Quote from: Ulsterking on August 28, 2015, 05:40:51 AM
The treaty does not impose any real obligations of any kind, going so far as to allow Iran to inspect itself with no outside oversight. This treaty for all intents and purposes empowers Iran to become an atomic state. On top of that, the US will fund it, and by the terms of the agreement is obligated to defend Iran should someone like say Israel attempt to strike Iranian nuclear facilities. Russia is already delivering tons of small arms, missile defense systems, and ships in anticipation of a healthy payday. China is lined up to do the same with all manner of tech support. Theyve been buying gas and oil from Iran for a few years now as part of their attempt to push the USD out of the petrodollar. Which by the way, when Obama began pledging his support for Tehran in 2013, Saudia Arabia also began working on ways to dislodge the USD as the reserve currency.
Centered around this appeal to Iran is a slurry of circumstance that is building up to compromise both US security and its economy, not to mention guarantee the atomic death of Israel. In the not too distant future, Iran will have serviceable ICBM technology courtesy of Russia/China. At the very best, this treaty ushers in a new cold war set against the worst alliance of authoritarian regimes assembled since the Axis powers.

The Iran agreement is not a treaty. It is a deal that does not have to be ratified by Congress. Obama/Kerry did it that way on purpose as they knew they were screwing us. Now they only have to find some lemming congress critters not to override the veto of Congress's disapproval of the deal.

Quote from: kit saginaw on August 26, 2015, 08:35:18 AM
As to why 'they' support it.....  $$$ of course

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/259895/traitor-senators-took-money-iran-lobby-back-iran-daniel-greenfield

The real victory had come long before when two of their biggest politicians, Joe Biden and John Kerry, had moved into prime positions in the administration. Not only IAPAC, but key Iran Lobby figures had been major donors to both men.

That list includes Housang Amirahmadi, the founder of the American Iranian Council, who had spoken of a campaign to "conquer Obama's heart and mind" and had described himself as "the Iranian lobby in the United States." It includes the Iranian Muslim Association of North America (IMAN) board members who had fundraised for Biden.

Bingo you hit the nail on the head. A boat load of democrats got their pockets line with the almight dollar.

Traitor Senators Took Money from Iran Lobby, Back Iran Nukes

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/259895/traitor-senators-took-money-iran-lobby-back-iran-daniel-greenfield

Quote from: supsalemgr on August 28, 2015, 12:48:31 PM
The Iran agreement is not a treaty. It is a deal that does not have to be ratified by Congress. Obama/Kerry did it that way on purpose as they knew they were screwing us. Now they only have to find some lemming congress critters not to override the veto of Congress's disapproval of the deal.

If it's not a treaty ratified by the Senate then the "deal" does not carry the force of law in the U.S.

That also means then, that such things as the freezing of Iranian asset's in the U.S. would still remain frozen, as that was done legislatively by act of Congress. A "deal" doesn't supersede a law.

No matter what Obama and his merry band of liberals might think.

Quote from: daidalos on August 28, 2015, 02:55:30 PM
If it's not a treaty ratified by the Senate then the "deal" does not carry the force of law in the U.S.

That also means then, that such things as the freezing of Iranian asset's in the U.S. would still remain frozen, as that was done legislatively by act of Congress. A "deal" doesn't supersede a law.

No matter what Obama and his merry band of liberals might think.

The problem is Boehner and McConnell do not have the courage to challenge Obama.

Quote from: supsalemgr on August 29, 2015, 05:44:56 AM
The problem is Boehner and McConnell do not have the courage to challenge Obama.

It is not so much about courage as it is about "K" Street money in their pockets!!

Quote from: kroz on August 29, 2015, 08:02:30 AM
It is not so much about courage as it is about "K" Street money in their pockets!!

Bingo!

Quote from: supsalemgr on August 28, 2015, 12:48:31 PM
The Iran agreement is not a treaty. It is a deal that does not have to be ratified by Congress. Obama/Kerry did it that way on purpose as they knew they were screwing us. Now they only have to find some lemming congress critters not to override the veto of Congress's disapproval of the deal.

