Invoking the 'Nuclear Option' Against the Iranian Nuke Deal

American Thinker ^ | 09/18/2015 | Richard M. Schum

[SeekAndFind]

Last week, the Congress began debate on President Obama’s nuclear agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran. Many questions have been raised about the wisdom of the deal, including the lack of verifiability of the inspection regime, the release of over $150 billion that will help fund its ongoing terrorist activities, the secret codicils that the United States is not privy to, the lifting of sanctions on Iran’s ballistic missile program, and the bellicose words of Iran’s supreme leader, who has continued to openly reject the terms of the deal as the president moves forward with its implementation.

As expected, Mr. Obama has sought to demonize opponents of his deal, framing the issue as a choice between the agreement and going to war. This type of straw man argument has been employed by the White House many times in support of its positions, and is as contrived as it is ridiculous. Recognizing that the alternative to a bad deal isn’t war, but rather a better deal, most Republicans and some Democrats have expressed serious reservations and gone on record as opposing the deal. Given the sizable and bipartisan nature of the dissent, it would seem that the president would stand little chance of the getting the deal approved the Congress. Indeed, the Constitution requires that treaties be ratified by a two-thirds supermajority in the Senate, and even non-treaty agreements require both House and Senate majorities for passage.

Enter the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, introduced by Senator Bob Corker (R-TN), and supported overwhelmingly by both parties. It provides for a formal review period of up to 60 days and a vote on a resolution of disapproval that would derail portions of the Iran deal, if passed. However, this resolution would be subject to a presidential veto,

[Pearls Before Swine]

I’m generally against the nuclear option, as its a genie best put back in the bottle.

But, what could be more appropriate for a vote on a potential treaty welcoming nuclear Armageddon than the nuclear option?

[jsanders2001]

I’ll lay money that some of that $150B gets rediverted back into the pockets of the deal brokers. I’ll also bet that this president and all of Congress will be the wealthiest elites to have ever been in in office when all is said and done and that corruption will be at its highest level in all known world history with the exception of Africa.

[stylin19a]

Dingy Harry used it when her was on charge.

So now Harry is daring Mitch NOT to use it, because Mitch promised to not use it.

Repubs just know nothin about hard b all.