• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Republicans Admit: That Iran Letter Was a Dumb Idea

Zaac

Well-Known Member
It makes absolutely no sense for the Republicans to be interfering at this moment. They could at least stay out of it until they see what the framework agreement is going to be, but they're blatantly trying to scuttle the negotiations now. Yes, I believe this will be used against them big time in catching the blame for no deal.

It was just a dumb move. They are so out to undermine Obama to show him that he can't do anything without their approval, that they've managed to pin themselves into a stupid corner.

If negotiations fall apart, the fault is gonna be placed right in their laps by the Dems from here through the election cycle.
 

ShagNappy

Member
Now the GOP is seen as supporting Iran's hard liners and we know they hate us.

This, along with your constant use of bolded Comic Sans, confirms for me you are a troll of the highest dedication. My hats off to you El Retardo! You will have to work hard to best this pile of manure!
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
What kind of question is that? I want the administration to get a good deal and narrow-minded hothead ignoramuses won't even give the negotiations a chance to see what comes of them.

Those jockeying for war should have to be with the first wave in.

Will you honestly say you trust Obama and Kerry?

After 6 years in Office Obama is still an unknown other than he is a Marxist, a racist, hates this country, and thinks the Muslim call to prayer is the most beautiful sound in the world.

As for Kerry. Well if you trust him you will be sent back to Bloody Breathitt for punishment, perhaps only a short "purgatory stay" cause you are a fellow hillbilly, but don't push your luck!:tonofbricks:
 

Zaac

Well-Known Member
Will you honestly say you trust Obama and Kerry?

After 6 years in Office Obama is still an unknown other than he is a Marxist, a racist, hates this country, and thinks the Muslim call to prayer is the most beautiful sound in the world.

As for Kerry. Well if you trust him you will be sent back to Bloody Breathitt for punishment, perhaps only a short "purgatory stay" cause you are a fellow hillbilly, but don't push your luck!:tonofbricks:

The Rule of Law has nothing to do with your trust of Obama and Kerry.

He and his administration, not Congress, are responsible for foreign policy direction.

If they had waited until after an agreement had been brokered and then said Congress can't get behind this, that would be one thing.

But they showed their hands too quickly and showed that this is all about politics and interfering with Obama's ability to do what he was elected to do.

Warmongers is what they will be viewed as.
 

777

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Well, what bother me here is that Iran keeps demanding concession after concession and getting it with this WH. I don't see what's so wrong with:

The third bad option is to try to topple the government in other ways. But the Islamic Republic has survived tougher things than we can throw at them. Even in Iran's mass 2009 protests after the disputed presidential election, people were calling for the government to behave better, not for it to collapse outright. Any Western-led effort to topple the government is probably just going to deepen its popular support and make Iran more likely to want a nuclear weapon to protect itself.

The fourth bad option is to try to force Iran to surrender and simply give up its nuclear program. This would be the status quo. International sanctions have indeed taken a tremendous toll on Iran. Meanwhile, U.S. and Israeli efforts to sabotage the Iranian program, such as through cyber-attacks, have found some real successes. But Iran's nuclear program has continued to grow despite all these efforts. The world, it seems, can slow them but not stop them.

either of those options would be a better choice than waiting for an inevitable nuclear Iran and hope it's "peaceful".

As for the fall-out for the 2016 elections, time will tell but I think this is just a toothless protest statement by the GOP.
 

carpro

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Quite untrue. The Senate has no responsibility in negotiating treaties, only is approving them once they have been agreed to by the executive branch. To meddle in the negotiations is not part of the Senate's responsibility.

Now the GOP is lumped in with the Islam, Iranian hard liners whose only goal is harming the USA.

You really need to read something besides DNC talking points.

If you did, you would know that Obama has no intention of submitting any agreement reached to the Senate.

IE...Another illegal "executive action".
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You really need to read something besides DNC talking points.

If you did, you would know that Obama has no intention of submitting any agreement reached to the Senate.

IE...Another illegal "executive action".

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I have heard that Obama can make a deal until the end of his term with Iran without submitting it to the US Senate. It would not be a treaty and could be reversed 2 seconds after Obama leaves office in January 2017--a happy day for everyone.
 

kyredneck

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
CMG, methinks you're a wee bit over confident that the next POTUS will be a Republican. I say the idiotic moves the Republican congress are making right now brings into question their majority in 2017. You all seem to forget, Obama was elected BECAUSE Americans were war weary and fed up with the neocons, and they STILL are.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Zaac

Well-Known Member
CMG, methinks you're a wee bit over confident that the next POTUS will be a Republican. I say the idiotic moves the Republican congress are making right now brings into question their majority in 2017. You all seem to forget, Obama was elected BECAUSE Americans were war weary and fed up with the neocons, and they STILL are.

BINGO. The GOP was already out of the running for 2016. This will just seal the deal for the Dems.
 

777

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Perhaps I'm wrong, but I have heard that Obama can make a deal until the end of his term with Iran without submitting it to the US Senate. It would not be a treaty and could be reversed 2 seconds after Obama leaves office in January 2017--a happy day for everyone.

Yeah, you got that right - this deal (which I'm no fan of) is not a treaty, and Obama can do it unilaterally and any deal will expire when he leaves office if the next POTUS doesn't want to issue another EA.

You didn't say that the next POTUS was going to be a Republican and the merits/detriments of this deal will have all changed by 2016.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Yeah, you got that right - this deal (which I'm no fan of) is not a treaty, and Obama can do it unilaterally and any deal will expire when he leaves office if the next POTUS doesn't want to issue another EA.

