Posted on 08/07/2015 10:57:25 AM PDT by MarvinStinson
Why I’m opposing the Iran nuclear deal
By Charles Schumer
I’ve spent the last three weeks carefully studying the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. I’ve decided I must oppose the agreement and will vote yes on a motion of disapproval.
I examined this deal in three parts: nuclear restrictions on Iran in the first 10 years, nuclear restrictions after 10 years and non-nuclear components and consequences. In each case, I’ve asked: Are we better off with the agreement or without it?
In the first 10 years, there are serious weaknesses. First, inspections are not “anywhere, anytime”; the 24-day delay before we can inspect is troubling. More troubling is the fact that the US can’t demand inspections unilaterally. And the “snapback sanctions” provisions seem cumbersome and difficult to use.
Those who argue for the agreement say it’s better to have an imperfect deal than nothing. When you consider only this first portion of the deal, that line of thinking is plausible, but the weaknesses still make this argument less compelling.
Second, we must evaluate how this deal would restrict Iran’s nuclear development after 10 years.
Supporters argue that a future president would be in no weaker a position than today to prevent Iran from racing to the bomb. That discounts the current sanctions regime. After 15 years of relief from sanctions, Iran would be stronger financially and better able to advance a robust nuclear program.
More important, the agreement would allow Iran, after 10 to 15 years, to be a nuclear-threshold state with the blessing of the world community. It would have a green light to be as close, if not closer, to possessing a nuclear weapon than it is today. And the ability to thwart Iran would have less moral and economic force.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Because Obama gave him the okay.
Schumer's standing with Israel and with most of the American people - democrats and Republicans... but against his own party's elites. That can't be easy - it's courage...
Good for Schumer. He's right on this one.
I know. I guess because they didn’t call it a treaty. I heard Kerry say that it can’t be a treaty because we don’t have diplomatic relations with Iran. I think it’s full blown BS, but that’s what we’ve had the last 7 years....
That says it all.
Problem is, there won’t be enough dems to vote for not doing this deal
*****************
Schumer has already done the political calculus and determined that he can safely vote against this without defeating it. He knows that a sufficient number of his fellow Dem legislators will pass it for him.
Of course, behind the scenes, he’s lobbying every Democrat to support the deal.
****************
Exactly right. He’s telling them he can’t do it but they can, and they must support the deal. The fix is in and Chuckie is having it both ways. Win-win for him.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
Related threads
Chuck Schumer Defies White House On Iran
Blind squirrel, etc.
Schumer is not being a statesman, not even for Israel. Schumer waited until B. Hussein Obama had built a firewall and then pretended to care about the Jewish state.
What a putz.
Is Schumer working to convince other Democrats to support Israel?
Nope.
Traitorous.
Stand up Chuck !!!!
Oh MG he doesn’t have any legs...
God Bless You Chuck.
Uhh, maybe because his vote is meaningless if they don’t have enough votes to stop it, so it looks like he’s supporting Jews? Perhaps?
Jewish constituents threatening to cut you off?
Schumer went to the White House to tell them of his decision on Thursday night.
He planned to announce it on Friday.
Instead the White House leaked his decision.
What you printed in bold is a further move by the White House to keep things under control.
So - all the anti-Semites are coming out of the woodwork at the New York Times, with the usual 2000-year-old cliches: Schumer is just loyal to Jews, not his country; he has betrayed his country and his President; he should not be representing a US state as his loyalty to his country is questionable; yadda yadda yadda. 99% of the comments are like this. Doesn’t take much to bring them out.
The White is full of them—
Obama, Jarrett, Susan Rice, Samantha Power, Robert Malley, Brezinski, Kerry,
The opportunists have declared opposition politically necessary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.