Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"The recent passing away of Mr. Deng Xiaoping is a great loss to China. I had known him personally. Mr. Deng Xiaoping took the initiative to establish direct contact with us to start a dialogue to solve the Tibetan problem."
Human rights violations, liberty restrictions, and disregard for citizenry are part and parcel of contemporary governments. The degrees are different (and they matter), but there are no clean hands. Granted, even though the history is still fogged, we must treat Rommel's hands as too dirty to discuss in the same breath as someone like Xiaoping, the Iranian government, or the other governments you listed. *Advertisement World War II: New Research Taints Image of Desert Fox Rommel - SPIEGEL ONLINE
if your country started talking about "death to america" every day. If your country began to fund terrorists that daily sought to kill Americans and succeeded from time to time, if your country was then known to be building nukes, as an American, I would be very happy with a full blown invasion that left your nation a heap of rubble. Then as an American, I would advocate for a Marshall Plan to rebuild your nation with the ideals of peace and freedom.
As it stands now, your country embraces the ideals of peace and freedom, is not now nor ever has been (at least the second battle of Qubec... congrats) an enemy of my country.
therefore as an American I am happy that Canada is both our neighbor and our friend....
Canada our friend & neighbor ???
How many wars we had with Canada, you have no clue,go back and read about it.
The US has never never fought a war with Iran.
You need to educate yourself,this is US history !!
A) Boehner cannot receive foreign ministers under the Constitution. Nor can the House.
B) Boehner and the Republicans are playing politics with foreign policy. They smell 2016 votes by dividing Dems on Netanyahu. Obama has no constitutional obligation to consult Congress about a deal he is negotiating with Iran. You are correct that Republicans would reject anything on the issue he puts forward, which is why that will never happen.
C) Netanyahu took advantage of a campaign opportunity offered by Boehner. He's already taken himself out of the negotiations, and he cares more about staying in power than Iran, Israeli-Palestinian relations, or Israeli relations with the White House. Those are the big 3 foreign policy interests of the State of Israel.
A) Obama is undermining the Constitution by not consulting congress on its Iranian nuclear negotiations. Obama is not disclosing information to this 'treaty' and giving the run around the Senate, violating the checks & balance. Boehner can invite whomever he pleases and this is not the first time a foreign leader has been invited. There is neither an explicit grant or prohibition.
B) There is plenty of bi-partisan politics involved in this mess. Don't get to happy with agreement, as we must wonder why Obama is keeping his deal a secret? Obama has usurping Congressional authority with its negotiations with Iran ( Amongst other examples). He believes so, so he had exercised his inherit powers as speak of the house to counter balance the Presidents Constitutional amenability.
C) No, Netanyahu as Prime Minister of Israel did his duty of putting his country national security as a priority and seized the opportunity when Boehner extended an invitation to him. Sure, he saw a advantage during his campaign, which was a risk of itself. But at the end of the day, the Iranian issue is a much more dire situation and the Prime Minister has expressed to Obama for a better deal.
Why the NY Times would publish this buffoon, I almost can't say . . . if not for the other rubbish op-eds they print.
Israel and the United States do not have shared strategic interests here. Neoconservatives would have the US cede its interests to the junior partner in the alliance. They believe they win, in domestic politics, if they take that position. We will see how good their bet is. If its a good bet, then we will see if they force themselves to follow-through at great cost to American interests.
U.S and Israel have similar strategic interests regarding Iran other than how to diffuse the situation. Obama has a legacy to fulfill and is undermining his constituents and ally's to achieve a deal. What ever the Neo-Conservatives opinions are, Israel is looking for a better deal and harsher sanctions; not war. Israeli analysts have even documented that the time to strike Iranian nuclear facilities has passed. This does not mean however, that Israel will unilateral strike as its last option.
A) Obama is undermining the Constitution by not consulting congress on its Iranian nuclear negotiations. Obama is not disclosing information to this 'treaty' and giving the run around the Senate, violating the checks & balance. Boehner can invite whomever he pleases and this is not the first time a foreign leader has been invited. There is neither an explicit grant or prohibition.