You didn't say that the next POTUS was going to be a Republican and the merits/detriments of this deal will have all changed by 2016.

The deal will be so bad that it cannot be submitted to the US Senate.

I am not sure that the next President will be a Republican. Right now Hillary has high name recognition and is leading in the polls but I don't think that she could debate a person such as Gov. Walker, for example. To me, Hillary is very corrupt and her policies are much like Obama's.
 

Zaac

Well-Known Member
You are counting your chicks and momma hasn't laid the eggs yet, except the one named email!

I don't have any chicks in the fight as I already know that I won't be voting for either of the two major party candidates.
 

The American Dream

Member
Site Supporter
What is a dumb idea is that Obama wants to make a useless deal with Iran and enforce it by executive order for the last two years of his term.

The GOP has brought all of this on themselves by refusing to stand up to Obama for the last six years. The letter was just a sign of GOP weakness that Obama has not invited them to the table by promising to submit the deal to the US Senate. Obama has signaled that the deal with Iran that he makes will be an executive order.

Indiana US Senator Dan Coats did not sign the letter, but then he has slept with the dogs so much that he has fleas.

Exactly, what do you expect when lead by Speaker Bonehead and RINO Mitch McConnell. Both are spineless. They would both make great Democrats.
 

kyredneck

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It's not a new tactic, but...

No letter of any kind from anybody would be necessary if Obama was not trying to make a treaty without Senate approval.

Just another example of his lawlessness.

Exactly....

It doesn't make their move any less stupid. Republican candidates could have used 'Democratic lawlessness' to their advantage, now the table is turned:

Kathleen Parker on GOP Letter

"....It must be relatively simple, as one clips along the marble halls of the Russell Senate Office Building, speaking only to those of like mind, to decide that undermining the president is a public service. Hating the president isn’t personal; it’s a national imperative! He’s not our leader, after all. Therefore, he shall not be allowed to lead. Collateral damage? Well, such is the toll we pay for truth, justice and My Way.

Yes, the preceding paragraph could as easily have been written about the president, whose approach to governance has become an executive action (or agreement, in this case) and a pen. The disorder isn’t unique to one party and is, apparently, highly contagious.

So what was the rush to tell Iran, essentially, “You’re wasting your time” ? The 47 senators are like food critics who condemn a chef before he has finished preparing the entree. Their letter also signals to the world that they have zero respect for our president, or for the other world powers attempting to try diplomacy first.

This cannot have been helpful to any but the signees’ legendary standing in their own minds.

In comments about the letter, his lips stretched a little tighter than usual, Obama suggested that the 47 were seeking “common cause” with Iran’s hard-right religious leaders.

The foregoing observations don’t mean that Republicans are wrong about their concerns. Many Democrats are concerned, too. No American disagrees that Iran is a bad actor undeserving of faith or trust. But there are other ways to accomplish our goals than profiling for political profit. The 47 may have felt like Zorro, inking their opposition with the bold felt tips of their swords, but they were acting like children at the school fair whose single purpose is to dunk the principal.

No one is jockeying for a bad deal, plainly. And everyone at the table and beyond knows that the United States and Israel will not allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. Period. Thus, an attempt at a diplomatic agreement is more than a hedge against the unthinkable — a nuclear-armed Iran. It is a message to the world that, if and when we do take military action, it will be as a last resort....."
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
It doesn't make their move any less stupid. Republican candidates could have used 'Democratic lawlessness' to their advantage, now the table is turned:

Kathleen Parker on GOP Letter

"....It must be relatively simple, as one clips along the marble halls of the Russell Senate Office Building, speaking only to those of like mind, to decide that undermining the president is a public service. Hating the president isn’t personal; it’s a national imperative! He’s not our leader, after all. Therefore, he shall not be allowed to lead. Collateral damage? Well, such is the toll we pay for truth, justice and My Way.

Yes, the preceding paragraph could as easily have been written about the president, whose approach to governance has become an executive action (or agreement, in this case) and a pen. The disorder isn’t unique to one party and is, apparently, highly contagious.

So what was the rush to tell Iran, essentially, “You’re wasting your time” ? The 47 senators are like food critics who condemn a chef before he has finished preparing the entree. Their letter also signals to the world that they have zero respect for our president, or for the other world powers attempting to try diplomacy first.

This cannot have been helpful to any but the signees’ legendary standing in their own minds.

In comments about the letter, his lips stretched a little tighter than usual, Obama suggested that the 47 were seeking “common cause” with Iran’s hard-right religious leaders.

The foregoing observations don’t mean that Republicans are wrong about their concerns. Many Democrats are concerned, too. No American disagrees that Iran is a bad actor undeserving of faith or trust. But there are other ways to accomplish our goals than profiling for political profit. The 47 may have felt like Zorro, inking their opposition with the bold felt tips of their swords, but they were acting like children at the school fair whose single purpose is to dunk the principal.

No one is jockeying for a bad deal, plainly. And everyone at the table and beyond knows that the United States and Israel will not allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. Period. Thus, an attempt at a diplomatic agreement is more than a hedge against the unthinkable — a nuclear-armed Iran. It is a message to the world that, if and when we do take military action, it will be as a last resort....."

Kathleen Parker is an elitist journalist like George Will! I psy no attention to either!

Does anyone really believe that the United States will prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon? Yeah, just like North Korea!
 
Top