republican toadies this would be hailed by all as the breakthrough it is.
Fear not Senator McCain and PM Netanyahu. There is always the option of starting the war you so crave. For the time being, though, we won't be sending more young Americans to their deaths to help prop up the right wing Israeli government. Enough Americans died in Iraq for the same cynical, craven, manipulative ends.
I am thankful that we now have a government that can see through such charades. I hope we are smart enough to elect as our next President someone wise enough to further distance this country from the Israeli right wing. They are no friends of this country. In fact, just the opposite. I would rather we take our risks with the Iranians. Without a return to more progressive government in Israel, in the long term the Iranians may grow to be better friends.
21
Of course, support for the deal is not enthusiastic. The point of negotiations is that you negotiate and compromise. The final deal is the product of intense compromise and reflects a technical and political practice of realpolitik--what is good enough. The US doesn't run the world anymore, and congress isn't about to grasp that fact any time soon. Their behavior over this deal demonstrates why international treaties have been pursued as executive action over the last 40 years. If the legislature demands congress act like children, that's all we'll get, and the sum of our diplomacy will be war and temper tantrums.
325
If the United States' international Treaties were meant to be simply the subject of "executive action" then one wonders why the US Constitution requires the President to conduct its foreign relations by and with consent of the Senate? President Wilson had the same idea at Versailles and yet the Senate refused to yield to his brinkmanship.
The U.S. never did run the world. Those who imagined it was so were the ones who ensured that we could no longer position ourselves as a leader on a path to a better world.
I am thankful that the president has authority to act in this instance without legislative approval. This congress is unwilling, or incapable, to act on any matter of substance such as immigration, environment, infrastructure, or appropriations. They spend their time debating women's reproductive functions, and religious zealotry.
Finally they are making the better decision. This accord is good for both sides, internationally and domestically. It’s internationally good for Iran, because she can play a better and more diplomatic role in Middle East and around the world, she can also enhance her relations with America and thaw the ice of 35 hostility between the two country, most importantly Iran can flourish economically, and etc. It’s internationally good for US too, because this accord will preserve American’s prior role in the world, it prevents US’s “save the world” foreign policy to be tarnished if the other international powers refused to cooperate in sanctions regimes or it finally will be lifted automatically. It is also possible that the two countries cooperate over the Middle East escalating issues. But domestically as Obama has been stating repeatedly, is that Iran is on the road of cultural, sociological, economical, and even philosophical transition, and this deal will help this trend. You can see and feel this trend everywhere in Iran, most obviously in universities, in undergraduate’s political debates, in the essays of Iranian’s political and international professors. You just have to take a look at Humans of New York Page in Facebook to feel this trend.
250
My feelings exactly! This agreement buys us time not only to monitor Iran's nuclear activities but also to change hearts and minds. The majority of Iran's population -- 60% -- is under 30! They want to be part of the world community and they don't want sanctions to depress their lifestyle. Iran was once our ally. The U.S. did what it had to -- take a bold step for change, accepting that everything has its risks.
1
Robert Stundtner,
It is obvious you are in a small minority of our Armed Forces that support this complete submission by Obama.
Your post leads me to believe that you support the exponential decrease of our Armed Forces by Obama.
GOD BLESS AMERICA
GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS
It is obvious you are in a small minority of our Armed Forces that support this complete submission by Obama.
Your post leads me to believe that you support the exponential decrease of our Armed Forces by Obama.
GOD BLESS AMERICA
GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS
Alireza in Iran, who's posted that:
"It’s internationally good for Iran, because she can play a better and more diplomatic role in Middle East and around the world,"
Alas, we see present Iran's ' diplomatic role', from Lebanon Hezbolla, Syria's Assad, Yemen's Houties etcetera - no to mention past global anti Jewish terror bombing in S. America, and routine declaration that Israel must be eliminated.
A star-studded 'diplomatic role'. Isn't it?
"It’s internationally good for Iran, because she can play a better and more diplomatic role in Middle East and around the world,"
Alas, we see present Iran's ' diplomatic role', from Lebanon Hezbolla, Syria's Assad, Yemen's Houties etcetera - no to mention past global anti Jewish terror bombing in S. America, and routine declaration that Israel must be eliminated.
A star-studded 'diplomatic role'. Isn't it?
Obama's Iran Deal was negotiated for TWO years with radical Islamic terrorists who chant "Death to America" and as of Sept 1st, refer to America as "the Great Satan."
No GOP input, Republicans had NO hand or role in this.
Now that Obama has surrendered completely to Iran and it is too late to go back and actually GET a deal, the news media backs our politicians into a corner to back this idiotic legacy grabbing ball of nothing.
Way to go.
No GOP input, Republicans had NO hand or role in this.
Now that Obama has surrendered completely to Iran and it is too late to go back and actually GET a deal, the news media backs our politicians into a corner to back this idiotic legacy grabbing ball of nothing.
Way to go.
4
Sadly for you, we are not declaring war and sending troops into harm's way, the favorite pastime of Republican draft dodgers who, like W. Bush, only want to lead but never had the courage to fight.
"No GOP input, Republicans had NO hand or role in this."
The "Death to America" rhetoric from the right in Iran is no different than the "Bomb Iran" and "Axis of Evil" rhetoric we hear from the right in the U.S. Everyone knows this but the right like to pretend it doesn't.
As for "No GOP input" – like with everything else Obama has tried to do over the last six years, if the GOP had been willing to constructively collaborate instead of always willfully obstructing, they could have had input.
So yes, all credit goes to Obama and the Democrats.
The "Death to America" rhetoric from the right in Iran is no different than the "Bomb Iran" and "Axis of Evil" rhetoric we hear from the right in the U.S. Everyone knows this but the right like to pretend it doesn't.
As for "No GOP input" – like with everything else Obama has tried to do over the last six years, if the GOP had been willing to constructively collaborate instead of always willfully obstructing, they could have had input.
So yes, all credit goes to Obama and the Democrats.
Utter and complete nonsense.
It was Barack Obama who fooled you with that bogus rhetoric that the only alternative to his plan was war.
I am a lawyer with a history degree. It could actually be genetically impossible to fool me.
It was Barack Obama who fooled you with that bogus rhetoric that the only alternative to his plan was war.
I am a lawyer with a history degree. It could actually be genetically impossible to fool me.
Only in America. Obama gets 34 Senate votes to go ahead with his foolish Iran deal and 66 votes to scrap the absurd deal and that result means Obama gets to go ahead with his bad deal. We can only hope that the next President is Donald Trump and he will ,overturn the deal and put back the sanctions if congress is still in control of GOP.
Just for arguments sake if Iran completely destroys Israel what do we do?
Do we hold Obama and the Democrats responsible?
Just for arguments sake if Iran completely destroys Israel what do we do?
Do we hold Obama and the Democrats responsible?
3
NYChap---Bush, they will blame it on Bush.
Someday in the future (I may not be here to see it) history will look back and recognize just how lucky the US was to have Obama's leadership at this point in time. I shudder to even think about what a disaster the continuation of the Cheney/Bush policies would have been. There is no assurance that this will work either but the other side has had months to propose a viable alternative and their silence has been deafening.
34
Will that day be before or after Iran uses its nuclear weapons to turn Israel into a parking lot?
The Obama Legacy.
The Obama Legacy.
Iran hates Jews, hates Israel, hates America.
We're going to let them "inspect" their own weapons.
They are the largest single state that funds terrorism on this planet. And we're giving them $150,000,000,000 US dollars to do just that.
Whose side is this president on?
Whose side are Democrats on?
We're going to let them "inspect" their own weapons.
They are the largest single state that funds terrorism on this planet. And we're giving them $150,000,000,000 US dollars to do just that.
Whose side is this president on?
Whose side are Democrats on?
4
We are "giving" them nothing.
And thinking in terms of "sides" is infantile. Things are a tad more complicated than in the schoolyard.
And thinking in terms of "sides" is infantile. Things are a tad more complicated than in the schoolyard.
A very good result for America. The fact that the leaders of the revolutionary guard are freaking out is a clear indicator that western influence and philosophies of freedom and individual rights is on the rise. its just a matter of time until the vast majority of Iranian youth vote to fully integrate with the world. We need to ensure that we are there to support those efforts.
13
Needed 1/3 of the Senate to approve. Just barely got there.
Note to American Jews: You paid for this guy's elections, you supported him in the polls. Heck, you even embarrassed yourselves as you tried to explain away his gaffes in Syria, Libya (Benghazi) and in Afghanistan.
Now your President has turned his back on you, putting the Jewish homeland in great peril of nuclear annihilation.
How do you like him now?
Note to American Jews: You paid for this guy's elections, you supported him in the polls. Heck, you even embarrassed yourselves as you tried to explain away his gaffes in Syria, Libya (Benghazi) and in Afghanistan.
Now your President has turned his back on you, putting the Jewish homeland in great peril of nuclear annihilation.
How do you like him now?
3
This post is Anti-Semitic in so many ways; blaming the Jews, equating all Jews with Zionism, and implying all Jews think the same way.
1
As a non-practicing American Jew, your offensive and barbed rhetorical fear-mongering does not have me shaking in my boots.
Name one thing that Netanyahu or AIPAC has done to promote Middle Eastern stability.
