NYT OPED On Iran Nuclear Issue Very Unclear

Opinion/Editorial

 

 It's as the old saying goes "It's better to be thought of as a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt" the only difference here is the opening of one's mouth is this fooilsh opinion piece of crap this morning from the New York Times.Entitled "Sabotaging a Deal With Iran."

 The only reason why the NYT oped board is commenting on the Iran nuclear issue is because the Prime Minister of the great nation of Israel the great Benjamin Netanyahu came to Washington last week to address his concerns to our lame brained idiots in Congress both Houses at the behest of RINO House Speaker John Boehner (RINO-Oh) only to be bereated by President Barack HUSSEIN Obama and the back turning House Mniority leader Nancy "the witch" Bellalegosi Pelosi.

 The BS begins "Congressional critics of an emerging international agreement to limit Iran’s nuclear program moved with uncommon speed last week to force a vote that could have blown up the negotiations, which are now at a delicate stage. Cooler heads prevailed, and action was delayed. But Congress could still sabotage the deal.Apparently hoping to capitalize on the fiery denunciation of Iran by the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, in a speech to Congress, the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, on Tuesday pressed for a vote this week on a bill that would require congressional review of any deal. But he backed down when the bill’s supporters insisted on delaying any vote until after March 24, the target set by the United States, five other major powers and Iran for reaching a framework agreement."

 Yeah negotiations that the NYT wants because they are o so diplomatic my ass they are.And of course blame congress game.Congress should be able to review any so called deal with Iran but that would involve something called transparency from the Obamaites but that isn't going to happen any time soon just the usual BS lip service.

 The rant goes on "The agreement is intended to offer Iran relief from crippling economic sanctions in return for tough restraints on its nuclear program for at least a decade. In the administration’s view, the agreement will not be a treaty requiring Senate ratification but a political commitment that is well within Mr. Obama’s authority to enter into without congressional approval. Congress’s chief power is that while Mr. Obama can waive certain sanctions on Iran on national security grounds, only Congress can permanently remove them. Congress also can enact new sanctions if Iran violates its commitments.The bill before the Senate could well scuttle any deal. Within five days of concluding an agreement, the president would have to submit the text to Congress as well as an assessment of Iran’s compliance and a certification that the deal does not jeopardize American security. That is an absurdly short timeline.More damaging, the bill would bar the president from easing sanctions on Iran for 65 days so Congress could hold hearings and decide whether to support the deal.

The bill would also eliminate the presidential authority Mr. Obama used in 2013 to lift some sanctions against Iran under an interim agreement, thus calling into question America’s credibility and its ability to fulfill its promises under any new deal. And it would add onerous new conditions that have not been part of the negotiations so far.Congress can play a role going forward. One useful way for it to weigh in would be to support legislation introduced by, among others, Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, both California Democrats, that would require Mr. Obama to report to Congress every 90 days on Iran’s compliance with the deal and that sets up an expedited process for Congress to reimpose sanctions if Iran violates its commitments.

After more than a year of negotiations, the United States, Britain, France, China, Russia and Germany can take credit for an interim deal that has sharply limited Iran’s nuclear activities, and they are on the verge of a more permanent agreement that could further reduce the risk of Iran’s developing a nuclear weapon. Congress needs to think hard about the best way to support a verifiable nuclear deal and not play political games that could leave America isolated, the sanctions regime in tatters and Iran’s nuclear program unshackled.

 Yeah tough restraints on Iran's nuclear program if sanctions are lifted keep them in place Iran is just going to give us the middle finger.Hello NYT you actually think Iran gives a shit about commitments

but then again you guys don't think at the NYT.