Archive for Peace Over War

United Nations Five [5] Permanent Members Russia, China, France, Britain And The United States Chose Peace Over War, Death And Destruction. Republicans And Benjamin Netanyahu Wants War To Kill More Of America’s Sons And Daughters Like George W Bush And Dick Cheney Did In Iraq!

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on July 20, 2015 by sheriffali

[NYT] UNITED NATIONS — The United Nations Security Council on Monday unanimously approved a resolution that creates the basis for international economic sanctions against Iran to be lifted, a move that incited a furious reaction in Israel and potentially sets up an angry showdown in Congress.

 

The 15-0 vote for approval of the resolution — 104 pages long including annexes and lists — was written in Vienna by diplomats who negotiated a landmark pact last week that limits Iran’s nuclear capabilities in exchange for ending the sanctions.

 

Iran has pledged to let in international monitors to inspect its facilities for the next 10 years and other measures that were devised to guarantee that its nuclear energy activities are purely peaceful.

 

The Security Council resolution, which is legally binding, lays out the steps required only for the lifting of United Nations sanctions.

 

It has no legal consequence on the sanctions imposed separately by the United States and the European Union.

 

The European Union also approved the Iran nuclear deal on Monday, putting in motion the lifting of its own sanctions, which include prohibitions on the purchase of Iranian oil. Europe will continue to prohibit the export of ballistic missile technology and sanctions related to human rights.

 

Diplomats have warned that if the United States Congress refuses to lift American penalties against Iran, the Iranians may renege on their commitments as well, which could result in a collapse of the entire deal.

 

The resolution takes effect in 90 days, a time frame negotiated in Vienna to allow Congress, where members have expressed strong distrust of the agreement, to review it. President Obama, who has staked much of his foreign policy ambitions on the Iran pact, has vowed to veto a congressional rejection of the nuclear accord.

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

Twitter @hrcwhitehouse

 

 

Open New York Times Link For Full Article

 

http://nyti.ms/1JslNnC

 BARACK - UNITED NATIONS JULY 20 15 3 BARACK - UNITED NATIONS JULY 20 15 2 BARACK - UNITED NATIONS JULY 20 15 4

{The Iran Deal Problem} A President’s Intelligence Contrasting Warmongers In The Repugnant, Republican, GOP Party..

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on July 16, 2015 by sheriffali

President Obama was well into his feisty and freewheeling news conference on the Iran nuclear deal when Major Garrett of CBS News got under the presidential skin.

 

“As you well know, there are four Americans in Iran, three held on trumped-up charges,” Garrett said. “Can you tell the country, sir, why you are content, with all the fanfare around this deal, to leave the conscience of this nation, the strength of this nation, unaccounted for in relation to these four Americans?”

 

The normally cool president reacted slowly, as though trying to control his anger.

 

“The notion that I am content — as I celebrate — with American citizens languishing in Iranian jails?” Obama asked, icily. “That’s nonsense, and you should know better.” After that extraordinary scolding, the president went on to explain that he didn’t link the American captives to nuclear talks because doing so may have made Iran think “we can get additional concessions out of the Americans,” and would have made it “much more difficult for us to walk away” from a deal.

 

Garrett’s question, though loaded, was legitimate; one of those being held on bogus charges in Iran is Jason Rezaian, The Washington Post’s Tehran bureau chief. And Obama’s answer was revealing: Full of Sturm und Drang, he ultimately acknowledged that the United States just doesn’t have the clout to enforce its will.

 

This was an undercurrent of the whole news conference Wednesday afternoon, and of Obama’s overall defense of the Iran deal. He was tough and strong, but in service of the argument that American power is limited — that this is the best deal we could get with our declining leverage. His defenders call it realism; it also may amount to ratifying retreat.

 

Obama took on those who said a better deal would have stripped Iran of all nuclear capability. “The problem with that position is that there is nobody who thinks that Iran would or could ever accept that, and the international community does not take the view that Iran can’t have a peaceful nuclear program,” he said. “And so we don’t have diplomatic leverage.”

