Who do you agree with Mattis or Trump?

[Rod1]

Maybe if Trump starts making agreements without the consent of Congress you simpletons will begin to understand why it's non-binding and the next possible liberal president has zero duty to continue to carry Trumps jock strap.

Simpletons the whole lot of you. Not a man of principle in sight.

Honest question, yes or no.

If Trump made a deal with NK to denuclearize it and then a liberal president came to power, and the secretary of Defense and State both said the deal is in the best interest of the USA and the JCS said that NK is complying with it.

Do you think that the liberal president would go against the wishes of its cabinet and tear it down?

Yes or no?

 

[WiolentOne]

"but Obama said so"

<Lmaoo>

 

[panamaican]

That's simply not true. Please read Article II, section 2 of the US Constitution. Treaties need Senate approval. Treaties are not made at the whims of a 4 year POTUS. That's not how it works.

Agreements that go thru the proper process of being ratified by the Senate and legislative bodies, and signed by the POTUS are binding and upheld.

That is what other countries have trust in.

Not because Obama said so.

Ignore Obama for a moment.

We have numerous international agreements (beyond treaties) in effect that have not received the consent of the Senate. Many of them go back before the previous administration. The President can and does enter into agreements intended to have long standing effect but not submitted for a full 2/3 approval from the Senate.

These agreements are predicated on the understanding that the next administration will not randomly disregard them just because they didn't negotiate them.

This is what I was referring to - the entire range of international agreements that the Executive branch is party to, not just 2/3 consented treaties.

 

[Rational Poster]

Ignore Obama for a moment.

We have numerous international agreements (beyond treaties) in effect that have not received the consent of the Senate. Many of them go back before the previous administration. The President can and does enter into agreements intended to have long standing effect but not submitted for a full 2/3 approval from the Senate.

These agreements are predicated on the understanding that the next administration will not randomly disregard them just because they didn't negotiate them.

This is what I was referring to - the entire range of international agreements that the Executive branch is party to, not just 2/3 consented treaties.

Cretins don't understand credibility because they have none.

You're only honest till you tell one lie, then you're a liar for the rest of your life.

 

[Rod1]

Every country worth a shit on this planet understands its not an official agreement if it's not ratified by the US Senate and signed by the POTUS.

"...but Obama said so"

just doesn't mean anything anymore.

Actually you are quite wrong, most countries in the world will start negotiations with the implicit belief that they are talking with someone that has some framework with said negotiations.

Pulling stunts like unilaterally withdrawing from TPP and doing away with the Iran deal certainly puts America in a bad spot.

Specially when you dont give valid arguments for pulling off, just petty internal politics spilling into the international scene.

America is at this point like a dysfunctional company where you cant tell who to talk with, when you have the president openly discredit the sec of Defense and State you cant simply deal with this banana republic levels of disorganization.

I know American hubris blinds you and you cant see straight.

When North Korea thinks you are the crazy one i think you have reached rock bottom.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/28/politics/north-korea-trump-republicans-outreach/index.html

 

[WiolentOne]

Honest question, yes or no.

If Trump made a deal with NK to denuclearize it and then a liberal president came to power, and the secretary of Defense and State both said the deal is in the best interest of the USA and the JCS said that NK is complying with it.

Do you think that the liberal president would go against the wishes of its cabinet and tear it down?

Yes or no?

Probably not. I'm not really arguing in favor or disfavor of this agreement. Im arguing the US legality and Constitutional of it and WHY it's non-binding.

Also Mattis did not say the deal itself was in the best interest of the US. He said staying with the deal was in the best interest of the US at this time if Iran is complying. He also supported Trumps "rigorous review".

 

[Rod1]

It's not merely a local law issue; it's called The US Constitution. I understand that Mexico isn't a nation of laws so it's hard for you to comprehendo but that's your problem, rodrigo.

The US Constitution is local law...

 

[Rod1]

Probably not. I'm not really arguing in favor or disfavor of this agreement. Im arguing the US legality and Constitutional of it and WHY it's non-binding.

Also Mattis did not say the deal itself was in the best interest of the US. He said staying with the deal was in the best interest of the US at this time if Iran is complying. He also supported Trumps "rigorous review".