Name one thing that Netanyahu or AIPAC has done to promote Middle Eastern stability.
1
We like him just fine.
Thanks Obama, for making efforts towards peace rather than war.
Thanks Obama, for making efforts towards peace rather than war.
12
It's called a "victory?" For whom? Obama and the Democrats? Iran? Certainly not the American people. Why did we need this deal? It's just another partisan jab disguised as diplomacy and a bit of petty revenge over those who are not a member of Obama's adulation society.
5
“The 'unbreakable' US-Israel alliance started to break down,” notes one commentator.
It really hasn’t. Think back to the rift between President Clinton and the UK premier, John Major over Northern Ireland. Things got testy. But it’s over and the US-UK alliance is as strong as ever.
Similarly with Israel, both the US and the UK have committed to the defense of Israel (which was evidenced by the allied support of Israel against Hamas recently). That commitment will not waver and is fully supported by France and Germany.
Hopefully Mr. Netanyahu knows who his true friends are. As much as he may like to think so, they are not in Riyadh, where the Saudi Administration will not countenance an Israel embassy, even though there is a Palestinian one. No, and with the obvious exception of Germany, his friends are in countries whose fabric owes much to the presence of Jewish people.
It really hasn’t. Think back to the rift between President Clinton and the UK premier, John Major over Northern Ireland. Things got testy. But it’s over and the US-UK alliance is as strong as ever.
Similarly with Israel, both the US and the UK have committed to the defense of Israel (which was evidenced by the allied support of Israel against Hamas recently). That commitment will not waver and is fully supported by France and Germany.
Hopefully Mr. Netanyahu knows who his true friends are. As much as he may like to think so, they are not in Riyadh, where the Saudi Administration will not countenance an Israel embassy, even though there is a Palestinian one. No, and with the obvious exception of Germany, his friends are in countries whose fabric owes much to the presence of Jewish people.
5
“The 'unbreakable' US-Israel alliance started to break down,” notes one commentator.
Have they stopped taking our money? No, thought not.
Have they stopped taking our money? No, thought not.
1
Wendy Sherman was Congresswoman Barbara Mikulski’s Chief-of-Staff for three years and served as campaign manager for Mikulski's first successful Senate campaign.
Our country is blessed by amazing coincidences like these.
Our country is blessed by amazing coincidences like these.
6
My thoughts are Netanyahu helped this deal be passed. His speech in the well of the people’s house did more to force people to take sides than anything else. To insult our sitting President was an affront. Bibi bet the farm and lost. Everyone knew the Senior Senator from New York was going to vote the way he did. I wonder does he still have a lock on Harry Reid’s job. Giving peace a chance should always win out. War should only be on the table when all else fails. To say the nations that went to the mat to get this deal are rubes is not a great way to lead the world. Thanking all who gave peace a chance.
39
Nuclear weapons have loomed over my entire life of 67 years. I have supported every effort to reduce the threat since the earliest treaties. My security clearances as an electronics technician in the Navy also provided me with the opportunity to serve as a nuclear weapons watch. The advocate for nonproliferation and disarmament became a deadly serious guardian.
After being infuriated by my senior senator's craven decision to oppose the agreement between the major powers and Iran, I am deeply relieved to know the agreement will not be obstructed by a partisan and/or politically shameless Congress.
After being infuriated by my senior senator's craven decision to oppose the agreement between the major powers and Iran, I am deeply relieved to know the agreement will not be obstructed by a partisan and/or politically shameless Congress.
705
The people's will and the will of Congress, a significant part of his own party are firmly against this decision. He is a dictator probably making deals as President to buy votes that will be enough to allow him avoid vetoing this treaty. We should wait until Congress actually debates the issue to see if he can win votes by making the agreement better rather than scoring a political victory by buying his own votes with the imperial presidency he is presiding over.
I agree with you about Schumer. He betrayed his President and his Party. I will never vote for or support him again.
The big question now for organizations like AIPAC and the Israeli government is now that you have gone out of your way to vilify democrats for not supporting you how will you ever get them to respect what you have to say? The real tragedy is they have alienated democrats like me and as long as Netanyahu and the rest of the right wing Jewish organizations like AIPAC are out there bad mouthing us they should not expect our unconditional support. Plus, their actions have probably tanked Chuck Schumer's bid for majority leader because I have no intention of contributing one dime to any Democrats who supports him.
20
You do realize that 100% of Republicans are voting against this? Are you implying that the Republicans are puppets of AIPAC and the Israeli government? And do you understand what you are REALLY implying?
Where is Chuck? My Senator never misses a chance to get his picture taken. Chuck has been missing lately. Menedez legal fees are being paid for by who? Really understand why folks like Trump. These Senators represent someone other than us.
1
I get what he is saying. Why can't you
It should never have been this hard.
It's not a good thing for American foreign policy to be so warped by the interests of a small foreign country. If Israel can do this much, how much can China or Russia do if they set themselves to it?
It's not a good thing for American foreign policy to be so warped by the interests of a small foreign country. If Israel can do this much, how much can China or Russia do if they set themselves to it?
17
Oh, such a delight during the torrid, hot summer to see Obama outwit the elephants yet once again. Paralleled by the Republican implosion made even more embarressing by their clown campaign with maestro The Donald in charge. So deserving are the scoundrels.
22
Had the deal not gone through, as Joe Kline has pointed out, Iran would likely have taken the high road and said this deal was negotiated with the world and it will adhere to the agreement, thereby making America look globally inept and powerless, since every one of our negotiating partners–not just the Russians and Chinese, but the Europeans as well–will stick by the accord.
12
This headline was a wonderful bit of news after lunch and will serve as a dessert.
The Israeli people deserve a Prime Minister that better serves their true interests than a schemer such as Benjamin Netanyahu.
The Israeli people deserve a Prime Minister that better serves their true interests than a schemer such as Benjamin Netanyahu.
23
Bibi Netanyahu must be having apoplexy.
Bibi met with Senator Tom Cotton in Jerusalem this week. Tom Cotton, the guy who wrote an open letter to the Iranians that he got 47 traitorous Senators to sign.
Bibi backed the loser in the 2012 Presidential election.
Looks like Bibi also backed the losers in Congress on this issue.
I guess he is maintaining his "perfect record".
Bibi met with Senator Tom Cotton in Jerusalem this week. Tom Cotton, the guy who wrote an open letter to the Iranians that he got 47 traitorous Senators to sign.
Bibi backed the loser in the 2012 Presidential election.
Looks like Bibi also backed the losers in Congress on this issue.
I guess he is maintaining his "perfect record".
23
"Despite the continuing rancor on Capitol Hill, there was also growing recognition, even among some accord opponents, that the other nations — Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia, and especially Iran — would be unwilling to renegotiate the agreement even if Congress formally rejected it."
And it took those clowns how long to figure that out?
And it took those clowns how long to figure that out?
5
John Kerry, President Obama, and those at the table brought home a strong treaty in a difficult situation. They are deservedly proud despite the whining of the obstructionists and the belligerent grunts of the warmongers.
I am a long-time supporter of Israel and of Democrats....but if the DSCC is expecting me to donate one more $, Mr. Schumer needs to move on. I have no interest in supporting any organization he's associated with.
I am a long-time supporter of Israel and of Democrats....but if the DSCC is expecting me to donate one more $, Mr. Schumer needs to move on. I have no interest in supporting any organization he's associated with.
22
I would like to hear back from those who support this deal - What's your reaction if Iran would threaten the US, Israel or any other nation with their nuclear arsenal at some point within the next ten year?
3
How would that work, exactly? Threaten to blow up Wellesley, MA, for example? And then do it? That would be a death sentence for Iran. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we have 5,000 or so firecrackers to their 0. And Israel has perhaps 100. So explain how that sort of threat would matter, even when 0 changes to 5.
5
What nuclear arsenal? They don't have one now, and they don't have any way to make even a single bomb for at least the next 15 years.
Hard to take your question seriously, so I assume you're actually writing for the Onion.
Hard to take your question seriously, so I assume you're actually writing for the Onion.
2
Then we respond appropriately, destroying them if necessary. Happy now?
And, 15 years hence, when Iran re-joins the fraternity of freely-elected democracies, a fraternity from which the United States expelled them back in 1953 by overthrowing Mossadegh and installing the puppet Shah Reza Pahlavi, will you admit that your side was wrong?
And, 15 years hence, when Iran re-joins the fraternity of freely-elected democracies, a fraternity from which the United States expelled them back in 1953 by overthrowing Mossadegh and installing the puppet Shah Reza Pahlavi, will you admit that your side was wrong?
1
This is great news. It is, however, hard to believe that so far the U.S. Has only 34 senators supporting this major diplomatic accomplishment. I really do hope other senators and politicians will come out and support this agreement that is both a peaceful and clear thinking document for peace and safety. May all the senators yet to make their decision take a quiet moment and then join the courageous, clear headed thinking of these 34 senators that stand with most of the free world in their support of the Iran Nuclear Deal. Stand for diplomacy, stand for security, stare down the Hawks, defy the insidious lobby efforts, and stand for peace.
11
Congratulations, Mr. President. For choosing peace instead of war.
And there should be some economic gains for the country and for rest the world
on account of this.
