Obama wishes to bypass congress on Iran deal

[Texashiker]

Thomas Jefferson disagreed with you.

Proof?

If that argument doesn't work with "assault weapons", it certainly doesn't work here.

So you have no issue granting the president unlimited treaty making authority?

 

[MrPickins]

So you have no issue granting the president unlimited treaty making authority?

He does not have this currently.

You are overstating your argument, one of the best ways to lose a debate.




(I know, you don't care about winning, only about making yourself look even more willfully ignorant.)

 

[ElFenix]

TH: the president has a pile of apples!
everyone else: no, those are oranges
TH: BUT APPLES!

 

[Texashiker]

He does not have this currently.

You are overstating your argument, one of the best ways to lose a debate.

The president by not calling the treaty with Iran an official treaty is bypassing his constitutional requirements.

Where is the system of checks and balances?

As I asked earlier in this thread, where is the dividing line? When is the president required to seek senate approval, and when can the president bypass the senate?

TH: the president has a pile of apples!
everyone else: no, those are oranges
TH: BUT APPLES!

It's ok, I love you just like everyone else, not as much as moonbeam though. Not saying I am gay, but if moonbeam asked me to go on a date,,,,,.

 

[fskimospy]

Proof?

From your own link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_Clause#One_of_three_types_of_international_accord

The Supreme Court of the United States has considered congressional-executive and sole-executive agreements to be valid, and they have been common throughout American history. Thomas Jefferson explained that the Article II treaty procedure is not necessary when there is no long-term commitment:

It is desirable, in many instances, to exchange mutual advantages by Legislative Acts rather than by treaty: because the former, though understood to be in consideration of each other, and therefore greatly respected, yet when they become too inconvenient, can be dropped at the will of either party: whereas stipulations by treaty are forever irrevocable but by joint consent....

Why do you post links if you don't even read them?

So you have no issue granting the president unlimited treaty making authority?

He isn't making treaties.

 

[ElFenix]

The president by not calling the treaty with Iran an official treaty is bypassing his constitutional requirements.

well, no, the supreme court has already weighed in and determined that not all international conventions are treaties. and even if they were, nearly no treaties that are called treaties are implemented as treaties in the US, they're passed as regular laws (because then you can get rid of them with a regular law, unlike a treaty).

Where is the system of checks and balances?

As I asked earlier in this thread, where is the dividing line? When is the president required to seek senate approval, and when can the president bypass the senate?

reading supreme court precedent on the matter would be a good start in learning where it is. but you've refused to do that for some reason.

 

[Texashiker]

well, no, the supreme court has already weighed in and determined that not all international conventions are treaties. and even if they were, nearly no treaties that are called treaties are implemented as treaties in the US, they're passed as regular laws (because then you can get rid of them with a regular law, unlike a treaty).

reading supreme court precedent on the matter would be a good start in learning where it is. but you've refused to do that for some reason.

I am reading the link eskimospy posted.

Everything you and eskimospy are posting does not explain anything I have asked.

Iran is an emerging nuclear power. They deny they are developing nuclear weapons, but the rest of the world does not believe them.

If this was some treaty to import bake pads for a ford pinto, so what, no big deal.

Iran is under international sanctions. What the obama administration negotiates does not affect just the united states, it affects the international community.

From the wikipedia link eskimospy posted,

Likewise, a sole-executive agreement can only cover matters within the President's authority or matters in which Congress has delegated authority to the President.

For example, a treaty may prohibit states from imposing capital punishment on foreign nationals, but a congressional-executive agreement or sole-executive agreement cannot.

Just because the president can wage war for 30 days without congress does not mean obama can nuke russia and china for 29 days and then call a cease fire.

EDIT

Also, why is obama trying to bypass the senate when there is clear bipartisan support?

Bring the details to the senate, let the world see the treaty, and let the senate vote on the treaty.

 

[Fern]

That the US should resolve its differences internally and deal with other countries as a united front. It seems that Obama already has all the authority he needs here, as Congress explicitly granted him that authority when it passed the sanctions to begin with. What else would he need? We aren't going to go to war with Iran.
-snip-

"What else would he need?"

I think you answered your question in your first sentence: "the US should resolve its differences internally and deal with other countries as a united front".

Resolve =/= ignore.

Some of the criticism I've heard do seem valid. No matter how much you dislike the other person a leader should evaluate it and, if necessary, adapt accordingly. If the criticism turns out to be valid and Obama ignores it'll go down as part of his legacy. I.e., it's in his own best interest to not ignore everyone else.

Two things:

1. I tried to find details of Obama's plan. The info I found said it is not available. So much for that.

2. In searching the above I found that the WH is denying that they will avoid Congress. If so, this whole thread is bogus.

Fern

 

[norseamd]

I think all geopolitical and military threads need more ElFenix.

 

[norseamd]

I am reading the link eskimospy posted.

Everything you and eskimospy are posting does not explain anything I have asked.

Iran is an emerging nuclear power. They deny they are developing nuclear weapons, but the rest of the world does not believe them.

