47 Senate Republicans Write Letter to Iran, Undermine US Foreign Policy

[metis]

Personally, I think that is beside the point. Members of the government can argue the issue as much as they like, but stepping outside the bounds of their own government and directly negotiating with a foreign power is effectively stepping outside the democratic process they dwore to serve.

Yep, and the 47 pulled a "Jane Fonda", but at least in her case she was a civilian when she did so,

However, now we are hearing some Pubs that also have come to realize and admit that this was a terrible decision that could set a very dangerous precedent. However, to the vociferous Obama-hating Pubs, such "minor" things matter little.
.

 

[BSM1]

Personally, I think that is beside the point. Members of the government can argue the issue as much as they like, but stepping outside the bounds of their own government and directly negotiating with a foreign power is effectively stepping outside the democratic process they dwore to serve.

This is exactly what Obama is trying to do by bypassing the Congress that was elected by the people of the United States.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

Her emails are much worse.

Who knows what american intelligence was hacked by the enemies and what she was trying to conceal as Sec. of State.

Actually the letters are good. Allowing Iran to get nukes and to continue the world wide funding of terrorism is pretty close to evil. That's what the Obama deal would do.

Iran getting their hands on that sweet sweet nuke is part of a deterrent strategy, nothing more. This is even recognized by the pentagon. No Iranian with half an ounce of sense would be stupid enough to threaten, let alone use, a nuclear weapon on anyone. It's not hard to imagine the consequences.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

This is exactly what Obama is trying to do by bypassing the Congress that was elected by the people of the United States.

What exactly are you referring to when you say "bypass?"

 

[fantome profane]

Question. Isn't this exactly what the republicans criticized John Kerry for during the 2004 election?

 

[philbo]

It's Obama and his administration that are undermining the US, constantly.

It's difficult to tell these days... are you being serious?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

This is exactly what Obama is trying to do by bypassing the Congress that was elected by the people of the United States.

No, it's not. He has the constitutional right to negotiate the treaty. It is then up to the Senate to advise on whether the treaty should be ratified.
Finally, it is up to the President (not the Senate), to ratify. In other words, both the Senate and subsequently the President need to agree in order for the treaty to be ratified.

Flagging their intent to not ratify a treaty before full disclosure, and doing so through direct communication with a foreign power is at best circumventing democratic process, and at worst illegal.

 

[CMike]

No, it's not. He has the constitutional right to negotiate the treaty. It is then up to the Senate to advise on whether the treaty should be ratified.
Finally, it is up to the President (not the Senate), to ratify. In other words, both the Senate and subsequently the President need to agree in order for the treaty to be ratified.

Flagging their intent to not ratify a treaty before full disclosure, and doing so through direct communication with a foreign power is at best circumventing democratic process, and at worst illegal.

Not quite.

Sanctions are legislation passed by congress.

Obama isn't dictator.

If he just wants to bypass congress and play dictator he shouldn't be surprised if there is push back.

Besides it's a lousy deal that will endanger the world.

Also, they wrote an open letter. How is that illegal? Dictator Obama doesn't approve of the content of the speech?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Not quite.

Sanctions are legislation passed by congress.

Obama isn't dictator.

If he just wants to bypass congress and play dictator he shouldn't be surprised if there is push back.

Besides it's a lousy deal that will endanger the world.

Also, they wrote an open letter. How is that illegal? Dictator Obama doesn't approve of the content of the speech?

Negotiating with Iran isn't bypassing Congress. Refusing to place said negotiations in front of the Senate for advice on ratification would be, and at that point I'd be on the side of these Republicans, but not before.

They should be working within their own government, not outside it.

As for an open letter being illegal, I'd refer you to the Logan Act. I don't see it being invoked in this case (or any other) but it does suggest there are some legal issues with their actions.

(Hence I said 'at worst illegal' rather than straight out lawbreaking.)

 

[Harmonious]

Yep, and the 47 pulled a "Jane Fonda", but at least in her case she was a civilian when she did so,

However, now we are hearing some Pubs that also have come to realize and admit that this was a terrible decision that could set a very dangerous precedent. However, to the vociferous Obama-hating Pubs, such "minor" things matter little.
.

Actually, what they did was far more legal than when Nancy Pelosi ran around the Middle East apologizing for President Bush's continuation of the wars that both Houses of Congress approved of (at the time he declared them).

These 47 people explained that Obama did not have the right to do what he did, and if Iran is interested in a deal, which is the appropriate way to go about it.