Well done, sir.
And there should be some economic gains for the country and for rest the world
on account of this.
Well done, sir.
26
"President Obama's Iran accord"??? Wasn't this negotiated with five other nations as well?
6
The President "won"? 34 out of a hundred, all in one party (his), and he won?
This guy is going to push through an agreement while Congress strongly opposes it? On the corrupt theory that the only reason Republicans are opposed is that they will oppose Obama reflexively on anything.
I don't know what the definition of an alternative universe should be, but one in which this happens would be one.
Funny thing is, what Obama does not seem to realize is, this agreement brings us closer to war with Iran (or others in the Middle East), not further.
Intellectuals should not negotiate deals. Thought we'd have learned that with Woodrow Wilson, but I guess not.
This guy is going to push through an agreement while Congress strongly opposes it? On the corrupt theory that the only reason Republicans are opposed is that they will oppose Obama reflexively on anything.
I don't know what the definition of an alternative universe should be, but one in which this happens would be one.
Funny thing is, what Obama does not seem to realize is, this agreement brings us closer to war with Iran (or others in the Middle East), not further.
Intellectuals should not negotiate deals. Thought we'd have learned that with Woodrow Wilson, but I guess not.
4
Thanks Dems for the largest transfer of money, and eventually arms (nuclear and conventional), in history to a terrorist state that calls for the annihilation of Israel and the death to America!
Peace in our time! Trust Iran.......because they never lie.
Peace in our time! Trust Iran.......because they never lie.
3
Melissa,
Do you acknowlege the alternative to not signing the deal?
The other countries will stop the sanctions, and Iran will have the Bomb in 90+ days.
OR we can stall them for 15 years.....
You can guess what the rational choice is, even if you can't admit it.
Do you acknowlege the alternative to not signing the deal?
The other countries will stop the sanctions, and Iran will have the Bomb in 90+ days.
OR we can stall them for 15 years.....
You can guess what the rational choice is, even if you can't admit it.
1
Like Billions we give to IsraEL every year!- for what?
3
Senator Mikulski will be leaving DC after 2017. This woman has not been afraid to do what is right. We are grateful for her service through the years and now.
33
Kudos to President Obama and Secretary Kerry for their major accomplishment--getting Russia, China, Germany, UK, France and Iran to come to the table and agree on an effective, verifiable agreement to prevent Iran from pursuing the development of nuclear weapons. This could even be a step toward resolving conflicts in the Middle East.
25
Every once in a while, a few people in Washington behave like grown-ups. If only it were catching and more stood up to AIPAC.
31
I suspect that when this deal blows up there won't be any Democratic senators lining up to proclaim their support.
6
What about when it succeeds? Will the ones who oppose resign?
1
Watching the Congressional drama play out, from hosting Netanyahu's theatrical performance to the nail-biting yes/no vote counts, is a reminder why foreign relations should be the purview of the President, not of fickle legislators.
18
I'd like to think that, speaking as a former military officer, my writing Bob Casey to support the deal had some impact. Probably not, but it's a nice thought nonetheless.
14
Are we really to believe that the fix was not in? The slobs on both sides of the congressional isle triumph again at the expense of the hard working and middle class Americans. Let the lies and chest thumping for the fake Iran opposers begin. That accompanied by the buy off of the "safe" seats sets the stage for, just another payoff and elite advertising campaign culminating in the same disgusting reelect me "I'm alright screw you" result.
Until we elect some human beings to office and demand that they live under the same rules the rest of us must and the stupid realize that social "equality" is really a code for social subjugation of a middle class, with media assistance, we will rail against the wind.
Until we elect some human beings to office and demand that they live under the same rules the rest of us must and the stupid realize that social "equality" is really a code for social subjugation of a middle class, with media assistance, we will rail against the wind.
There will be great rejoicing in the Democrat party and on the streets of Iran today. Perhaps even brief pauses in the "Death to America!" chants on Iran's streets for a few "We love Obama!" and "He actually fell for it!" interspersions.
For the rest of the world that lives here on planet earth within range of Iran's missiles– not so much.
For the rest of the world that lives here on planet earth within range of Iran's missiles– not so much.
3
Jack, it's the hard-liners in Iran who completely agree with you that this accord should have been rejected. Kinda makes you think? Hopefully?
Jack,
There is a difference between a noun and an adjective.
A noun refers to a person, place, or thing.
An adjective modifies nouns.
A Democrat is a person (a noun).
If you wish to modify the noun "Party", you need an adjective.
That adjective would be "Democratic."
This is basic grade school grammar.
There is a difference between a noun and an adjective.
A noun refers to a person, place, or thing.
An adjective modifies nouns.
A Democrat is a person (a noun).
If you wish to modify the noun "Party", you need an adjective.
That adjective would be "Democratic."
This is basic grade school grammar.
@Dectra
Thanks for pointing that out. I will try to keep it in mind.
Thanks for pointing that out. I will try to keep it in mind.
As he runs for President, Senator Marco Rubio should have his feet held to the fire for signing the open letter to Iran casting doubt on the accords' validity. For someone who says he is terrified by the thought of a nuclear Iran, he (like the other naysayers) sure are quick to write off the best bet to keep that from happening.
19
J Street, a pro-Israel lobbying outfit, supports this deal. Boehner and Bibi Netanyahu, Boehner's perpetually partisan intruder into American foreign policy, go down in political flames. This is a positive. Republicans, including Bibi, offer us no alternative but war, which they would have others fight for them.
47
Thank God for peaceful progress!
20
Gee. Sometimes God really is on our side...
Schumer is inviolate in NY, my former homeland, but let us hope he becomes a minority in his own party.
And let Israel*s destruction of its neighbors be the key to its own destruction as a theocracy. Were it not for its destabilization of formerly viable, secular Arab nations, we would not have the flood of desperate migrants the NY Times thinks Europe should be responsible for.
The Irani people are dying to see the end of the mullahs* regime--a regime that we precipitated by our installation of and support of the Shah. There*s more blood and suffering on our hands than most Americans are capable of understanding.
Justice often comes slowly. Israel does not want a rival state whose people are as worldly and educated as its own. Too bad. You've got one...
Schumer is inviolate in NY, my former homeland, but let us hope he becomes a minority in his own party.
And let Israel*s destruction of its neighbors be the key to its own destruction as a theocracy. Were it not for its destabilization of formerly viable, secular Arab nations, we would not have the flood of desperate migrants the NY Times thinks Europe should be responsible for.
The Irani people are dying to see the end of the mullahs* regime--a regime that we precipitated by our installation of and support of the Shah. There*s more blood and suffering on our hands than most Americans are capable of understanding.
Justice often comes slowly. Israel does not want a rival state whose people are as worldly and educated as its own. Too bad. You've got one...
18
Agreed. And I hope other NY Democrats like me are able to swing our support to someone besides Schumer in the next Senate Democratic Primary. He is voting against our interests here, and it's time to find someone with better judgement.
1
I don't know which deal is better...this one or the greenhouse gas reduction deal with China....In the end I think Iran is getting even more than China!!!
Way to go!
Way to go!
5
So what should Jews opposed to the deal do now?
1. Make up a list of everyone who supported the Iran deal and hold on to the documents needed to prove this. Supporters of the deal are already beginning to claim they fought against it from the very beginning.
2. Call your local voter registration office and inquire about registering as a Republican or Independent.
3. Start returning all Democratic campaign literature you receive in the mail to the Post Office marked “Addressee-No-Longer-Interested-In-Receiving-This-Mail.”
4. Tell your children that any involvement they have with J-Street or B.D.S. will be remembered unfavorably when you write your will, and mean it.
5. Call or write letters to Republican Congressmen and Senators who opposed the deal and thank them for their support of Israel. Consider making contributions to their political campaign funds.
6. Contact Christian leaders in your community who opposed the deal and thank them for their efforts on behalf of Israel.
7. Add AIPAC to the list of organizations you make regular contributions to.
9. If you ever receive a letter asking for a contribution to President Obama’s Presidential Library and are tempted to respond favorably, make an appointment with your doctor to find out what’s wrong with you. For this deal, he deserves a library?
10, Cancel your subscription to the NY Times.
11. Go to shul this Shabbos and Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur and think about what more all us need to be doing?
1. Make up a list of everyone who supported the Iran deal and hold on to the documents needed to prove this. Supporters of the deal are already beginning to claim they fought against it from the very beginning.
2. Call your local voter registration office and inquire about registering as a Republican or Independent.
3. Start returning all Democratic campaign literature you receive in the mail to the Post Office marked “Addressee-No-Longer-Interested-In-Receiving-This-Mail.”
4. Tell your children that any involvement they have with J-Street or B.D.S. will be remembered unfavorably when you write your will, and mean it.
5. Call or write letters to Republican Congressmen and Senators who opposed the deal and thank them for their support of Israel. Consider making contributions to their political campaign funds.
6. Contact Christian leaders in your community who opposed the deal and thank them for their efforts on behalf of Israel.
7. Add AIPAC to the list of organizations you make regular contributions to.
9. If you ever receive a letter asking for a contribution to President Obama’s Presidential Library and are tempted to respond favorably, make an appointment with your doctor to find out what’s wrong with you. For this deal, he deserves a library?