So how does that work if they disapprove of the deal, they just dont fund it? They wouldnt do that for ObamaCare, why would they do it for this? DC is swimming in trade lobbies (notably oil), left-wing anti-war lobbies, and of course the anti-Zionists that infect both the aforementioned and have their own lobbies, and theyve all got money to spare. Between the US and UN there is an ocean of greed pushing this deal. All fifteen member nations of the UN security council approve of the deal. Led by Russia and China, no one on that council wants to maintain sanctions. They want trade, particularly for Iranian oil and gas, and they dont give two shits about Iran funding international terrorism, or the security of Israel.

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — President Hassan Rouhani said Saturday he opposes a parliamentary vote on the landmark nuclear deal reached with world powers because terms of the agreement would turn into legal obligations if passed by lawmakers.

Rouhani told a news conference that the deal was a political understanding reached with the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany, not a pact requiring parliamentary approval. The deal also says Iran would implement the terms voluntarily, he said.

The historic deal calls for limiting Iran's nuclear program in exchange for lifting economic sanctions.

"If the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action is sent to (and passed by) parliament, it will create an obligation for the government . it will mean the president, who has not signed it so far, will have to sign it," Rouhani said. "Why should we place an unnecessary legal restriction on the Iranian people?"

MORE
http://www.newsmax.com/World/MiddleEast/ML-Iran-Nuclear/2015/08/29/id/672594/#ixzz3kGM2qiBC

They support the Iran deal because party first and country last.

Quote from: redbeard on August 29, 2015, 07:49:06 PM
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — President Hassan Rouhani said Saturday he opposes a parliamentary vote on the landmark nuclear deal reached with world powers because terms of the agreement would turn into legal obligations if passed by lawmakers.

Rouhani told a news conference that the deal was a political understanding reached with the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany, not a pact requiring parliamentary approval. The deal also says Iran would implement the terms voluntarily, he said.

The historic deal calls for limiting Iran's nuclear program in exchange for lifting economic sanctions.

"If the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action is sent to (and passed by) parliament, it will create an obligation for the government . it will mean the president, who has not signed it so far, will have to sign it," Rouhani said. "Why should we place an unnecessary legal restriction on the Iranian people?"

MORE
http://www.newsmax.com/World/MiddleEast/ML-Iran-Nuclear/2015/08/29/id/672594/#ixzz3kGM2qiBC

Okay, so this is just a very public back alley secret handshake under the table wink wink between several national entities. No contracts, and no signatures. This isnt diplomacy or politics anymore, its conspiracy to commit a crime.

Quote from: Ulsterking on August 30, 2015, 06:14:57 AM
Okay, so this is just a very public back alley secret handshake under the table wink wink between several national entities. No contracts, and no signatures. This isnt diplomacy or politics anymore,

Yep, and the GOP leadership is equally culpable.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/31/democrats-end-summer-meeting-with-no-resolution-to-support-obama-iran-deal/

Well Obama seems to be having difficulty getting Democrats on board with this despite the steady trickle of senate support. Apparently the House isnt so friendly.
Of course, even if the deal dies on the US end, I dont see what prevents the other countries involved moving on with their terms.

Quote from: The Boo Man... on August 29, 2015, 08:12:43 PM
They support the Iran deal because party first and country last.

It has nothing to do with the party.
It's all about the interests of those who back up BO's expenses.
I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist but that's really looking like a good anti-American plot.

Quote from: ReadyToShoot on August 31, 2015, 09:21:00 AM
It has nothing to do with the party.
It's all about the interests of those who back up BO's expenses.
I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist but that's really looking like a good anti-American plot.

It's both, monied communists back the Marxist Dim party.

Quote from: Solar on August 31, 2015, 09:54:25 AM
It's both, monied communists back the Marxist Dim party.

Imagine the light Hillary's emails could shine on this. Its fairly common knowledge that many of the foreign interests that fund her campaigns are aligned with Iran and militant Islam in general, and of course she isnt the only one taking money from the "Death to America" crowd, and facilitating the injection of pro-Jihadists into federal bureaucracy.