Tom Cotton, and The Republicans are Lobbying For War on Two Fronts

I think many see "The Letter" as a way of stopping Obama's possible attempts to sell us down the river.

a reply to: xuenchen

That's irrelevant. Should we have a coup d'état every few years like some third world hellhole over partisan differences?

Negotiations are ongoing. Is this more of the GOP doctrine of preemptive attack? The President, Iran and the Senate are all aware of the limits of the President's deal-making powers. What the GOP was doing was basically telling Iran that negotiating with the Obama administration is futile because he's got 2 years left in office and they've got a majority in Senate. They did this to derail the negotiations. Sen. Cotton said this POINT BLANK. In the same speech he also said that he favors regime change.

I honestly don't see how this could be any clearer.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Checks & Balances have strange ways of manifesting don't they.

originally posted by: xuenchen
I think many see "The Letter" as a way of stopping Obama's possible attempts to sell us down the river.

Sell us down the river? How so? Iran sits on a large deposit of both oil and natural gas our companies would love to get their hands on them like they used to have. Unless you believe the they are trying to build the bomb nonsense there is no reason for America to have sanctions against Iran. The inspections have shown no evidence of bomb building not to mention our secret service says they aren't trying to build a bomb. It's time for America to do what we want and to hell with what Israel wants when it comes to the ME.

So, the new Republican Congressional majority finally gets their day in the sun. With all those incompetent, misguided Democrats out of the way, the Republicans can now get to work for America and show us how it’s done. The Republicans are gonna put our house back in order and make us all proud to be Americans again.

Excuse me a minute. I think I’m gonna puke...

First of all, the U.S. Constitution gives the executive branch responsibility for negotiating international agreements. Congress normally does not intervene with foreign leaders on matters being negotiated by the administration. Before the Republican Party became radicalized, this has been the tradition. The Congress does not ratify international “agreements”. At most they can advise and consent. Otherwise, unless it’s a “treaty” being negotiated, they should keep their noses out of it and focus on domestic issues. The 47 traitors who signed off on this international disgrace overstepped their authority, intentionally attempting to derail the talks. I think they should face grave consequences for their insubordination and total lack of judgement. What they’ve done is beneath the dignity of the institution they serve, and has moved us a giant leap closer to yet another war in the ME. Tom Cotton, a JUNIOR senator, would serve this nation better if he did a little more listening and learning instead of grand-standing to promote his own self-serving agenda.

I swear, all the Obama-haters here seem to have an inside track to the substance of the negotiations taking place. You know, these talks involve not only the US and Iran, but also the U K, France, Germany, Russia & China. It seems that the US alone, though, has the distinction of a traitorous Congresss willing to sabotage the talks. What these senators have accomplished is to weaken the US internationally, making this a more dangerous world today than it was yesterday. The Republicans have allowed their intense personal hatred for Obama to damage this nation’s standing on the global stage. This is not only blatantly unAmerican, it’s a gross dis-service to this country and it’s people. The irresponsible actions of these fools we call our “leaders” has moved us one step closer to sending our sons and daughters back to fight another senseless war in the ME. And this one will be considerably more costly in lives and dollars than the one in Iraq.

Nice goin’, Guys! We can all sleep a little better tonight...

For those who do not know who Tom Cotton is:
Tom Cotton is 35 years old. He was just sworn in one month ago as a Senator, from Arkansas. Before this video I never knew he existed..

He is a graduate of Harvard and Harvard Law School.

After 9/11 he joined the Army and passed on JAG Corps (Army legal/lawyers) to join the infantry.

He did combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, where he earned the
bronze star, amongst other citations.

He literally made his point in less than two minutes and I do not believe he was politically grand standing..

I love the looks on everyone's faces, including those behind the
witness, when he asked the first question; which in my opinion had to big a word for many at the hearing.

youtu.be...

originally posted by: 727Sky

For those who do not know who Tom Cotton is:

Tom Cotton is 35 years old. He was just sworn in one month ago as a Senator, from Arkansas. Before this video I never knew he existed..

He is a graduate of Harvard and Harvard Law School.

I bet they knew there was no Logan Act infringement in "The Letter"

a reply to: xuenchen

I bet if he was a Democrat there'd be a bunch of blabbering about "Ivy League Liberal Elites."

EDIT:

Also, we'll need affidavits from at least two dozen people who went to school with him and also his school transcripts... or it didn't happen!

a reply to: 727Sky

Awesome. Benedict Arnold was seriously wounded at the (2nd) Battle of Saratoga, spent most of his own personal money on the war effort and was a General in the Continental Army.

Didn't stop him from becoming a traitor did it?

War on 2 fronts? Does anyone remember what happened to the last group that fought a war on 2 fronts? They lost. Obviously the Republicans are not a fan of history and tend to ignore the facts. The reality is that the USA can ill afford another prolonged armed conflict. We are still in the midst of the last one, can they let it end before starting up a whole new problem that will end badly for the country.