10, Cancel your subscription to the NY Times.
11. Go to shul this Shabbos and Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur and think about what more all us need to be doing?
7
Crazy talk, hopefully most Jews are more sensible and. Start planning for this deal to succeed and adjust your thinking accordingly.
2
On the Day of Atonement maybe think about being less vindictive?
Wonderful list! But it should be a Huffington Post click-bait listicle, not in the New York Times.
Satire, right? Sometimes my satire radar is not as finely-tuned as it should be. It is a difficult genre to do well.
Good, creative list. But you cannot be serious – are you?
Satire, right? Sometimes my satire radar is not as finely-tuned as it should be. It is a difficult genre to do well.
Good, creative list. But you cannot be serious – are you?
1
It should be obvious by now that the problem with the accord is only in the "mind" of the Republican Party. The rest of the world seems fine with it, not because it is a perfect agreement, but because it was the best that everyone could do. The Republicans live in a universe all their own and are in the process of being isolated by the rest of the world and a fair part of their own country. It's kind of ironic, isn't it? One cat escapes the trap of self isolation and another falls in to it.
20
Congress needs to pass the resolution condemning this disastrous treaty. Obama needs to be exposed as an imperial leader who in vetoing the resolution will show a complete disdain for the concerns of the elected representatives of the American people and our allies.
When Iran gets the bomb (guaranteed by this treaty) I hope the American people will rise up and demand that Obama and his administration be sentenced for treason.
When Iran gets the bomb (guaranteed by this treaty) I hope the American people will rise up and demand that Obama and his administration be sentenced for treason.
3
Go Ahead... Democrats... Support the "Faustian" Deal"..
...and as you do just remember... what Iran said TODAY...
Ref: NYT Article - 9/2/15 : U.S. Remains the ‘Great Satan,’ Hard-Liners in Iran Say :
...."The head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, Maj. Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, announced plans to 'expand the reach of Iran’s missiles' and warned that despite the nuclear deal, America was still the “same Great Satan.”...
"Mr. Jafari said the range of missiles — now 2,000 kilometers, about 1,242 miles — would be increased...
...His remarks were echoed by Mohammad Yazdi, the head of an influential clerical council, who warned that the nuclear agreement should not portend any broader political reconciliation with the United States...“We should not change our foreign policy of opposition to "America, our No. 1 enemy", ” Mr. Yazdi said, ...“The U.S. will take this dream...[ to its " Grave,” he was quoted as saying...
Ha Ha Ha ... on the Great USA ...
...and as you do just remember... what Iran said TODAY...
Ref: NYT Article - 9/2/15 : U.S. Remains the ‘Great Satan,’ Hard-Liners in Iran Say :
...."The head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, Maj. Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, announced plans to 'expand the reach of Iran’s missiles' and warned that despite the nuclear deal, America was still the “same Great Satan.”...
"Mr. Jafari said the range of missiles — now 2,000 kilometers, about 1,242 miles — would be increased...
...His remarks were echoed by Mohammad Yazdi, the head of an influential clerical council, who warned that the nuclear agreement should not portend any broader political reconciliation with the United States...“We should not change our foreign policy of opposition to "America, our No. 1 enemy", ” Mr. Yazdi said, ...“The U.S. will take this dream...[ to its " Grave,” he was quoted as saying...
Ha Ha Ha ... on the Great USA ...
6
I'd like to know if the Boehners and McConnells of the world along with the rest of the Republicans actually, read, listened and carefully analyzed the deal before reaching their conclusion. Or, is it more likely that they are towing the party and Netanyahu line. It seems for those who are voting for the deal that painstaking consideration was required followed by a 'this is the least of all evils - Yes'. I believe that to be true, even for Obama. That's what we should expect from all our leaders on all sides of the aisle.
11
Opponents are great at offering criticism, but have completely failed to offer a better solution that is even remotely credible. The effort to make a partisan issue out of foreign policy is disgraceful.
61
34 votes for. What a stunning victory for the President!
21
As you know, ExPeter, several GOP Senators opposed the deal before they even knew what it contained.
What you mean is, what an indictment of those members of the legislative branch of our government who prefer to run our country into the ground rather than support any initiative that comes from our unacceptably black president. And of those members who prefer to act in the best interests of a foreign country rather than in our best interests.
2
Not really. That means there's 66 votes against. Obama again ignoring the will of the people. What a sad legacy.
1
That's rich, the filibuster happy Republicans asking for an vote up or down. It should be recognized the right wing settler dominated gov't of Netanyahu has embarrassed the Republicans in Congress.
162
Someone needs to tell Corker that'll happen when Boehner permanently dispenses with the Hastert Rule, a greater subversion of majority rule than the filibuster ever was.
I could not be more pleased for this accomplishment by President Obama. A move to peace for which I am grateful.
307
RE: Nancy -Great Neck
Believe it or not this is an accomplishment for USA c/o President Obama - we too often make these matters of State personal when it involves all Americans - at least those whose allegiances are thereto.
Believe it or not this is an accomplishment for USA c/o President Obama - we too often make these matters of State personal when it involves all Americans - at least those whose allegiances are thereto.
"Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, is asking Democrats not to filibuster the resolution so that it can come to a final up-or-down vote."
Oh, that's RICH, coming from a Republican. Was there any legislation they didn't filibuster when the Democrats were in the majority?
Oh, that's RICH, coming from a Republican. Was there any legislation they didn't filibuster when the Democrats were in the majority?
348
I look forward to our next Republican President needing to get Senate approval to conduct foreign policy and diplomacy.
(Had anyone else noticed the Republicans and most Democrats are more loyal to the Israeli head of state than the US head of state?)
(Had anyone else noticed the Republicans and most Democrats are more loyal to the Israeli head of state than the US head of state?)
97
History will look back on this time in America's military-industrial complex -- one that includes Dick "The Penguin" Cheney's war rants, Wall Street excesses, middle-class serfdom, school-loan burdens, healthcare exorbitancies, Donald Trump's clown car, and childhood hunger in the richest country on Earth (to name a few features of our pitiful landscape) -- and wonder how this sensible act of diplomacy actually occurred.
264
"Sensible act of diplomacy actually occured"
Yes, hard to comprehend is it not.
My only hope is that there is no machiavellian plot to undermine the agreement at some later date. I have an itch in my elbow, it could be a sign of such a scheme or it could be a change in the weather, let us hope it is the later.
Yes, hard to comprehend is it not.
My only hope is that there is no machiavellian plot to undermine the agreement at some later date. I have an itch in my elbow, it could be a sign of such a scheme or it could be a change in the weather, let us hope it is the later.
1
But, Delving Eye, you forgot to say that we are an "exceptional" country! [To be fair, we are in many good ways, and also not in many other not-so-good ways -- pointing out the absurdity of American Exceptionalism. Can't wait to read Dick and Liz Cheney's new book.
While I consider the agreement basically meaningless since Iran was doing what it wanted to do without the agreement and, given the weak inspection and enforcement provisions, can do what it wants to do even with the agreement.
I do not like that a precedent is set that we in a democratic republican country can approve an agreement with just 1/3 of our legislators. It is an affront of our constitutional system that provides that these types of foreign agreements should have atleast a majority of the house and senate be undermined by political gamesmanship. We tread on dangerous ground when we subvert due process and the negatives avoiding the prescribed process may come back to haunt us.
Regardless of the good of the End in a democracy the means to the End is most important.
I do not like that a precedent is set that we in a democratic republican country can approve an agreement with just 1/3 of our legislators. It is an affront of our constitutional system that provides that these types of foreign agreements should have atleast a majority of the house and senate be undermined by political gamesmanship. We tread on dangerous ground when we subvert due process and the negatives avoiding the prescribed process may come back to haunt us.
Regardless of the good of the End in a democracy the means to the End is most important.
10
"While I consider the agreement basically meaningless"....Perhaps you haven't noticed, but the "meaningless" agreement has the backing of the international community including all permanent members of the UN Security Council; which means that if Iran cheats on the agreement the stage has already been set to secure support for further more forceful international action.
11
I think it's an affront to our democracy that a foreign power can attempt influence our foreign policy by buying Senators and Congressmen.
To clarify, the deal is an executive agreement which all presidents have used on many occasions. It does not require Congressional input at all (this is in contrast to a treaty). Congress has the authority to override such an agreement by passing a law (which has greater authority) but of course, that law is subject to the same rules as all laws and must either be signed by the president or override his veto. It was this type of law that is at issue here, and which has now apparently failed to achieve the votes to override the veto. Hence the agreement will stand.
FWIW, any future president can rescind this agreement (as Walker has promised to do).
Process-wise your general point is sound and I'd question the propriety of a petulant Congress inserting itself unprecedentedly into foreign affairs which have always been the purview of the executive. It makes the US look weak as other leaders wonder whether any discussions or agreements have any value if Congress will legislate over them in a desperate attempt to win votes for the next election.
FWIW, any future president can rescind this agreement (as Walker has promised to do).
Process-wise your general point is sound and I'd question the propriety of a petulant Congress inserting itself unprecedentedly into foreign affairs which have always been the purview of the executive. It makes the US look weak as other leaders wonder whether any discussions or agreements have any value if Congress will legislate over them in a desperate attempt to win votes for the next election.
