Iran's take on GOP Treason Letter

QuickSilver said:
This IMO is a real problem for the GOP... the fact that all this "hard line" talk makes negotiations impossible. They simply cannot negotiate with anyone and maintain a "my way or the highway" attitude. That's only going to lead to war. It's already almost destroyed the ability of Washington to govern. Compromise is not even a word that John Boehner can SAY let alone do. Negotiations work when both sides give and take.. that's what it means.. This hardline GOP rational has got to go.. Hopefully in 2016 it will.
Click to expand...

I think Iran has the attitude of my way or the highway, Quicksilver.

Iran advancing its nuclear program despite pact with West

Oren Dorell, USA TODAY 2:46 p.m. EST February 28, 2014


In recent weeks Iranian officials have said they will not dismantle elements of their nuclear program of concern to the West, including centrifuges, enrichment facilities and a heavy water reactor under construction that, once operational, would produce plutonium that could fuel a bomb with further processing. Among the concerns identified by Institute for Science and International Security and other sources:

• Iran continues research and development work at its Natanz Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant, and has installed casing for a new eighth-generation centrifuge. Aliakbar Salehi, head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, has said the new design is 15 times more powerful than the IR-1 centrifuge, according to Iran's state broadcaster IRIB.

• The U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency, the IAEA, reported no new progress on addressing its questions related to past military dimensions of Iran's nuclear program. It has yet to gain access to Parchin, a military site where the IAEA seeks to investigate concentric explosive devices that could be used to demolish bridges or detonate a nuclear warhead.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/02/28/iran-nuclear-economic-advance/5835935/
 

Josiah09 said:
Misty, Maybe the Iranian hardliners are saying 10 years is unacceptable, but the understanding that the US Iran and five other nations is negotiation is for 10 years and the prospects seemed good that these negotiations would have led to such an understanding agreed to by Iran, accept for the efforts of the Iranian hardliners and their allies in the US Senate to scuttle the negotiation. I'm sure you're aware Misty, that the only way we can ever feel confident that Iran in not secretly doing nuclear enrichment is if independent observers are allowed by Iran to monitor compliance within the country of Iran. The only way to get those monitors into Iran is with a negotiated understanding such as we are trying to negotiate.
Click to expand...

I totally agree, Joshiah, that independent observers should be allowed by Iran to monitor compliance, but Iran just keeps doing what it wants to do, and is still not allowing compliance. If Pres. Obama gets Iran to allow independent observers to monitor their activities, and Iran stops all nuclear enrichment, I will give the President alot of credit.
 

Debby said:
Have Iranian armies become a thing and I didn't notice? Where are they marching to in their 'offensive'? I can't help but wonder if the author isn't stretching things about Iran in an effort to support aggression towards Russia. After all,Yaroslav Trofimov, the guy who made that statement is born in Kiev, Ukraine and has worked in the US for Wall Street Journal for years and Russia and Iran have ties. Not unlikely at all as far as I can see.



Let's see, his article is decidedly negative and yet when I look at a page out of Newsweek, I find this, which having read it, I would call more positive (and declarative) than anything:

What is Iran doing in Iraq? How important is Iran in the ground war against ISIS?
The Iranian government, particularly the Revolutionary Guards, is playing a huge role in helping the Iraqi security forces fight the Islamic State, especially in Diyala. The Guards are working with the Iraqi central government, but they are reportedly heavily reliant on Shiite militias with close ties to Iran. Iran is now arguably the most influential foreign actor in Iraq........Secretary of State John Kerry has acknowledged that the net effect of Iranian strikes on ISIS “is positive.” http://www.newsweek.com/what-are-iranians-doing-iraq-303107


Two different American msm organizations, two different attitudes. Is this one more example of how much trust we should be giving to pronouncements by anyone in the mainstream media? A further support for the idea that we should look for multiple sources before accepting inflammatory rhetoric?
Click to expand...