Here is the problem in a nut shell. If the USA launches an attack against Iran, any support that they may have in the country will be gone. And from all accounts there is not a whole lot of support for the USA in Iran as it stands. They do not like us, and with good reason, the people there do not trust the USA. This is not the country to fight, or attempt a military solution with, cause all it will do is give the current leadership the backing to launch a counter strike and go full bore with the blessing of the people there already. Right now the population of Iran is split in the middle. Some of them would like to see a warming relations with the USA, but the majority, and those with the weapons and who call the shots do not. History is what they remember, and the view of the USA is non too favorable.

I would urge anyone that wants war in Iran to speak to our vets from IRAQ and Afg and see how they feel.

We don't need to invade anymore countries. We're past that. Let's get these war hawks out of office.

All for little old Israel.
Netanyahu is laughing

Obama should have years ago taken on the GOP

But the guy is a lifeless wimp who doesn’t know how to fight the right wing crazies just like he doesn’t know how to fight ISIS

originally posted by: xuenchen
I think many see "The Letter" as a way of stopping Obama's possible attempts to sell us down the river.

So we can't raise min. wage, but the GOP thinks we have enough tax dollars to fight a war on 2 fronts?

Who's selling us down the river?

a reply to: olaru12

What war?

Where does anything say war?



Maybe the bankers are involved.

Obama wants to lift sanctions.

Hmmm.

Obama has already been jilted and snubbed by Iran.

Now Obama will do anything to save his own rear end.

originally posted by: Willtell
All for little old Israel.
Netanyahu is laughing

Obama should have years ago taken on the GOP

But the guy is a lifeless wimp who doesn’t know how to fight the right wing crazies just like he doesn’t know how to fight ISIS

Which war do you want? One with ISIS or one with Iran, or is the only bad war the one that someone with an (R) after their name wants? Assuming anyone wants a war ... I thought the whole gripe here was that we shouldn't be in one.

Arguably, Obama has helped ISIS with his own foreign policy actions on several fronts, so I wouldn't look for him to do anything to move against ISIS in any real way anytime soon.

As for Netanyahu ... well, Obama has already sent three of his best election fixers to Israel to try to make sure that the election goes against him, so if all goes well, you won't have Netanyahu to gripe about for much longer.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: olaru12

What war?

Where does anything say war?

:

You mean this one...? The one we will fight for the Zionists; And those that profit from death and blood of the American youth; all paid for by the American middle class taxpayers.
www.huffingtonpost.com...

Actually, you know what WOULD be the kind of event you are all frothing at the mouth over?

The son of the late former Shah of Iran lives near DC. If the Republicans in Congress really wanted to threaten Iran and suggest they were thinking seriously about a military policy of regime change (something they cannot do without Obama's approval as CIC just as he cannot make treaties without Congressional approval), they would invite the man to speak to the Congress about how Iran used to be before the Ayatollahs and mullahs took over, and all while the liberal world whined about it in the run up, they would suggest that they might act as a Congressional body to recognize the man as the legitimate ruler of Iran.

THAT would be a truly undermining and passive aggressive action. This is just a letter. A letter just like the UN writes every day of the year and sends off to some tinpot regime or other. No one cares about that, but this is suddenly treason? All they are doing is using a pen and phone just like Obama.

No different than using the Wall Street Journal or Times editorial pages like various people have done for years.

a reply to: olaru12

wild theory isn't it.

originally posted by: netbound

I swear, all the Obama-haters here seem to have an inside track to the substance of the negotiations taking place. You know, these talks involve not only the US and Iran, but also the U K, France, Germany, Russia & China. It seems that the US alone, though, has the distinction of a traitorous Congresss willing to sabotage the talks. What these senators have accomplished is to weaken the US internationally, making this a more dangerous world today than it was yesterday. The Republicans have allowed their intense personal hatred for Obama to damage this nation’s standing on the global stage. This is not only blatantly unAmerican, it’s a gross dis-service to this country and it’s people. The irresponsible actions of these fools we call our “leaders” has moved us one step closer to sending our sons and daughters back to fight another senseless war in the ME. And this one will be considerably more costly in lives and dollars than the one in Iraq.

Nice goin’, Guys! We can all sleep a little better tonight...

a reply to: ketsuko

Failure to do some arbitrary thing that you feel would have been more incendiary excuses what was done and also proves that they're not marching down the path to regime change by way of military intervention? You're just be silly now.

something they cannot do without Obama's approval as CIC just as he cannot make treaties without Congressional approval

So what?

- You seem to be aware of the the function of the branches of government when it comes to to conducting foreign affairs, so you're obviously aware that Congress advises the President and ratifies treaties. What they are not supposed to be doing is undermining the negotiations conducted by the executive branch. Not their job. For anything that falls within the scope of his office's powers, Obama can still negotiate a sole-executive agreement.

- The GOP can still kill negotiations and move the ball toward their desired goal and they obviously also hope to take the White House in 2016.

All they are doing is using a pen and phone just like Obama.

I'm confused. Overreach by the Democratic President is bad but overreach by the Senate Republicans is good?