Great news. Glad to know that Addleson and Israel don't have total control of our congress and we can run our own country as we see fit with the help of a determined president. Right or wrong money and foreign pressure aren't in charge on this one.
120
'Glad to know that Addleson and Israel don't have total control of our congress,Determined President' , just owned by the Millions of $$$$$ from George Soros and Company. Have to wonder what the Dems are going to get from anywhere between $50 Billion to $150 Billion from Iran?
Benyamin Netanyahu and Israel's political leadership have made a colossal foreign policy miscalculation. To overestimate the Jewish state control of American Middle Eastern policy.
Netanyahu's speech at the US Congress -- opposing President Obama's decision of diplomatic rapprochement with Iran -- will go in history as a pivotal moment. The 'unbreakable' US-Israel alliance started to break down.
Netanyahu's speech at the US Congress -- opposing President Obama's decision of diplomatic rapprochement with Iran -- will go in history as a pivotal moment. The 'unbreakable' US-Israel alliance started to break down.
212
It can't happen soon enough.
Tail's been wagging the dog on this one far too long already.
Tail's been wagging the dog on this one far too long already.
2
I agree. I despise Netanyahu; how he has tried to embarrass our President in our own country, how he has tried to meddle in U.S. politics and elections and how he has gone about all but destroying any chance for peace with his settlement policy and the stealing of Palestinian homes and land. I wish I could say my feelings about Israel as a whole have not been harmed as well but they have and that is unfortunate.
2
This should not be a partisan matter but it certainly looks that way now. All Republicans have or will oppose the deal and the President has used the power of the presidency and leader of his party to enforce discipline on the Democratic caucus. He seems to have accomplished this by presenting the congress with a fait accompli so that those (many) who think the deal is awful but think it is the only option open to them now are supporting it.
3
There is no practical reason this deal should not already have sixty-votes for passage. Former Sen Majority Leader Mitchell stated and I agree, 'this is an easy one.' GOP Senators are playing for money at risk to USA sovereignty; I do not want to hear anymore about they being so American enthusiasts and Obama is an "other" they have shown their true representation that has been more of an Israeli Knesset member - not a US Senator - And speak without deviation that race and religion - 'got nothing to do with basis of this analysis.'
36
War is always made by those who lust for money and power. Leaders who are in positions to make wars but choose peace, are true leaders for the good of the people. We, the ordinary people, will forever be grateful and indebted to them.
119
Every rational American should be gratified and relieved by this tremendous victory for the President—one that represents a moment of collective national sanity, and that showcased Mr. Obama's finest leadership qualities in the face of tremendous obstacles and Republican cynical partisanship.
But the struggle to gain these 34 votes also exposed the lack of leadership by Democratic Senator Chuck Schemer, who elevated crass politics above a monumental world goal.
Leaving aside Mr. Schumer's history of slavish devotion to Wall Street, support of the Iraq War, and other questionable behavior, this latest betrayal of Democratic principles—and blatant alignment with Republican obstructionists—makes plain that he should have no leadership role in the Democratic Party.
While an ideal outcome would be a primary challenger emerging to replace Senator Schumer in 2016, at a bare minimum, the Democratic leadership should desist from any further consideration of Mr. Schumer as the Senate Minority Leader.
If progressive values mean anything at all, the Democratic Party must end the affront of rewarding those within the party who betray its core principles. To impose Senator Schumer on us as the party's choice to lead Senate Democrats is a gross affront and will not be taken lightly by the party's rank-and-file. This time, Mr. Schumer has gone too far and consequences must follow.
@ricfouad
But the struggle to gain these 34 votes also exposed the lack of leadership by Democratic Senator Chuck Schemer, who elevated crass politics above a monumental world goal.
Leaving aside Mr. Schumer's history of slavish devotion to Wall Street, support of the Iraq War, and other questionable behavior, this latest betrayal of Democratic principles—and blatant alignment with Republican obstructionists—makes plain that he should have no leadership role in the Democratic Party.
While an ideal outcome would be a primary challenger emerging to replace Senator Schumer in 2016, at a bare minimum, the Democratic leadership should desist from any further consideration of Mr. Schumer as the Senate Minority Leader.
If progressive values mean anything at all, the Democratic Party must end the affront of rewarding those within the party who betray its core principles. To impose Senator Schumer on us as the party's choice to lead Senate Democrats is a gross affront and will not be taken lightly by the party's rank-and-file. This time, Mr. Schumer has gone too far and consequences must follow.
@ricfouad
1433
Senator Schumer has made it very clear where his true allegiances are and it is not with the Democratic Party and in the final analysis it is not with his country that he was elected to serve.
13
Amen! Schumer also helps keep Gitmo open. Schumer is in the wrong party and nation. Schumer should be in the Likud Party Knesset leadership?
What about Dick Durbin from my home State of Illinois? Or Kirsten Gillibrand from New York?
Or even better yet some other younger choice or new face to start building the liberal progressive wing of the Democratic party for the next open POTUS election.
What about Dick Durbin from my home State of Illinois? Or Kirsten Gillibrand from New York?
Or even better yet some other younger choice or new face to start building the liberal progressive wing of the Democratic party for the next open POTUS election.
11
The Democratic party fundraisers need to hear us loud and clear: if you promote Chuck Shumer to the post of Senate Majority Leader expect a dramatic reduction in financial support for the party from rank and file members. Chuck failed to protect the US by opposing this resolution. His failure to place the interest of the US first over those of his funding sources will not be forgotten.
6
The Republicans would have you believe that all Iranians hate us and want to bomb us and Israel with nuclear weapons. This is patently false. When we see a clip from Iran on the news with a few thousand people chanting "Death to America" it is just a propaganda sound bite. Those few thousand people do not represent Iran any more than the Tea Party represents the US. There are over 70 million Iranians and most of them are just like you and me and have no interest in starting a nuclear war. It is time to move on and we should all be thankful that John McCain did not win the presidency in 2008.
150
You would have us believe that the average Iranian has anything to do with the governing of their country. This is patently false. Iran is run by the Mullahs without any regard to the opinion or cares of the people. Its the Mullahs who are getting the bomb.
3
A day which will live in infamy.
Here's a straightforward alternative:
Not a ground war like Iraq.
Not rewarding them with access to billions that they will spend on terror.
Not trusting them not to play games with the pathetic 24 day wait period.
Not rewarding them with a path to the bomb in ten years.
Not risking the creation of the biggest monster since WW2.
Rather:
An air raid that destroys their nuclear facilities.
It's proven effective.
It worked in Iraq when Israel did it.
It worked in Syria when Israel did it.
It will work in Iran as well.
It didn't lead to war. The opposite. It prevented dangerous regimes from going nuclear.
What if they rebuild in two years? They probably won't. Iraq and Syria realized it wasn't worth wasting their money on. If they do– then do it again. We're capable. Wouldn't take more than a few days. They'll learn.
What if they fire missiles on Israel through Hezbollah? They will. Unfortunately, that will happen either way. Much easier to deal with without a nuclear Iran backing them up. Much easier to deal with now that Hezbollah is busy occupied with Syria.
In fact just give Israel a green light and a few bunker busters and they'll be happy to do the grunt work themselves. How did we get to the point where the most powerful nation on earth is reduced to groveling and risking a multiple billion dollar wave of terror, followed in ten years by a nuclear Iran, when it shouldn't take more than a few hours and a bit of spine to resolve?
Here's a straightforward alternative:
Not a ground war like Iraq.
Not rewarding them with access to billions that they will spend on terror.
Not trusting them not to play games with the pathetic 24 day wait period.
Not rewarding them with a path to the bomb in ten years.
Not risking the creation of the biggest monster since WW2.
Rather:
An air raid that destroys their nuclear facilities.
It's proven effective.
It worked in Iraq when Israel did it.
It worked in Syria when Israel did it.
It will work in Iran as well.
It didn't lead to war. The opposite. It prevented dangerous regimes from going nuclear.
What if they rebuild in two years? They probably won't. Iraq and Syria realized it wasn't worth wasting their money on. If they do– then do it again. We're capable. Wouldn't take more than a few days. They'll learn.
What if they fire missiles on Israel through Hezbollah? They will. Unfortunately, that will happen either way. Much easier to deal with without a nuclear Iran backing them up. Much easier to deal with now that Hezbollah is busy occupied with Syria.
In fact just give Israel a green light and a few bunker busters and they'll be happy to do the grunt work themselves. How did we get to the point where the most powerful nation on earth is reduced to groveling and risking a multiple billion dollar wave of terror, followed in ten years by a nuclear Iran, when it shouldn't take more than a few hours and a bit of spine to resolve?
6
Blessed are the peacemakers. And cursed be the war makers. To imagine that an air raid on Iran -- which has been working for 15 years knowing such a raid is a possibility -- would not only be futile in military terms, it would be warmongering that would permanently hurt not just the US and Israel itself, but the whole world.
Talk of "a few hours and a bit of spine" has been with us from Curtis LeMay to George W. Bush...and every time we have listened, the results have been catastrophic.
Talk of "a few hours and a bit of spine" has been with us from Curtis LeMay to George W. Bush...and every time we have listened, the results have been catastrophic.