B) There is plenty of bi-partisan politics involved in this mess. Don't get to happy with agreement, as we must wonder why Obama is keeping his deal a secret? Obama has usurping Congressional authority with its negotiations with Iran ( Amongst other examples). He believes so, so he had exercised his inherit powers as speak of the house to counter balance the Presidents Constitutional amenability.
C) No, Netanyahu as Prime Minister of Israel did his duty of putting his country national security as a priority and seized the opportunity when Boehner extended an invitation to him. Sure, he saw a advantage during his campaign, which was a risk of itself. But at the end of the day, the Iranian issue is a much more dire situation and the Prime Minister has expressed to Obama for a better deal.
You are wrong about this.
A) Not a treaty. Will not be a treaty. Only US State Department can authorize a foreign national to enter the US. Boehner simply does not have that power. It belongs to the Executive. Further, it is the Executive who receives foreign ministers.
B) There is not yet a deal. There are negotiations to secure a deal--sensitive negotiations. So they are obviously not public. Identify any section I power that entitles Mr. Boehner to authorize a foreign national's entry into the United States and to receive a foreign head of state.
C) Mr. Netanyahu is not involved with the negotiations--he does not know the nature of the deal. In fact, the US apparently stopped sharing info about the negotiations with Israel because Mr. Netanyahu has leaked shared information. If Mr. Netanyahu cared about the Iranian issue, he would be cultivating influence with the White House. Instead, he burned bridges for electoral advantages.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMoreJuice
U.S and Israel have similar strategic interests regarding Iran other than how to diffuse the situation. Obama has a legacy to fulfill and is undermining his constituents and ally's to achieve a deal. What ever the Neo-Conservatives opinions are, Israel is looking for a better deal and harsher sanctions; not war. Israeli analysts have even documented that the time to strike Iranian nuclear facilities has passed. This does not mean however, that Israel will unilateral strike as its last option.
Israel's stated interest is "no Iranian capability to build a bomb." The US's stated interest is "no Iranian bomb." Israel's unstated interest is nuclear hegemony in the Middle East and no relations between the United States and Iran. The US's unstated interest is building confidence, then cooperation with Iran.
A legacy of improved relations with Iran would be monumental--and it would importantly take the road to war with Iran and regime change off of the table. Time will tell whether that is politically feasible in both countries. Iran is an important regional power. In spite of intense pressure starting in 1979 (Iran-Iraq War with US backing Saddam, sanctions, inspections, US troops on two borders--Iraq and Afghanistan, further sanctions, further inspections, espionage, etc.), it remains independent and resistant to US interests. It is time to figure out if everyone can benefit by starting to cooperate.
Israel will not strike if there is a deal. It's diplomatic position is too precarious to risk such an offense to its patron.
The way his administration is carelessly letting Muslims into the country we won't have to go "over there" to fight radical Islam. Radical Islam is here in the USA.
A) Not a treaty. Will not be a treaty. Only US State Department can authorize a foreign national to enter the US. Boehner simply does not have that power. It belongs to the Executive. Further, it is the Executive who receives foreign ministers.
B) There is not yet a deal. There are negotiations to secure a deal--sensitive negotiations. So they are obviously not public. Identify any section I power that entitles Mr. Boehner to authorize a foreign national's entry into the United States and to receive a foreign head of state.
C) Mr. Netanyahu is not involved with the negotiations--he does not know the nature of the deal. In fact, the US apparently stopped sharing info about the negotiations with Israel because Mr. Netanyahu has leaked shared information. If Mr. Netanyahu cared about the Iranian issue, he would be cultivating influence with the White House. Instead, he burned bridges for electoral advantages.
A) I already provided you links of previous speakers who invited foreign nationals. Obama is not the supreme leader, Boehner is in his prerogative to invite whom ever he chooses. Foreign relations is a responsibility of the Executive, but undermining the Constitution is why Boehner did what he did.
B) Obama's proposed deal is secret, his integrity is absolutely relevant. He needs to sell his deal to Congress and its American allies before inking a deal. If you condone Netanyahu then you must equally condone decades of foreign speakers. It's an inherit power that the speaker possesses to satisfy constitutional responsibilities.