I missed seeing your post earlier, Debby. I always try to look at mulitiple sources and at one time would read CNN, Fox News, ABC, USA, Yahoo News, MSNBC, Washington Post, Washington Times, New York Times and decided I would rather have a life than keep spending all that time, trying to keep up with the news, so now I have cut down on my newsreading. :)
 
Hi Misty,

Here's where we disagree. You say "Iran just keeps doing what it wants to do, and is still not allowing compliance" and I say that on the contrary the sanctions have hurt Iran so badly that they (THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAN) are willing to sign a document saying that independent observers can come into their country and confirm that Iran is not doing nuclear enrichment. Do you see where that's different from what you are saying. The reason that I feel I'm right and your statement is wrong is that Secretary Kerry and the negotiators from five other countries have been sitting at a table with the negotiators of the Iranian government and they all confirm that they are close to such an understanding. So before you say that the Iranians aren't cooperating again please address the consensus opinion of all these negotiators.
 
AZ Jim said:
Let's get back to the subject. The letter, surely you don't support that action do you Misty?

Maybe Misty didn't see my question, I'll try again later.
Click to expand...

Sorry, no I didn't see your question, Jim. I don't think the letter should have been written, but I do understand the frustration of not being listened to by the President, as he ignores input from congress on the issue. Sending the letter was unprofessional and inappropriate in my opinion.
 
Of all of the presidents that I remember, I do not recall one ever has been shown so little respect as our U. S House and Senate has
exhibited to President Obama. I am so embarrassed for them.
 
charlotta said:
Of all of the presidents that I remember, I do not recall one ever has been shown so little respect as our U. S House and Senate has
exhibited to President Obama. I am so embarrassed for them.
Click to expand...

I agree. And it's not a matter of intellectual disagreement based on different perspectives regarding a particular issue. That would be an acceptable and healthy function of the democratic process. But no, it's a matter of frenzied, neurotic hatred of President Obama on the part of republicans.
 
And why should not the Congress be upset with Obama after 6 years of his not using the Congress as his legislative and legal body as he should. Obama has snubbed what should have been our legal and rightful way of doing things. That is not right at all.
 
BobF said:
And why should not the Congress be upset with Obama after 6 years of his not using the Congress as his legislative and legal body as he should. Obama has snubbed what should have been our legal and rightful way of doing things. That is not right at all.
Click to expand...

No he hasn't... The Republicans have blocked every piece of legislation or refused to bring it to a vote in the house.. Just WHAT news channel do you listen to? and where have you been for 6 years?
 
QuickSilver said:
No he hasn't... The Republicans have blocked every piece of legislation or refused to bring it to a vote in the house.. Just WHAT news channel do you listen to? and where have you been for 6 years?
Click to expand...

I have been right here in the US but apparently you may have been traveling. I don't know how you can say the House blocked every piece of legislation as it is the House where most items get started and then they were blocked by the Democrat leader of the Senate, Reid, as he refused to allow any House legislature to get discussed in the Senate. I sure don't know where you dig up such incorrect nonsense.

For the channels and such i use for news it is mostly NBC, can also say sometimes ABC or CBS. Each day I also take a couple hours of FOX NEWS to add some balance to the other news casts. I suppose I should be listening to one of those way far left ones where seldom is truth spoken.
 
This morning I woke to an interview on National Radio of a spokesman from the Brookings Institution on the subject of the Middle East, the various antagonists and America's foreign policy options. It was a very intelligent discussion (not yet available online but I will keep watching). In that light I googled Brookings and Iran and came up with this equally thoughtful appraisal of the Republican letter to Iranian leaders and what the effect of it is likely to be in Iran.

Worth a read. http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/markaz/posts/2015/03/10-congress-letter-iran-nuclear-deal
 
charlotta said:
Bob F, Obama has been told from day one that they (the Republicans) that they were going to do everything in their power to oppose everything that our President proposed.
Click to expand...

If that is so true, why haven't anybody actually posted the proof of that comment.