 

As for those who argue for continued economic sanctions? Obama said that sanctions “required the cooperation of countries all around the world, many of whom really want to purchase oil from Iran.” If they saw the United States walking away from a deal, “the sanctions system unravels,” he said, and “we have lost credibility in the eyes of the world.”

 

He positioned the nuclear deal as the work of a nation trying to triage its problems in global affairs. “The argument,” he said, “that because this deal does not solve all those other problems, that’s an argument for rejecting this deal, defies logic . . . and it loses sight of what was our original number one priority, which is making sure that they don’t have a bomb.”

 

Broadly, Obama offered his view that “it’s not the job of the president of the United States to solve every problem in the Middle East,” and he said he couldn’t end the Syrian civil war without “buy in” from Russia and Iran. He acknowledged that the nuclear deal might mean more money for Hezbollah, but said, “Is that more important than preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon? No.”

 

Even when the news conference took a brief detour into domestic issues — revoking Bill Cosby’s Presidential Medal of Freedom — Obama spoke of powerlessness. “There is no precedent for revoking a medal,” he said. “We don’t have that mechanism.”

 

 

A couple of dozen seats at the news conference were empty, so a smaller-than-usual crowd got to see the rare spectacle of Obama going off script. After finishing his list of pre-selected questioners (and posing a few questions to himself about various objections to the deal), he opened the floor to all comers. “Have we exhausted Iran questions here?” he asked. “I really am enjoying this Iran debate.”

 

There’s little that Obama’s Republican critics in Congress can do about the deal other than vote their symbolic disapproval, and the president seemed to be speaking as much for the history books as for contemporary critics, using phrases such as “historic chance” and “future generations.” But mostly what came through was a defense of what future historians may describe as the Obama doctrine: an America that recognizes the limits of its power and acts less ambitiously.

 

“No one suggests that this deal resolves all the threats that Iran poses to its neighbors or the world,” he said, returning repeatedly to the argument that none of his critics has “presented to me or the American people a better alternative.”

 

He’s right. And this is why it was, sadly, a powerful case — for American weakness. [Dana Milbank Washington Post]

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

Twitter @hrcwhitehouse

 

Washington Post Link http://wpo.st/bupQ0

 COOL PRESIDENT OBAMA 07-15-15 COOL PRESIDENT OBAMA 07-15-15 - 2 COOL PRESIDENT OBAMA 07-15-15 - 3 COOL PRESIDENT OBAMA 07-15-15 - 4

Chuck Schumer Democratic Snake Oil Salesman Stabbing President Obama In The Back With The Republican Traitors Sabotaging The Iranian Framework Agreement.

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 10, 2015 by sheriffali

WASHINGTON [NYT] In an event as rare as garden tomatoes ripening in January, Senator Charles E. Schumer has little to say.

 

Mr. Schumer, Democrat of New York, set off a tempest this week when he issued a statement strongly supporting a bill that could disrupt a nuclear deal with Iran. With that bill, Congress is trying to ensure it has a say in the final agreement, and the strong stand by Mr. Schumer, the Senate’s No. 3 Democrat, suggested that he could oppose an accord President Obama sees as a potentially legacy-defining achievement.

 

Mr. Schumer has since largely declined to elaborate and has said only that he will wait for a classified briefing before making further comment.

 

His position — annoying to the White House, at odds with the majority of Senate Democrats and expressed during a congressional recess — reflects the vigorous crosscurrents Mr. Schumer faces in his first real test since Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, announced that he would retire, placing Mr. Schumer as heir apparent.

 

Mr. Schumer, long personally hawkish on matters related to Israel, is caught between the Jewish voters and donors in his state and beyond who are pressuring him in conflicting directions, factions within his own party in the Senate, and a watchful White House that is seeking to limit the role of Congress in any deal it may make.

 

It is a struggle that several Senate Democrats with large Jewish constituencies face but who, unlike Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey, the co-sponsor of the bill pushing for congressional oversight of Iranian sanctions, have been typically strongly supportive of the White House.

  

  Twitter @sheriffali

 

   http://nyti.ms/1z11IAo

CHUCK SCHUMER SNAKE OIL DEMOCRAT

A Promising Nuclear Deal With Iran And The Face You Make When Sabotage Fails

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 3, 2015 by sheriffali

[NEW YORK TIMES EDITORIAL] The preliminary agreement between Iran and the major powers is a significant achievement that makes it more likely Iran will never be a nuclear threat. President Obama said it would “cut off every pathway that Iran could take to develop a nuclear weapon.”