What is the Iranian response to your attack? Bomb Israel? Bomb the Saudi oil fields and refineries? Close the Straits of Hormuz? All of the above? And all this for a temporary impairment of their nuclear program?
Bravo, bravo bravo. Thank God for President Obama and the Senators who understand that governance from a fact based reality is always better than from a failed ideology. Conservatives fail on every front due to their determination not to be influenced by the facts. They are ideologically driven, regardless of the consequences.
This deal is going to happen anyway, with or without the US. The Europeans intend to normalize relations with Iran.
30
"Republicans — backed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel — remain implacably opposed to the deal."
Someone should remind these Republicans that they do not work for Bibi and they do not represent constituencies in Israel. Apparently Sheldon Adelson's money is enough to persuade these Republicans who their true master is.
Someone should remind these Republicans that they do not work for Bibi and they do not represent constituencies in Israel. Apparently Sheldon Adelson's money is enough to persuade these Republicans who their true master is.
100
Don't they work for Grover Norquist?
Really, present-day Republicans are an interesting variant on the Burkean Dilemma. Instead of asking whether a representative votes according to his conscience or the wishes of his constituents, Republicans wonder if they should vote according to the donors, foreign leaders, Norquist's pledge. I don't expect this situation to change soon.
Really, present-day Republicans are an interesting variant on the Burkean Dilemma. Instead of asking whether a representative votes according to his conscience or the wishes of his constituents, Republicans wonder if they should vote according to the donors, foreign leaders, Norquist's pledge. I don't expect this situation to change soon.
Today Mikulski is how you spell relief. Congratulations to President Obama. Congratulations to the whole world!
41
Common sense has prevailed. Not a very usual outcome these days...
What I believe the opponents have really achieved is a kind of public display of US commitment to redouble efforts to maintain Israel's military edge in the region, as well as concerted action to counter Iran sponsored terrorism. And I'm sure Iran is listening.
What I believe the opponents have really achieved is a kind of public display of US commitment to redouble efforts to maintain Israel's military edge in the region, as well as concerted action to counter Iran sponsored terrorism. And I'm sure Iran is listening.
16
Bravo, BO, bravo!
60
The behind-the- scenes angling of the opposition is particularly political and fraudulent. The opposition to approving this arranged a series of maneuvers so they could lose, but, in the end, not look bad. They can blame Obama and seek cover in that. If they had in fact blocked this negotiation, the fallout would have destroyed them and they knew it all along. Shameful, and excellent governance by the Executive Branch.
30
Upon hearing the GOP Senators' objections to the Iran deal, I can't help but think of George Costanza's negotiation with NBC:
So let me get this straight... you held out for less money.
Congratulations to Mr. Obama, Mr. Kerry, and all of the others who engaged in grown-up talk and allowed cooler heads to prevail. This is a major step in the right direction.
So let me get this straight... you held out for less money.
Congratulations to Mr. Obama, Mr. Kerry, and all of the others who engaged in grown-up talk and allowed cooler heads to prevail. This is a major step in the right direction.
84
Interesting that yesterday I wrote to my Senator Mikulski to remind her that she has a responsibility to support her party and her President, to do the best thing for our country, and that I hoped she would not be the one vote remaining. Thank goodness she did the right thing.
59
Lucky you! Unfortunately we New Yorkers are represented by someone who puts the interests of a foreign nation, Israel, before that of the United States.
i'll give you full credit for this then - thank you and well done!
Good for you. We need more people getting involved this way. Thank you.
Godwin's Law states that the person to use a Hitler comparison loses the on-line argument. I propose a corollary that applies the law to Neville Chamberlain also.
50
Iran had no nuclear weapons while American Republicans and Israel does.
Who was the real threat in this standoff?
You'll get used to peace. You'll find it to be very nice.
Who was the real threat in this standoff?
You'll get used to peace. You'll find it to be very nice.
60
I agree that we Americans can be very parochial in stubbornly claiming that we alone are the arbiters of what is good and just in the world. We rarely put ourselves in the place of others whose approach to international relationships differs from ours. If I am an Iranian, I would be livid that the U.S. and a small group of other countries insists that they have the right to defend their interests with nuclear arms arsenals, but my country is not allowed to do the same. As for Iranian support of Hammas and other groups which oppose Israeli expansion or even its right to exist, while I might disagree, their support is not insane or inherently evil. The west installed an Israeli population in a part of the world which was governed by others and did so without the express consent of those who were or would be displaced. It was not Palestine who murderd Jews, it was Germany's Hitler, yet it was Palestine which was asked to offer a homeland to the surviving victims of Hitler's madness.
It appears that the US would stand alone with Israel in the international community if this deal was rejected by our Congress. While standing alone in a just cause can be a good thing sometimes, in this case we would be seen by almost everyone as standing against a peaceful resolution of this Iranian situation. By many in the world our hawkish faction belittles us in the eyes of the world. In the end we really need to be a nation standing for peace and a voice of reason.
63
The rest of the world looks on in dismay at the warmongering promoted by the GOP at he behest of it's backers and wonder what has happened to a once great nation.
This deal is solidly in the broad national security interests of the United States.
It is not in the narrow political interests of extremist Israeli settlers.
Half the US Congress serves the interests of foreign extremists in this matter.
That is what this brouhaha is all about. That is what it has been about all along.
It is not in the narrow political interests of extremist Israeli settlers.
Half the US Congress serves the interests of foreign extremists in this matter.
That is what this brouhaha is all about. That is what it has been about all along.
37
A monumental accomplishment, and a tremendous victory! For Iran.
8
Sen. Corker is asking senators not to filibuster a resolution of disapproval. This coming from a member of the party that set a record for filibusters, using them in even the most basic Senate actions to thwart the president, is rich.
I hope Democrats don't do their usual defensive crouch on this. They seem to be quite good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. They have the votes to secure the deal. Now let the GOP stew in the juice of its own dysfunction.
I hope Democrats don't do their usual defensive crouch on this. They seem to be quite good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. They have the votes to secure the deal. Now let the GOP stew in the juice of its own dysfunction.
28
No worries. Nancy Pelosi has the President's back. Kudos to her for her forward thinking.
This assessment by sufficient senators,to sustain a potential presidential,speaks to our varied but pronounced,national predilection for belated conclusiveness.This is also applicable to the spectacle that has become the current presidential campaign.Americans will eventually conclude that infused republican 'drama,is a needless deflection of our national concerns.Once we reached that result,a 'correct determination of our national path,will be as simple as the Iran negotiation dilemma.
It is good and bad news. Good is that Iran deal will go forward. Bad news is that 63 Senators are under the thumb of Israeli and Defense Lobby!
71
Which begs the question--Why isn't Dick Cheney in prison for war crimes? Instead, he's free to trot about the country on his "Dick and Liz Tour" spreading malice where ever he goes... Of course Cheney opposes the Iran deal; that's because Dick Cheney never met a war in the middle east that he did not like!
74
It is not isolationist to observe that the ONLY reason the 'security of Israel' and the 'stability of the Middle East' means anything to the security and prosperity of the U.S. or the rest of the world is (drum roll here) oil.
It may be politically incorrect to say that out loud but it's true. As the long-warring nation states of Europe finally concluded that killing each other over religion, territory or insults to someone's king was only turning their own civilizations to dust, at some point the players in the Middle East have to figure out on their own how they are going to do the same thing. It took the devastation of two World Wars to drive that point through a lot of very thick skulls in Europe, many of which ended up in piles. It is not too cynical to suggest that the Iran Deal is the 'League of Nations' moment for the Middle East. If there are those in the region (and there are) who are determined to 'have at it' - over religion, territory, principle, whatever - let them have at it. The Age of Oil is rapidly coming to an end, and it would not be a Worst Case Scenario if a war turns the area from Afghanistan to the Mediterranean into the quiet stretch of sand that it was before the Age of Religion. The only way Humankind seems to learn important lessons is through the old-fashioned 'touch the hot stove' method.
It may be politically incorrect to say that out loud but it's true. As the long-warring nation states of Europe finally concluded that killing each other over religion, territory or insults to someone's king was only turning their own civilizations to dust, at some point the players in the Middle East have to figure out on their own how they are going to do the same thing. It took the devastation of two World Wars to drive that point through a lot of very thick skulls in Europe, many of which ended up in piles. It is not too cynical to suggest that the Iran Deal is the 'League of Nations' moment for the Middle East. If there are those in the region (and there are) who are determined to 'have at it' - over religion, territory, principle, whatever - let them have at it. The Age of Oil is rapidly coming to an end, and it would not be a Worst Case Scenario if a war turns the area from Afghanistan to the Mediterranean into the quiet stretch of sand that it was before the Age of Religion. The only way Humankind seems to learn important lessons is through the old-fashioned 'touch the hot stove' method.
12
Congratulations, President Obama, on a masterful job of political persuasion and another victory for your administration and the American people. This imperfect but vital agreement is the essential first step toward a non-nuclear Iran and a more stable Mideast. You did it, even with the Republicans, Netanyau and certain cowardly Democrats - hello, Chuck, hello, Nita - working against ratification of the Treaty.