1.- Nobody every said that it was binding, you are arguing a strawman.

2.- "Thats a yes or no question" *pause* " Yes Senator i do"

"He never said what he said"

 

[WiolentOne]

Actually you are quite wrong, most countries in the world will start negotiations with the implicit belief that they are talking with someone that has some framework with said negotiations.

Pulling stunts like unilaterally withdrawing from TPP and doing away with the Iran deal certainly puts America in a bad spot.

Specially when you dont give valid arguments for pulling off, just petty internal politics spilling into the international scene.

America is at this point like a dysfunctional company where you cant tell who to talk with, when you have the president openly discredit the sec of Defense and State you cant simply deal with this banana republic levels of disorganization.

I know American hubris blinds you and you cant see straight.

When North Korea thinks you are the crazy one i think you have reached rock bottom.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/28/politics/north-korea-trump-republicans-outreach/index.html

There is a reason why the US is number one in the world. We have this thing called the US Constitution. Countries that want to do business with us need to read it.

That way we don't have to hear:

"but Obama said..."

 

[WiolentOne]

1.- Nobody every said that it was binding, you are arguing a strawman.

2.- "Thats a yes or no question" *pause* " Yes Senator i do"

"He never said what he said"

If it's non-binding then stop crying.

 

[WiolentOne]

That way we don't have to hear:

"but Obama said..."

 

[Rod1]

There is a reason why the US is number one in the world. We have this thing called the US Constitution. Countries that want to do business with us need to read it.

That way we don't hear:

"but Obama said..."

Actually no, they dont.

What are you going to do? invade Iran? send strong words to Russia and China to do something about Iran after they turn off the lights on their nuclear program and go back to enriching?

 

[Rod1]

If it's non-binding then stop crying.

You are the one who is crying. Claiming that it doesnt affects American credibility at the world stage if you act like a banana republic because of local law.

 

[WiolentOne]

You are the one who is crying. Claiming that it doesnt affects American credibility at the world stage if you act like a banana republic because of local law.

Right... youre the guy so upset that you had to make a thread about it. Crying about a non-binding agreement made by a now-nobody.

 

[Rod1]

Right... youre the guy so upset that you had to make a thread about it. Crying about a non-binding agreement made by a now-nobody.

Im not upset, im just antonished that Trump is willing to shoot America in the foot and having Trumpite eat their words when they were parading Mattis nomination as some sort of Trump greatness.

Im just gloating in here.

 

[deltapapha]

Iran's secret sites linked to nuclear weapons development revealed


Since April 2017, when the NCRI found out about a new military location being used by SPND, the coalition has focused its attention on all the potential SPND sites that we suspected were tasked with building the bomb. The NCRI’s investigation inside Iran was conducted by the network associated with the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), which was responsible for blowing the cover off the program, particularly since 2002.

“The more we investigated, the more we realized that the weaponization program is fully operational,” Jafarzadeh said. “The military sector has gone through changes in name, location and reorganizations over the years. However, it has never halted its work and key figures in the sector have remained unchanged.”

One of the key issues of the verification process, the report states, has been access to Iran’s military sites. The regime’s highest officials — from Ali-Akbar Velayti, a foreign policy advisor to Ali Khamenei, the current Supreme Leader of Iran, to Gholam-Hossein Sa’edi, brigadier general of Iran’s elite IRGC, have stated publicly over the past month that they will continue to refuse to allow IAEA inspections of their military sites.

“An important feature of the Iranian regime’s nuclear program is that several sites and centers where nuclear-related activities are conducted are situated in sprawling military complexes that also house scores of tunnels and silos. This not only makes IAEA access to these locations more difficult, but also makes it possible to relocate these centers and projects to other locations within the complex,” Jafarzadeh explained. “As such, if it becomes necessary to relocate a project or center, it can easily be moved to a different silo or tunnel within the parameters of the military site. This makes pinpointing the exact location of nuclear research and activities more challenging, and reduces the chance of exposure.”

As detailed in the report, the Iranian Resistance has identified four major sites that “with high degrees of certainty” have been involved in various aspects of the allegedly ongoing nuclear weapons project.