If this was some treaty to import bake pads for a ford pinto, so what, no big deal.

Iran is under international sanctions. What the obama administration negotiates does not affect just the united states, it affects the international community.

From the wikipedia link eskimospy posted,


Just because the president can wage war for 30 days without congress does not mean obama can nuke russia and china for 29 days and then call a cease fire.

EDIT

Also, why is obama trying to bypass the senate when there is clear bipartisan support?

Bring the details to the senate, let the world see the treaty, and let the senate vote on the treaty.

And I say if they agree to full IAEA and UN inspections then there are no problems. If they do not agree with inspections then I think we have some problem.

 

[fskimospy]

"What else would he need?"

I think you answered your question in your first sentence: "the US should resolve its differences internally and deal with other countries as a united front".

Resolve =/= ignore.

Some of the criticism I've heard do seem valid. No matter how much you dislike the other person a leader should evaluate it and, if necessary, adapt accordingly. If the criticism turns out to be valid and Obama ignores it'll go down as part of his legacy. I.e., it's in his own best interest to not ignore everyone else.

Two things:

1. I tried to find details of Obama's plan. The info I found said it is not available. So much for that.

2. In searching the above I found that the WH is denying that they will avoid Congress. If so, this whole thread is bogus.

Fern

Negotiations are ongoing so there is no plan.

I find it highly likely Obama will avoid congress. Considering the amount of influence Israel wields there I find it next to impossible to imagine any sane deal that would make it through there.

 

[norseamd]

Negotiations are ongoing so there is no plan.

I find it highly likely Obama will avoid congress. Considering the amount of influence Israel wields there I find it next to impossible to imagine any sane deal that would make it through there.

There is no moral or logic in involving Congress. Since they never do their job anyways they can suck festering chickenshit.

 

[Fern]

And I say if they agree to full IAEA and UN inspections then there are no problems. If they do not agree with inspections then I think we have some problem.

That means no deal. At least so far. There are areas they've absolutely refused to allow inspectors.

Additionally, and I can't confirm since Obama is keeping it all secret, Iran wants to greatly expand their centrifuges.

Accordingly, the problem I see with 'your deal' is that sanctions are removed from Iran allowing them build up their (financial) resources (which they can direct to nuclear build up). They can increase their production etc via increased centrifuged capacity. Once they get to the point where they have sufficient equip etc to produce weapon grade material they can simply tell us to 'F' off; the 'deal' is off. And at that point sanctions are useless as a deterrent. We may then find ourselves dealing with the possibility of a nuclear weapon arms race in the ME.

I hate to bring up Hitler, but he did something similar in the build up to WWII. I have at my desk a German Luger pistol manufactured circa 1933. This was forbidden; production of arms by Germany was seriously curtailed in the treaty ending WWI so as to prevent a WWII. To hide it there was no manufacturer listed on the pistol, merely a secret code stamped on it ("S/42"). This was so his ramp up of weapons manufacturing capability etc went unnoticed (or at least couldn't be proven.) until too late.

Fern

 

[Fern]

Negotiations are ongoing so there is no plan.
-snip-

LOL, I hope that's a typo.

To think we're in negotiations with no plan is astounding.

Fern

 

[fskimospy]

LOL, I hope that's a typo.

To think we're in negotiations with no plan is astounding.

Fern

Definitely not a typo. You would be crazy to publish your overall plan while negotiations were ongoing. Then the other side would know exactly what boundaries to push.

 

[Fern]

Definitely not a typo. You would be crazy to publish your overall plan while negotiations were ongoing. Then the other side would know exactly what boundaries to push.

So, yeah, it's definitely a 'typo'. No plan =/= secret plan.

Fern

 

[fskimospy]

So, yeah, it's definitely a 'typo'. No plan =/= secret plan.

Fern

I was referring to why there was no plan for you to find, but sure.

 

[fskimospy]

That means no deal. At least so far. There are areas they've absolutely refused to allow inspectors.

Additionally, and I can't confirm since Obama is keeping it all secret, Iran wants to greatly expand their centrifuges.

Accordingly, the problem I see with 'your deal' is that sanctions are removed from Iran allowing them build up their (financial) resources (which they can direct to nuclear build up). They can increase their production etc via increased centrifuged capacity. Once they get to the point where they have sufficient equip etc to produce weapon grade material they can simply tell us to 'F' off; the 'deal' is off. And at that point sanctions are useless as a deterrent. We may then find ourselves dealing with the possibility of a nuclear weapon arms race in the ME.

I hate to bring up Hitler, but he did something similar in the build up to WWII. I have at my desk a German Luger pistol manufactured circa 1933. This was forbidden; production of arms by Germany was seriously curtailed in the treaty ending WWI so as to prevent a WWII. To hide it there was no manufacturer listed on the pistol, merely a secret code stamped on it ("S/42"). This was so his ramp up of weapons manufacturing capability etc went unnoticed (or at least couldn't be proven.) until too late.

Fern

If their goal is to build nuclear weapons no matter what there is literally nothing we can do to stop them short of an invasion. Presumably you don't want that.