Don't be so indignant, Chuck - it wasn't Mitch McConnell that paid $800 million for lobbying and advertising to kill the deal, but rather AIPAC. You are fooling no one; you and other NYS members of Congress were heavily lobbied by right-wing organizations, particularly AIPAC, and all the Jewish Democrats - except for Nadler -- caved in to the pressure. It's the sole time you have broken with the Adminstration or your party - whom are you kidding?
Now, after spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to influence the American political process, AIPAC tries to shoot its way out of the corral by calling everyone who condemns its efforts or the results of that campaign - the abandonment of their Party and duty by those who should have known better - an anti-Semite. That dog won't hunt, Netanyahu (to mix a metaphor).
President Obama has achieved every one of his major goals. That he doesn't get credit for these achievements speaks reams about the U.S. voters and media. History will tell a far different story.
Don't be so indignant, Chuck - it wasn't Mitch McConnell that paid $800 million for lobbying and advertising to kill the deal, but rather AIPAC. You are fooling no one; you and other NYS members of Congress were heavily lobbied by right-wing organizations, particularly AIPAC, and all the Jewish Democrats - except for Nadler -- caved in to the pressure. It's the sole time you have broken with the Adminstration or your party - whom are you kidding?
Now, after spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to influence the American political process, AIPAC tries to shoot its way out of the corral by calling everyone who condemns its efforts or the results of that campaign - the abandonment of their Party and duty by those who should have known better - an anti-Semite. That dog won't hunt, Netanyahu (to mix a metaphor).
President Obama has achieved every one of his major goals. That he doesn't get credit for these achievements speaks reams about the U.S. voters and media. History will tell a far different story.
50
It's a deal for collaborationists. It will very likely to war rather than prevent one.
Israel must stand alone now until the US elects a strong and tough minded leader.
Israel must stand alone now until the US elects a strong and tough minded leader.
Agree and well said !!!
Glad to see that another country can't so easily hijack our political system. Glad to see Netanyahu shamed.
95
He's not shamed. Mr. Obama is shamed. His legacy will likely be a nuclear war in the Middle East.
1
President Obama and his Secretary of State John Kerry could have negotiated a better deal, but they signaled they'd accept a bad outcome over none at all early on. For example, a willingness to leave the current American hostages behind told the Iranians all they needed to know about the president’s courage and resolve.
Throughout his presidency, President Obama's signature weakness has been his unwillingness to communicate what he stands for in a convincing way. It's left him open to criticism from the right, but hasn't endeared him to the left either. A person who stands for nothing, who can't convincingly articulate what he wants, isn't able to negotiate effectively. A president can’t keep laying down red lines without crossing them
And the notion that the deal has weakened Israeli security is specious, too. Though no one wants to acknowledge their existence, Israel’s atomic weaponry stands ready to deal with Iranian threats. So, the only question is whether Obama’s poor deal will compel Israel to launch a preemptive strike. If Israel’s extinction is truly Iran’s goal, Obama should have worked harder to defuse the inevitable outcome of that strategy.
Throughout his presidency, President Obama's signature weakness has been his unwillingness to communicate what he stands for in a convincing way. It's left him open to criticism from the right, but hasn't endeared him to the left either. A person who stands for nothing, who can't convincingly articulate what he wants, isn't able to negotiate effectively. A president can’t keep laying down red lines without crossing them
And the notion that the deal has weakened Israeli security is specious, too. Though no one wants to acknowledge their existence, Israel’s atomic weaponry stands ready to deal with Iranian threats. So, the only question is whether Obama’s poor deal will compel Israel to launch a preemptive strike. If Israel’s extinction is truly Iran’s goal, Obama should have worked harder to defuse the inevitable outcome of that strategy.
51
How come W did not manage, not only to get a better deal, but watch the Iranian nuclear program grow and grow? You think we should have gone into another war in the middle east? Having such a mess in Iraq, unleashing the Middle East into the current instability and ISIS is not enough? We need more bloodshed and draining of our treasury?
12
Could it be that there are secret protocols as part of the public agreement that state that if/when the deal survives Congress, the Iranians will then release the American hostages? Not saying there are, but there could be . . .
1
It's called the Art of Compromise! We all know that this has to used in any deal that needs to be negotiated! A deal was concluded under the most extreme circumstances which therefore didn't allow for a "perfect" outcome yet the best best option for controlled prevention. This Art has been seriously neglected during the last 8 years and the political results speak for themselves! Bravo to the President, his team, the International community and yes Iran!
9
Near the start of reading this story, I was Blessing Ms. Mikulsky as a peacemaker but it seems her rationale is more pragmatic that idealistic. But what the heck! God Bless you anyway.
We will now soon embark on a long period of peace and reconciliation that should reaffirm old relationships between America and Iran. The warmongers among us; the Generals and the Republicans, will grumble all the while, but peace will hold because everyone knows that war is the insanity of humanity, and the warmongers will not be viewed kindly by history. The warmongers include the Iranian military leaders who depend on their "Great Satan" name calling to maintain their relevance and budget.
I say to all negotiators; this is your life's work, a job well done. You saved many lives and their future generations. Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall inherit the Earth.
Warmongers are damning themselves.
We will now soon embark on a long period of peace and reconciliation that should reaffirm old relationships between America and Iran. The warmongers among us; the Generals and the Republicans, will grumble all the while, but peace will hold because everyone knows that war is the insanity of humanity, and the warmongers will not be viewed kindly by history. The warmongers include the Iranian military leaders who depend on their "Great Satan" name calling to maintain their relevance and budget.
I say to all negotiators; this is your life's work, a job well done. You saved many lives and their future generations. Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall inherit the Earth.
Warmongers are damning themselves.
48
That's unfortunate.
If it was such a great deal, one would think it wouldn't require so much work and lobbying to secure a vote.
If it was such a great deal, one would think it wouldn't require so much work and lobbying to secure a vote.
3
Really! One would think Republicans would get off their knee-jerk Obama opposition, and follow a road of possible peace rather than likely war, and not allow a foreign country's leader to so blatantly campaign in Congress against our own president!
By the same token if it were such a bad deal, at least for the US, one would think it wouldn't require so much lobbying and an official foreign government's interfering with our internal debate.
@Kimbo - many bills that have been good for the U.S. like Clean Water, etc. had a tough slog. It is painfully clear that every good deal isn't great. A big deal that doesn't include the U.S. but does include our friends and even frenemies is very bad.
2
History will tell us if this agreement with Iran was in the best interests of the USA or it was not.
One thing history will tell us for certain is that a foreign country induced American legislators to act on behalf of a foreign country in a matter that involved foreign policy. It was not America's finest moment.
I hope history will also tell us that the relationship between America and the foreign power reached a watershed and that automatic support for that country in almost all circumstances was no longer there.
One thing history will tell us for certain is that a foreign country induced American legislators to act on behalf of a foreign country in a matter that involved foreign policy. It was not America's finest moment.
I hope history will also tell us that the relationship between America and the foreign power reached a watershed and that automatic support for that country in almost all circumstances was no longer there.
33
Really? You don't recall Churchill greatly influencing FDR to supply Britain with arms before the US got involved with WW2 knowing that his country was doomed without them. Commentators on this website continually ignore history.
1
Good news for all. By the way, someone recently wrote that Israel should be made our 51st state and then would only have two votes in the Senate like all of the other states. Not a bad idea.
73
Those Democratic leaders who had the integrity to stand with the accords, like Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Representative Jerrold Nadler, should emerge as a newer generation of Democratic leaders. Figures like Senator Chuck Schumer and Congresswoman Nita Lowey are embarrassing with the Likud kowtowing; "Profiles in Courage," they ain't.
154
There are 8,756 Jews living happily and in peace in Iran while continuing to practise Judaism - most Jews of whom I am one do not know this - Obviously Iran doesn't want to kill them or they would have long ago. Does no one remember the story of Purim where a Jewish woman was Queen there?
1
So all you folks trust Iran? Wow, what a strange time
4
no that's why this deal is necessary. Its about verification not trust.
As your God, Ronnie, said, "Trust, but verify." And that's exactly what we will do.
U.S. leaders trusted Soviet leaders at various times and to varying degrees.
Good for Senator Mikulski, but what took so long? Now it's time for Senator Cardin to come out in favor of this deal. It's the right thing for the US and the right thing for the world. Come on Senator Cardin. We are waiting.
29
It a very bad deal. We should be making demands on Iran not making negotiated deals with the terrorist state.
1
Also, waiting for Mark Warner of Virginia to kick in. Silence speaks volumes in this case.
It's an engineered vote allowing Dems like Schumer to vote against it for political cover. The same thing happened with the passage of the up or down vote for TPP--Democrats hiding behind the majority vote knowing full well it would pass. NAFTA, the Patriot Act, the vote on the Iraq war, it's all the same--Democrats always calculating their political advantage, standing up for nothing.
153
Just like the Republicans always stand up for war, racism, class warfare (against the working and poor classes), economic exploitation.
14
What an ignorant opinion! Although I don't disagree with the general theme of the opinion, to mindlessly single out Democrats as the only users is incorrect.
3
Yes, "standing up" for the Iraq War and the Patriot Act really got the GOP somewhere.