The big problem has been when anything was being done Obama did them behind closed doors, like the Obama care meetings where they were done without the Republicans allowed in. Their last time when it was voting time was done in the open chambers and for some hours the Democrats were losing the vote, so the vote was held open till the Democrat hold outs were convinced to vote for Obama care. I wonder what was the convincing comment. Maybe some sort of financial improvement. Anyway, it was later in the evening before Obama care did have its winning votes. It surely was not a marvelous victory for the Obama care.

And today we still do not know how the Supreme court may handle the Obama care. I think we may know that in another couple months when the Supreme courts makes their decisions public.
 
Hey, Bob! Yesterday my yoga instructor said this: "Say good-bye to that which does not promote peace, wisdom, and tranquility in your life." This made me think of you, Bob. I'm afraid we have to break up . . . Bye, Bob . . . :wave:
 
Glinda said:
Hey, Bob! Yesterday my yoga instructor said this: "Say good-bye to that which does not promote peace, wisdom, and tranquility in your life." This made me think of you, Bob. I'm afraid we have to break up . . . Bye, Bob . . . :wave:
Click to expand...

Poor judgement of me. But your own decision, not mine. I would not know just looking at you, but you must be one of the lefties on this forum with this comment.
 
charlotta said:
Obama has been told from day one that they (the Republicans) that they were going to do everything in their power to oppose everything that our President proposed.
Click to expand...

BobF said:
If that is so true, why haven't anybody actually posted the proof of that comment.
Click to expand...

That's been true and obvious since the first day Obama took the Presidency for the first term. http://egbertowillies.com/2012/09/0...ama-to-fail-and-would-obstruct-at-every-turn/


"Republicans want Obama to fail more than they want America to succeed.

Obama does better when America does better, so Republican politicians have been sabotaging our recovery since day one. That’s like setting fire to the house, keeping your foot on the water hose, and telling everyone the firefighters did it. It’s the worst kind of politicians who keep voting against their own constituents’ interests — so their constituents will vote against the President.

THE EVIDENCE

On President Obama’s inauguration day in 2009, Republican leaders — including Romney’s VP pick Congressman Ryan — met to plot how they could sabotage and undermine the economy in order to make the President fail.

Republican leaders said they want the President to fail:



When asked about the potential for more job losses, Speaker John Boehner said, "so be it."

They threatened to shut down our government, which would have cost our economy billions.
They brought our nation to the brink of default by threatening not to pay America’s bills, and say they’ll do it again — even though the default crisis by itself almost derailed the recovery.

Their political brinkmanship brought us the Tea Party Downgrade, the first-ever downgrade of America’s perfect credit rating.
They didn’t even want the Federal Reserve to consider intervening to help our struggling economy.

Let’s remember — a month into his presidency, they refused to help our economy recover.
They unified in voting against the President’s American Jobs Act, which would create 2 million jobs, even though it’s based on proposals they have supported in the past.

If Republican politicians hadn’t pushed so hard to lay off our teachers, cops, and firefighters and block efforts to put Americans back to work fixing our roads and bridges, the unemployment rate could be down to 6% already.

And now, Republicans have nominated Mitt Romney for president, even though economic experts say that implementing all of his economic ideas would "push us deeper into recession and make the recovery slower."
Even Romney admits that massive spending cuts will “throw us into recession or depression" — but he supports them anyway."
 
Well that is all at least two years old and nothing has change since then either. The Democrats still hate and attempt to keep the Republicans from doing any government issues at all. Even now with both Congress houses now under Republican control we hear nothing but more nonsense about how evil they are. I don't consider those so called proofs posted as being anything more than conversations. Same old nonsense as gets posted on here with lefties loving to challenge the more conservatives.

How did the Republicans get control over both houses of Congress? The people made that happen because the people are not happy with the way the Democrats have really messed up our finances and the way our government has been run. Over 10 trillion more debt for the US in the last 8 years where the Democrats have had the House and Senate in their hands. Four years now the Republicans have had control of the House but could not do anything as the Senate was controlled by the Democrats and Reid refused to give the Republican efforts any time on the floor.