So you have a choice, either attack them financially as we have been doing and watch them make slow but inexorable progress towards a nuclear weapon, thus guaranteeing the thing you want to avoid. Or, you can try to make it better for them to not have one than to have one.

I know what I would prefer but your mileage may vary.

 

[Jhhnn]

That means no deal. At least so far. There are areas they've absolutely refused to allow inspectors.

Additionally, and I can't confirm since Obama is keeping it all secret, Iran wants to greatly expand their centrifuges.

Accordingly, the problem I see with 'your deal' is that sanctions are removed from Iran allowing them build up their (financial) resources (which they can direct to nuclear build up). They can increase their production etc via increased centrifuged capacity. Once they get to the point where they have sufficient equip etc to produce weapon grade material they can simply tell us to 'F' off; the 'deal' is off. And at that point sanctions are useless as a deterrent. We may then find ourselves dealing with the possibility of a nuclear weapon arms race in the ME.

I hate to bring up Hitler, but he did something similar in the build up to WWII. I have at my desk a German Luger pistol manufactured circa 1933. This was forbidden; production of arms by Germany was seriously curtailed in the treaty ending WWI so as to prevent a WWII. To hide it there was no manufacturer listed on the pistol, merely a secret code stamped on it ("S/42"). This was so his ramp up of weapons manufacturing capability etc went unnoticed (or at least couldn't be proven.) until too late.

Fern

Magnificent bit of fear mongering & projection.

Let us begin with the places the Iranians place off limits to inspectors. The contention is that those places were used for weapons related research at times over a decade ago, not that they are places where enrichment or weapons manufacture has ever occurred. We both know this to be true. There are no credible allegations that such research is ongoing if it ever happened at all.

For the purposes of going forward, it matters not in the slightest. What matters is that weapons grade materials are not produced. No weapons grade material, no weapons. Period. Which is really the IAEA mission everywhere. They have not alleged that production of weapons grade material has occurred, either.

If Iran will agree to IAEA protocols wrt production & handling of nuclear material, that's realistically the best we'll get, because they will continue enriching fuel & building nuclear powerplants. Nobody will stop them, particularly if no weapons grade material can be shown to have been produced in IAEA monitored facilities.

It's not something you can hide very well, certainly not like your false equivalency over German pistols.

The truth is that if all of these allegations of Iran pulling secret shit were true, they'd already have nuclear weapons if they wanted them.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Magnificent bit of fear mongering & projection.

Let us begin with the places the Iranians place off limits to inspectors. The contention is that those places were used for weapons related research at times over a decade ago, not that they are places where enrichment or weapons manufacture has ever occurred. We both know this to be true. There are no credible allegations that such research is ongoing if it ever happened at all.

For the purposes of going forward, it matters not in the slightest. What matters is that weapons grade materials are not produced. No weapons grade material, no weapons. Period. Which is really the IAEA mission everywhere. They have not alleged that production of weapons grade material has occurred, either.

If Iran will agree to IAEA protocols wrt production & handling of nuclear material, that's realistically the best we'll get, because they will continue enriching fuel & building nuclear powerplants. Nobody will stop them, particularly if no weapons grade material can be shown to have been produced in IAEA monitored facilities.

It's not something you can hide very well, certainly not like your false equivalency over German pistols.

The truth is that if all of these allegations of Iran pulling secret shit were true, they'd already have nuclear weapons if they wanted them.

the IAEA has had troubles with Iran and not a decade ago.

Iran cannot be trusted if they will not allow proper verification. I'm willing to give them a chance but won't be amused by games or the defense of them.

 

[Jhhnn]

the IAEA has had troubles with Iran and not a decade ago.

Iran cannot be trusted if they will not allow proper verification. I'm willing to give them a chance but won't be amused by games or the defense of them.

Proper verification of what, exactly?

 

[Darwin333]

Has Congress done anything truly meaningful in the last 2 years? The government seems broken, but I don't think it's the executive that's the biggest problem. In fact, the reaching of executive power is in direct response to the craven, do-nothing, no meaningful oversight Congress.

Since the "reaching executive power" has been happening for well over a decade you are implying that Congress is obsolete and we should just go all dictatorship... Yeah but no thanks.

 

[Darwin333]

This post seems to come from a fundamental ignorance of how foreign relations is structured under the Constitution, not to mention these sanctions themselves. Explicitly written into them was the ability for Obama to suspend parts of them if he thought it was in the interests of US national security.

Apparently the Republic is on fire because the president is acting fully within duly enacted laws. Who knew?

Thank you for this post, I'll take you on your word that the above is true, you're generally a good and honest person.

While the article I read implied something else entirely, I assume congress has the power to do something if they could get off their asses?

 

[Darwin333]

Proper verification of what, exactly?

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess proper verification that they aren't making nuclear weapons.

 

[Darwin333]

There is no moral or logic in involving Congress. Since they never do their job anyways they can suck festering chickenshit.

So get rid of the entire legislative branch if that is your view. Just don't bitch when the other side gets the presidency/monarchy/dictatorship.