They undercut most Bush foreign policy, whether good or bad.
11 thoughts on “The Bush Negotiations With Iran”
You assume Iran could be convinced to abandon their enrichment program after all the investment in centrifuges they did. Brazil is another country which has not been interested in abandoning their nuclear fuel enrichment facilities.
I would have thought it obvious to everyone that the Bush deal was a dead duck when it wasn’t completed before the presidential election, and it’s clear that “demands that it stop enriching uranium” would never had been agreed to by Iran anyway as “Iranian diplomats reiterated before the talks that they considered the issue nonnegotiable.”
Blaming Obama for a deal not going ahead that would never have gone ahead seems a bit silly.
“Blaming Obama for a deal not going ahead that would never have gone ahead seems a bit silly.”
Possibly true (that the deal would not go ahead) but irrelevant.
Success in arriving at a deal is certainly not the issue. The issue is the incredible hypocrisy of the politicians who are whining and gnashing their teeth that the GOP Senate communicated directly with the other side of the negotiations.
1) The Congress is a co-equal branch of the government
2) The letter merely describes the constitutional limits of the Executive branch in making treaties.
3) The sturm und drang from the Dems is merely their angst at being exposed: that they are working for an agreement which they know will not pass Congress and therefore cannot be accepted as binding on our side. They had no intention of putting the treaty before Congress – which everyone knew up front because if you ARE interested in getting Congress to ratify the treaty you generally have congresscritters involved int he process – Obama does not.
Note how after the letter was published, Kerry then says the incredibly imbecilic thing that this negotiation was not intended to result in a legally binding treaty.
“Blaming Obama for a deal not going ahead”
Oh no, there will be a deal. The Obama administration will lie to Iran and the American public about what that deal actually is. The lie to Iran will be that future Presidents won’t do anything when they get nukes and the lie to the American public will be that Iran won’t be getting nukes.
Wodun,
I think Andrew_w meant that you can’t blame Obama for messing up Bush’s attempt at a deal. Andrew, of course, assumes no deal could possibly have been reached. But we’ll never know that will we? Andrew_w thinks he knows. But he really doesn’t as he was not there.
Yep, you are correct.
I tend to agree that a deal would not have been reached because Bush and Iran want different things while Obama and Iran want the same thing. But the reason this story arose was because it exposed Obama’s and the Democrat’s hypocrisy on appealing to foreign nations in the midst of negotiations.
Democrats do not even remember all of the Democrat activists going to Iraq to be human shields.
The letter by the Senators is to me, the first time Republicans have treated Obama the way he treats them. What they stated is perfectly legal and perfectly accurate. Democrats crowing about traitors should be called out for their poor understanding of the Constitution.
…and perfectly justified. That letter was not so much a message to the Iranian officials but to Obama.
Remember how the Obama campaign in 2008 turned off the checks to prevent illegal foreign contributions? Perhaps we now know why they did it.
This is the second time he has been busted cozying up with America’s enemies and promising to be more flexible in making concessions to them after an election.
With reference to the other post on Google, I entered these keywords: “senate letter”.
Of course, a string of democrat links come up, with Fox near the bottom. I find this happens enough to know that Google biases political news towards the democrat party.
Which is why I don’t use Google anymore, unless necessary, as with maps.
You assume Iran could be convinced to abandon their enrichment program after all the investment in centrifuges they did. Brazil is another country which has not been interested in abandoning their nuclear fuel enrichment facilities.
I would have thought it obvious to everyone that the Bush deal was a dead duck when it wasn’t completed before the presidential election, and it’s clear that “demands that it stop enriching uranium” would never had been agreed to by Iran anyway as “Iranian diplomats reiterated before the talks that they considered the issue nonnegotiable.”
Blaming Obama for a deal not going ahead that would never have gone ahead seems a bit silly.
“Blaming Obama for a deal not going ahead that would never have gone ahead seems a bit silly.”
Possibly true (that the deal would not go ahead) but irrelevant.
Success in arriving at a deal is certainly not the issue. The issue is the incredible hypocrisy of the politicians who are whining and gnashing their teeth that the GOP Senate communicated directly with the other side of the negotiations.
1) The Congress is a co-equal branch of the government
2) The letter merely describes the constitutional limits of the Executive branch in making treaties.
3) The sturm und drang from the Dems is merely their angst at being exposed: that they are working for an agreement which they know will not pass Congress and therefore cannot be accepted as binding on our side. They had no intention of putting the treaty before Congress – which everyone knew up front because if you ARE interested in getting Congress to ratify the treaty you generally have congresscritters involved int he process – Obama does not.
Note how after the letter was published, Kerry then says the incredibly imbecilic thing that this negotiation was not intended to result in a legally binding treaty.
“Blaming Obama for a deal not going ahead”
Oh no, there will be a deal. The Obama administration will lie to Iran and the American public about what that deal actually is. The lie to Iran will be that future Presidents won’t do anything when they get nukes and the lie to the American public will be that Iran won’t be getting nukes.
Wodun,
I think Andrew_w meant that you can’t blame Obama for messing up Bush’s attempt at a deal. Andrew, of course, assumes no deal could possibly have been reached. But we’ll never know that will we? Andrew_w thinks he knows. But he really doesn’t as he was not there.
Yep, you are correct.
I tend to agree that a deal would not have been reached because Bush and Iran want different things while Obama and Iran want the same thing. But the reason this story arose was because it exposed Obama’s and the Democrat’s hypocrisy on appealing to foreign nations in the midst of negotiations.
Democrats do not even remember all of the Democrat activists going to Iraq to be human shields.
The letter by the Senators is to me, the first time Republicans have treated Obama the way he treats them. What they stated is perfectly legal and perfectly accurate. Democrats crowing about traitors should be called out for their poor understanding of the Constitution.
…and perfectly justified. That letter was not so much a message to the Iranian officials but to Obama.
Remember how the Obama campaign in 2008 turned off the checks to prevent illegal foreign contributions? Perhaps we now know why they did it.
This is the second time he has been busted cozying up with America’s enemies and promising to be more flexible in making concessions to them after an election.
With reference to the other post on Google, I entered these keywords: “senate letter”.
Of course, a string of democrat links come up, with Fox near the bottom. I find this happens enough to know that Google biases political news towards the democrat party.
Which is why I don’t use Google anymore, unless necessary, as with maps.