 

[Rod1]

Iran's secret sites linked to nuclear weapons development revealed


Since April 2017, when the NCRI found out about a new military location being used by SPND, the coalition has focused its attention on all the potential SPND sites that we suspected were tasked with building the bomb. The NCRI’s investigation inside Iran was conducted by the network associated with the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), which was responsible for blowing the cover off the program, particularly since 2002.

“The more we investigated, the more we realized that the weaponization program is fully operational,” Jafarzadeh said. “The military sector has gone through changes in name, location and reorganizations over the years. However, it has never halted its work and key figures in the sector have remained unchanged.”

One of the key issues of the verification process, the report states, has been access to Iran’s military sites. The regime’s highest officials — from Ali-Akbar Velayti, a foreign policy advisor to Ali Khamenei, the current Supreme Leader of Iran, to Gholam-Hossein Sa’edi, brigadier general of Iran’s elite IRGC, have stated publicly over the past month that they will continue to refuse to allow IAEA inspections of their military sites.

“An important feature of the Iranian regime’s nuclear program is that several sites and centers where nuclear-related activities are conducted are situated in sprawling military complexes that also house scores of tunnels and silos. This not only makes IAEA access to these locations more difficult, but also makes it possible to relocate these centers and projects to other locations within the complex,” Jafarzadeh explained. “As such, if it becomes necessary to relocate a project or center, it can easily be moved to a different silo or tunnel within the parameters of the military site. This makes pinpointing the exact location of nuclear research and activities more challenging, and reduces the chance of exposure.”

As detailed in the report, the Iranian Resistance has identified four major sites that “with high degrees of certainty” have been involved in various aspects of the allegedly ongoing nuclear weapons project.

 

[Trotsky]

I said this another thread but even if you disagree with the Iran deal there isn't much the US can do on it's own outside of military action which would label us as a belligerent.

Their biggest trade partners are in Europe and Asia. For any US sanction to have teeth they would also have to sanction countries that trade with Iran leading to a trade war.

As long as Iran is playing ball you have to keep the deal intact.

This post needs to be posted on the refrigerator of every centrist conservative who is for invalidating the agreement.

 

[HomerThompson]

Iran's secret sites linked to nuclear weapons development revealed


Since April 2017, when the NCRI found out about a new military location being used by SPND, the coalition has focused its attention on all the potential SPND sites that we suspected were tasked with building the bomb. The NCRI’s investigation inside Iran was conducted by the network associated with the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), which was responsible for blowing the cover off the program, particularly since 2002.

“The more we investigated, the more we realized that the weaponization program is fully operational,” Jafarzadeh said. “The military sector has gone through changes in name, location and reorganizations over the years. However, it has never halted its work and key figures in the sector have remained unchanged.”

One of the key issues of the verification process, the report states, has been access to Iran’s military sites. The regime’s highest officials — from Ali-Akbar Velayti, a foreign policy advisor to Ali Khamenei, the current Supreme Leader of Iran, to Gholam-Hossein Sa’edi, brigadier general of Iran’s elite IRGC, have stated publicly over the past month that they will continue to refuse to allow IAEA inspections of their military sites.

“An important feature of the Iranian regime’s nuclear program is that several sites and centers where nuclear-related activities are conducted are situated in sprawling military complexes that also house scores of tunnels and silos. This not only makes IAEA access to these locations more difficult, but also makes it possible to relocate these centers and projects to other locations within the complex,” Jafarzadeh explained. “As such, if it becomes necessary to relocate a project or center, it can easily be moved to a different silo or tunnel within the parameters of the military site. This makes pinpointing the exact location of nuclear research and activities more challenging, and reduces the chance of exposure.”

As detailed in the report, the Iranian Resistance has identified four major sites that “with high degrees of certainty” have been involved in various aspects of the allegedly ongoing nuclear weapons project.

 

[Trotsky]

Im not upset, im just antonished that Trump is willing to shoot America in the foot and having Trumpite eat their words when they were parading Mattis nomination as some sort of Trump greatness.

Im just gloating in here.

I think what I hate most about Donald Trump ('s completely unprecedented shittiness and incompetence) is that it has made me think and speak favorably of men like Tillerson and Mattis