3
So to recap the situation in the Senate to date: opposed we have the implacable Republican opposition (AKA the self-proclaimed Party of No), the indicted-on-14-counts gentleman from New Jersey, and the depressingly predicatable senior senator from my state of New York. In favor (albeit in many cases with thoughtful reservations) is the entire Democratic Party. Got it. I've never been prouder to be a Democrat.
35
Republicans are doing their job, hindering progress of this hopelessly naive and destructive administration. Less than 18 months to go!
1
How is the "entire Democratic party" in favor, when there are only 34 Democrats approving? Last time I checked, there were 44 Dems. Even minus Schumer and Menendez, that leaves 42. Plus the Independents who caucus with the Dems. Please check your math.
1
Hindering progress - or trying to - is what today's Republicans do best.
I am all for Israel having a secure country where it is. And I support the U.S. giving military aide to Israel. But I am outraged that any U.S. congressperson would vote against a diplomatic solution to then Iranian nuclear issue.
It has become entirely clear that western nations have no idea as to how to resolve the wars and conflicts that have been going on in the middle east for almost 100 years.
The two largest super powers were unable to achieve military victory in Iraq or Afghanistan. How can anyone in their right mind think a war with Iran is a good idea or a winnable conflict?
A vote against this agreement is a vote against the best interests of the U.S. Which begs the question: whose interests are you representing?
It has become entirely clear that western nations have no idea as to how to resolve the wars and conflicts that have been going on in the middle east for almost 100 years.
The two largest super powers were unable to achieve military victory in Iraq or Afghanistan. How can anyone in their right mind think a war with Iran is a good idea or a winnable conflict?
A vote against this agreement is a vote against the best interests of the U.S. Which begs the question: whose interests are you representing?
1153
The sectarian differences between the sectarian states in the ME cannot be solved by western countries,Russia or China. The vital interests of all concerned are a free flowing oil supply and stopping proliferation of nuclear war material in the ME. This agreement advances those goals.
All sectarian states in the ME have had 100s of wars and fights over the last 1400 years. Western and outside countries have intervened, and sided with all parties against other parties as their interests dictate, but ultimately, sectarian states in the ME must learn to live with each other to have a future.
All sectarian states in the ME have had 100s of wars and fights over the last 1400 years. Western and outside countries have intervened, and sided with all parties against other parties as their interests dictate, but ultimately, sectarian states in the ME must learn to live with each other to have a future.
2
Not 100 years. Since Israel formed.
The statement that not adopting this agreement means war is a lie. A Big Lie.
The way to avoid war is certainly not to surrender in advance which is what this deal does. The major powers have surrendered to Iran's major demands. What should have happened is Iran should, have surrendered to the major powers demand to stop, cease and shut down its nuclear program.
The sense of no other option painted by Secretary Kerry and the president is symptomatic of their flawed thinking, their weakness.
Trump would have shut down their program without war. And Iran would have paid for it too.
The statement that not adopting this agreement means war is a lie. A Big Lie.
The way to avoid war is certainly not to surrender in advance which is what this deal does. The major powers have surrendered to Iran's major demands. What should have happened is Iran should, have surrendered to the major powers demand to stop, cease and shut down its nuclear program.
The sense of no other option painted by Secretary Kerry and the president is symptomatic of their flawed thinking, their weakness.
Trump would have shut down their program without war. And Iran would have paid for it too.
2
'The two largest super powers were unable to achieve military victory in Iraq or Afghanistan. How can anyone in their right mind think a war with Iran is a good idea or a winnable conflict?'
Well said! In the spirit of the US Open, that's a game, set, match point.
Well said! In the spirit of the US Open, that's a game, set, match point.
8
They hypocrisy of the political system is inconceivable. Everyone knew this was going to happen. Mr Corker basically planned it this way so he can vote against it (because Republican) but for the agreement to survive since he knew that not approving the agreement is stupid!
I am all for this agreement, but it's just strange to follow the process, which apparently is common in politics.
I am all for this agreement, but it's just strange to follow the process, which apparently is common in politics.
15
IRAN Deal Is Too Big To Fail.
EVEN the opponents of the Deal know that and the rest of this spectacle has been to embarrass Mr. Obama and extract more Weapons free of Charge for Israel paid by the US Taxpayer.
AS for Netanyahu/Likud/AIPAC et al, they know that delaying the recognition of the Palestinian State is no longer possible and dread the upcoming French Resolution on Israel/Palestine Conflict at the UN.
THIS Deal has vastly reduced threats to Israel and America's own Security and it is incumbent on the remaining Ten Democratic Senators to all come on-side by the Weekend and avoid an Unnecessary Theatrical Vote in Congress.
ANY undecided Politician or Citizen just needs to consider that the P5+1 Deal with Iran has pushed Iran's "Breakout Capacity" to Arm a "DOZEN Bombs" from a matter of Weeks NOW to an ability to Arm ONLY "ONE Bomb" after 15 Years.
AND my message to the Naysayers is: "The Greatest Enemy Of A Good Deal, In This Case A Brilliant Deal, Is The Illusion Of Having A Perfect Deal".
EVEN the opponents of the Deal know that and the rest of this spectacle has been to embarrass Mr. Obama and extract more Weapons free of Charge for Israel paid by the US Taxpayer.
AS for Netanyahu/Likud/AIPAC et al, they know that delaying the recognition of the Palestinian State is no longer possible and dread the upcoming French Resolution on Israel/Palestine Conflict at the UN.
THIS Deal has vastly reduced threats to Israel and America's own Security and it is incumbent on the remaining Ten Democratic Senators to all come on-side by the Weekend and avoid an Unnecessary Theatrical Vote in Congress.
ANY undecided Politician or Citizen just needs to consider that the P5+1 Deal with Iran has pushed Iran's "Breakout Capacity" to Arm a "DOZEN Bombs" from a matter of Weeks NOW to an ability to Arm ONLY "ONE Bomb" after 15 Years.
AND my message to the Naysayers is: "The Greatest Enemy Of A Good Deal, In This Case A Brilliant Deal, Is The Illusion Of Having A Perfect Deal".
58
What you say all depends on Iran actually keeping the deal and not cheating and what you said is actually very alarming. This process was supposed to stop ten Iranian nuclear program so they will NEVER get a bomb. Mr. Obama promised they will NEVER get a bomb. Now you say they will have one in 15 years?
They sad fact is that when they near actually producing a bomb the major powers must bomb them if they have to to stop them.
They sad fact is that when they near actually producing a bomb the major powers must bomb them if they have to to stop them.
This is good news on so many levels.
But don't forget this: a president stood up to the Israel lobby on a matter the lobby and Israel's prime minister said was vital to Israeli security and the president won.
Next time he or she should outline the terms of an Israeli-Palestinian agreement: ending the occupation in exchange for guarantees of both peoples' security. He should insist on its implementation, linking it to the continuation of US support for one or both parties.
Like the Iran deal, ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a vital U.S. interest.
The lobby has been shown NOT to be a paper tiger (it is still powerful) but indeed one when a president says "US interests come before Israel's desires."
As the Iran debate showed, a president--and not only this one--will defeat the lobby when that is the choice.
Now it's time to end the occupation. Neither the lobby nor Israel's prime minister can defeat a resolute president.
And that is good news for the US, Israel and Palestine.
But don't forget this: a president stood up to the Israel lobby on a matter the lobby and Israel's prime minister said was vital to Israeli security and the president won.
Next time he or she should outline the terms of an Israeli-Palestinian agreement: ending the occupation in exchange for guarantees of both peoples' security. He should insist on its implementation, linking it to the continuation of US support for one or both parties.
Like the Iran deal, ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a vital U.S. interest.
The lobby has been shown NOT to be a paper tiger (it is still powerful) but indeed one when a president says "US interests come before Israel's desires."
As the Iran debate showed, a president--and not only this one--will defeat the lobby when that is the choice.
Now it's time to end the occupation. Neither the lobby nor Israel's prime minister can defeat a resolute president.
And that is good news for the US, Israel and Palestine.
62
I think the core premise of your position was maybe Israel's real and final outcome fear....a new and more balanced political and humanitarian region!
President Obama's diplomacy wins both at home and abroad.
What a nightmare of peace, cooperation and goodwill for the Republican Caucus of war, objection and ill will toward others.
What a nightmare of peace, cooperation and goodwill for the Republican Caucus of war, objection and ill will toward others.
486
I still hope that Wasserman-Schultz and Cardin will support the deal. What would it say about the Democratic party if their national chair and ranking member of the foreign relations committee won't support the most important international agreement in decades? This is an ideal moment to break the grip of AIPAC, and respectfully remind Israel that we have our own foreign policy concerns.
136
Wasserman-Schultz doesn't have the courage to go against AIPAC and Bibi. We'll have to see about Cardin.
Wasserman-Schultz is Jewish. And you would like her to help break the grip of AIPAC?
Washerman refused to bring a resolution (not a bill) praising the deal and the President. We now know where her loyalties lie.
1
Too bad for AIPAC, but that's OK. Maybe they need "Bibi" Netanyahu as their president.
18
Given that obama has violated the Corker deal, which he signed, it should be declared null and void. The senate should now treat the Iran deal as it should have been treated all along, as a treaty, thus requring two thirds of the senate for approval. Problem solved, and Iran doesn't get a nuclear bomb with our approval, and all sanctions remain in place.
4