Article 2, section 2: Advice and Consent on Treaties
C) Spare me the propaganda. Iran who's NPT participation is in question, has expressed nuclear genocide against another UN Charter member, Israel. Iran cannot make these claims without repercussions. As the Prime Minister of Israel, it is his duty to protect Israel regarding national security measures. Netanyahu exposed the flaws in Obama's negotiations, which its urgency triumphs protocol or Bi-Partisan bickering.
Quote:
Israel's stated interest is "no Iranian capability to build a bomb." The US's stated interest is "no Iranian bomb." Israel's unstated interest is nuclear hegemony in the Middle East and no relations between the United States and Iran. The US's unstated interest is building confidence, then cooperation with Iran.
A) Israel's alleged nuclear program is for defensive deterrence, which never caused an outspoken Arab nuclear arms race.
B) Iran's nuclear ambitions and its Persian Empire fantasies is causing a security dilemma to occur in the Arab bloc. The West is not going to perform miracles through negotiations.
Quote:
A legacy of improved relations with Iran would be monumental--and it would importantly take the road to war with Iran and regime change off of the table. Time will tell whether that is politically feasible in both countries. Iran is an important regional power. In spite of intense pressure starting in 1979 (Iran-Iraq War with US backing Saddam, sanctions, inspections, US troops on two borders--Iraq and Afghanistan, further sanctions, further inspections, espionage, etc.), it remains independent and resistant to US interests. It is time to figure out if everyone can benefit by starting to cooperate.
Israel will not strike if there is a deal. It's diplomatic position is too precarious to risk such an offense to its patron.
Your living a pipe dream. Khamenei, the political and religious leader of the state, has threatened the destruction of the U.S and Israel. While the U.S was convincing Iran to be a 'wonderful asset' , they created virtual mock naval trainings of destroying U.S Navy fleets. And you want to appease and make nice?
I take these threats very seriously, especially a country who is know for terrorism sponsorship. You're apologism and whitewashing of Iranian responsibility and wrongdoings is candidly remarkable. Picking the enemy over an ally while the enemy produces the means to carry out its threats. Is that what you are projecting?
This is not an end run and this is not a treaty, you cannot reasonably involve congress in direct sensitive negotiations with 7 countries involved. Attempts to break off negotiations that have not been completed is premature and senseless. They will have their opportunity to vote on the removal of sanctions tied to nuclear development in Iran, that is their participation.
When will they have an opportunity to vote, after the sanctions have been removed? Or Obama issues executive order not to enforce?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
Yes no question that Saddam Hussein gave inspectors the run around but they did ask for more time before we invaded, 10 years later the better choice is obvious. There will be inspectors inside Iran to check compliance but issues remain.
And if the inspectors find a violation they're going to risk saying something about it while inside Iran or while their colleagues are? Give me a break.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
The vote on removal of sanctions will most likely occur after the 2016 election, so why the attempt to circumvent negotiations at this point in time, are destructive relations with Iran the better choice.
We have productive relations now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
A not so perfect deal is better than no deal at all.
When will they have an opportunity to vote, after the sanctions have been removed? Or Obama issues executive order not to enforce?
And if the inspectors find a violation they're going to risk saying something about it while inside Iran or while their colleagues are? Give me a break.
We have productive relations now? Why?
Only congress can remove the sanctions, the administration can make a deal but only congress can remove or impose sanctions. The problem is that congress want's to be directly involved in negotiations and that would complicate what are very intricate negotiations.
I doubt Iran will take action against inspectors that would not play out well in the international community.
Yes a not so perfect deal is better than none, North Korea is a perfect example.
We should learn from history.
Canada our friend & neighbor ???
How many wars we had with Canada, you have no clue,go back and read about it.
The US has never never fought a war with Iran.
You need to educate yourself,this is US history !!
This might qualify for the worst post of the day.
Seriously scobby? Canada is a bigger threat than Iran?
Only congress can remove the sanctions, the administration can make a deal but only congress can remove or impose sanctions. The problem is that congress want's to be directly involved in negotiations and that would complicate what are very intricate negotiations.
I doubt Iran will take action against inspectors that would not play out well in the international community.
Yes a not so perfect deal is better than none, North Korea is a perfect example.
We should learn from history.
The deal can't be all that 'intricate', since latest news is that it's going to be verbal and loosely framed.
This can't be good but may be done to avoid calling it an official treaty.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
