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 bottom line is this. We don’t yet have a deal. It may be that Iran cannot say yes to a good deal. I have repeatedly said that I would rather have no deal than a bad deal.
But if we’re successful negotiating, then in fact this will be the best deal possible to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Nothing else comes close. Sanctions won’t do it. Even military action would not be as successful as the deal that we have put forward.
Iran doesn't need any deal. This is just the US trying to save face because we have not been able to destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities after all these years.
What was the point in sending a letter to Iran explaining the constitution, they should be unified in standing behind the administrations decision rather than 2nd guessing the negotiations.
Iran doesn't need any deal. This is just the US trying to save face because we have not been able to destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities after all these years.
Iran is legally entitled to "nuclear capabilities" as you say.
Actually, this is smart and standard protocol for anyone with a brain who is working in diplomacy.
Obama is saying that they will first come to an agreement, then raise that agreement for discussion in the appropriate context; not that they will come to an agreement, implement it, and then tell people "what's in it." And it depends on the agreement, frankly. We are not a direct democracy where you get a vote on every piece of international diplomatic deal; we are a representative democracy where our elected representatives may get a debate and vote on said deal.
No one in their right mind would leak information on ongoing diplomatic negotiations to the public...for reasons that should be obvious, but that I'm sure I'll need to explain to this audience in future posts.
The President has been backstabbing this country since before his election.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
No. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Trying to undermine international negotiations is beyond the pale. I am in no way a fan of this administration, but it is the duty of the executive branch to handle international relations, not Congress. These senators should be ashamed of themselves. They act as if their president is Benjamin Netanyahu. Enough is enough. At the very least, they should all be censured for this.
"[i]n our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy. It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history. This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.
" ... I wish to enlighten the authors that if the next administration revokes any agreement with the stroke of a pen, as they boast, it will have simply committed a blatant violation of international law. ... Congress may not modify the terms of the agreement at any time as they claim, and if Congress adopts any measure to impede its implementation, it will have committed a material breach of US obligations."
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.