 

[CMike]

Iran getting their hands on that sweet sweet nuke is part of a deterrent strategy, nothing more. This is even recognized by the pentagon. No Iranian with half an ounce of sense would be stupid enough to threaten, let alone use, a nuclear weapon on anyone. It's not hard to imagine the consequences.

The problem is that a lot of them don't have sense.

A chunk of them want to die in this way to get to heaven.

 

[CMike]

What exactly are you referring to when you say "bypass?"

This question wasn't address to me, but I will add my cents anyway

1) Sanctions against Iran is legislation that goes through congress.

2) Congress is supposed to advise and consult in foreign policy. Obama is acting like a dictator and bypassing them.

And then he screams like a girl if Congress just doesn't take it.

 

[Salvador]

I think it's wishful thinking by the U.S. Senate that a congressional letter to the Iranian government is going to persuade Iran to give up her nuclear power ambitions. I think it's inevitable that Iran will obtain nuclear weapons. I'm not too worried about a nuclear Iran, because the Iranian nuclear arsenal will never be as powerful as the American or Israeli nuclear arsenal.

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

The problem is that a lot of them don't have sense.

A chunk of them want to die in this way to get to heaven.

I'm sorry, but you don't seem to have any sense if you really believe that. Either that, or you don't understand the circumstances. They aren't going to allow their entire Islamic state become a smoking crater to launch one nuclear missile...which could conceivably be shot down before it even reaches its target, or even before it's launched. Iran is heavily monitored via satellite and other forms of intelligence. It's not going to happen.

 

[metis]

Actually, what they did was far more legal than when Nancy Pelosi ran around the Middle East apologizing for President Bush's continuation of the wars that both Houses of Congress approved of (at the time he declared them).

These 47 people explained that Obama did not have the right to do what he did, and if Iran is interested in a deal, which is the appropriate way to go about it.

Pelosi was not trying to change U.S. policy but the 47 are. And the last sentence is bogus because if there's a constitutional issue, the Pubs could have taken it to the SCOTUS and the court could fast-track a decision. And exactly what do you believe Obama is doing that's supposedly unconstitutional on this anyway?

 

[TurkeyOnRye]

I think it's wishful thinking by the U.S. Senate that a congressional letter to the Iranian government is going to persuade Iran to give up her nuclear power ambitions.

The point of the letter doesn't seem to be to persuade. The letter was intended to spoil the negotiation process.

 

[LuisDantas]

One has to be worried when 47 senators show a desire to so openly display their basic ignorance and/or disregard of their proper role just to fall into greater sympathies among their most immature voters.

That really indicates a very fragile state of the political institutions of the USA.

 

[Harmonious]

Pelosi was not trying to change U.S. policy but the 47 are.

Yes, actually, she did. She made it clear that the United States is weak, because the leadership is divided, and whatever image President Bush attempted to put forward, she single-handedly destroyed, because it was more important to play politics and make Bush look bad than to do what was right to make the United States strong in the eyes of its enemies.

And the last sentence is bogus because if there's a constitutional issue, the Pubs could have taken it to the SCOTUS and the court could fast-track a decision. And exactly what do you believe Obama is doing that's supposedly unconstitutional on this anyway?

I'm not going to go through everything that President Obama has done wrong and gone against the Constitution.

However, Congress was clearly moved at what Netanyahu had to say when he addressed them. The idea that it is bad for the free world for Iran to have nuclear capabilities was made very clear. I'm not sure what Obama is playing at, but he knew that what he is doing with setting up a ten-year time limit is against the will of the Congress.

What Obama did may not have expressly violated the Constitution (this time), but it is clear that he isn't interested in doing what is good for the country, again, so that he can play politics.

The 47 people made clear that Obama doesn't have the right or the consent to do what he's doing. Obama seems to have forgotten that there are three branches of government, and the one that holds the power to declare war or make sanctions is the one he is set on ignoring because they are the wrong party for his tastes.

 

[columbus]

This letter meant nothing to Iran.
It was intended to pander to the Republican base who don't care how much damage is done to the USA as long as it is done by their party and opposes the President.

Tom

 

[LuisDantas]

This letter meant nothing to Iran.
It was intended to pander to the Republican base who don't care how much damage is done to the USA as long as it is done by their party and opposes the President.

Tom

That certainly seems to be an accurate assessment of the facts. I truly wonder if anyone in the GOP even thinks differently.