In less than two years we will have another election. If it is a Democrat named Hillary, it will be better than Obama. If it is a Republican it will be better than Obama. We need to get this government back under control of the people, like the Congress running things once again and not just some self proclaimed leader in spite of the Constitutions ways. Obama is smart and a good speaker, but he seems to have forgotten we do have a Constitution that has carried this country for over 200 years. It is still a very good document and we should all be following its guidelines.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 911
BobF said:
Well that is all at least two years old and nothing has change since then either.
Click to expand...

That information was from 2012, and I agree nothing has changed since then. The GOP is still doing everything in their power to obstruct the President and attempt to discredit everything he's done for this country. Some people are happy with the progress the democrats have made since President Obama took office, and some are not happy that is not news. Many people don't get out to vote unless it is a Presidential election year, that may be reasons why the votes sway certain ways in midterms.

I'm not thrilled with everything Obama has done, but he's certainly an improvement over the last president in many ways. He's done well to pick up the pieces left to him when he took office, and for that I have to give him credit. The economy has improved from the state it was in before Obama, he's had a rough road to travel, but he's strong and has done well, IMO.
 
The real story behind the letter (perspective). http://billmoyers.com/2015/03/17/real-story-behind-republicans-iran-letter/

AIPAC Marching Orders

The more serious problem with focusing on the Logan Act, however, is that what Cotton and his Republican colleagues were doing was not negotiating with a foreign government but trying to influence the outcome of negotiations in the interest of a foreign government.

The premise of the Senate Republican reflected in the letter – that Iran must not be allowed to have any enrichment capacity whatever – did not appear spontaneously. The views that Cotton and the other Republicans have espoused on Iran were the product of assiduous lobbying by Israeli agents of influence using the inducement of promises of election funding and the threat of support for the members’ opponents in future elections.

Those members of Congress don’t arrive at their positions on issues related to Iran through discussion and debate among themselves. They are given their marching orders by AIPAC lobbyists, and time after time, they sign the letters and vote for legislation or resolution that they are given, as former AIPAC lobbyist MJ Rosenberg has recalled.

This Israeli exercise of control over Congress on Iran and issues of concern to Israel resembles the Soviet direction of its satellite regimes and loyal Communist parties more than any democratic process, but with campaign contributions replacing the inducements that kept its bloc allies in line.

Cotton’s Loyalty to Israel

Rosenberg has reasoned that AIPAC must have drafted the letter and handed it to Senator Cotton. “Nothing happens on Capitol Hill related to Israel,” he tweets, “unless and until Howard Kohr (AIPAC chief) wants it to happen.Nothing.

AIPAC apparently supported the letter, but there may be more to the story. Senator Cotton just happens to be a protégé of neoconservative political kingpin Bill Kristol, whose Emergency Committee on Israel gave him nearly a million dollars late in his 2014 Senate campaign and guaranteed that Cotton would have the support of the four biggest funders of major anti-Iran organizations.

Cotton proved his absolute fealty to Likudist policy on Iran by sponsoring an amendment to the Nuclear Iran Prevention Act of 2013 that would have punished violators of the sanctions against Iran with prison sentences of up to 20 years and extended the punishment to “a spouse and any relative, to the third degree” of the sanctions violator.

In presenting the amendment in the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Cotton provided the useful clarification that it would have included “parents, children, aunts, uncles, nephews, nieces, grandparents, great grandparents, grandkids, great grandkids”.

That amendment, which he apparently believed would best reflect his adoption of the Israeli view of how to cut Iran down to size, was unsuccessful, but it established his reliability in the eyes of the Republican Likudist kingmakers. Now Kristol is grooming him to be the vice-presidential nominee in 2016.

So the real story behind the letter from Cotton and his Republican colleagues is how the enforcers of Likudist policy on Iran used an ambitious young Republican politician to try to provoke a breakdown in the Iran nuclear negotiations. The issue it raises is a far more serious issue than the Logan Act, but thus far major news organizations have steered clear of that story.
Click to expand...
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top