 

Officials said some important issues have not been resolved, like the possible lifting of a United Nations arms embargo, and writing the technical sections could also cause problems before the deal’s finalization, expected by June 30. Even so, the agreement announced on Thursday after eight days of negotiations appears more specific and comprehensive than expected.

 

It would roll back Iran’s nuclear program sufficiently so that Iran could not quickly produce a nuclear weapon, and ensure that, if Iran cheated, the world would have at least one year to take preventive action, including reimposing sanctions. In return, the United States, the European Union and the United Nations would lift sanctions crippling Iran’s economy, though the timing of such a move is yet another uncertainty.

 

Iran would shut down roughly two-thirds of the 19,000 centrifuges producing uranium that could be used to fuel a bomb and agree not to enrich uranium over 3.67 percent (a much lower level than is required for a bomb) for at least 15 years. The core of the reactor at Arak, which officials feared could produce plutonium, another key ingredient for making a weapon, would be dismantled and replaced, with the spent fuel shipped out of Iran.

 

Mr. Obama, speaking at the White House, insisted he was not relying on trust to ensure Iran’s compliance but on “the most robust and intrusive inspections and transparency regime ever negotiated for any nuclear program.”

 

There is good reason for skepticism about Iran’s intentions. Although it pledged not to acquire nuclear weapons when it ratified the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in 1970, it pursued a secret uranium enrichment program for two decades. By November 2013, when serious negotiations with the major powers began, Iran was enriching uranium at a level close to bomb-grade.

 

However, Iran has honored an interim agreement with the major powers, in place since January 2014, by curbing enrichment and other major activities.

 

By opening a dialogue between Iran and America, the negotiations have begun to ease more than 30 years of enmity. Over the long run, an agreement could make the Middle East safer and offer a path for Iran, the leading Shiite country, to rejoin the international community.

 

The deal, if signed and carried out, would vindicate the political risks taken by President Hassan Rouhani of Iran and President Obama to engage after decades of estrangement starting from the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

 

Talking to adversaries — as President Ronald Reagan did in nuclear weapons negotiations with the Soviets and President Richard Nixon did in his opening to China — is something American leaders have long pursued as a matter of practical necessity and prudence.

 

Yet in today’s poisonous political climate, Mr. Obama’s critics have gone to extraordinary lengths to undercut him and any deal. Their belligerent behavior is completely out of step with the American public, which overwhelmingly favors a negotiated solution with Iran, unquestionably the best approach.

 

Sunni Arab nations and Israel are deeply opposed to any deal, fearing that it would strengthen Iran’s power in the region. This agreement addresses the nuclear program, the most urgent threat, and does not begin to tackle Iran’s disruptive role in Syria and elsewhere. Iran is widely seen as a threat; whether it can get beyond that will depend on whether its leaders choose to be less hostile to its neighbors, including Israel.

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

http://nyti.ms/1GlyUcb

 GOP SABOTAGE BACKFIRED

Cuba Has Freed All 53 Prisoners As Agreed In USA Deal

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on January 12, 2015 by sheriffali

(Reuters) – Cuba has released all 53 prisoners it had promised to free, senior U.S. officials said, a major step toward détente with Washington.

 

The release of the remaining prisoners sets a positive tone for historic talks next week aimed at normalizing relations after decades of hostility, the officials said.

 

They described the Cuban government’s release over the weekend of the last detainees on the list as a milestone but said they would keep pressing Havana to free more people the United States considers political prisoners.

 

The officials, speaking to Reuters on condition of anonymity, did not say how many prisoners were released over the weekend or identify them. But the White House will provide the names of all 53 to Congress and expects lawmakers to make them public, the officials added.

 

There had been questions over whether Havana would release all 53 prisoners as part of the deal Presidents Barack Obama and Raul Castro announced on Dec. 17 to restore diplomatic ties that Washington severed more than 50 years ago.

 

Twitter @sheriffali

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/12/us-usa-cuba-prisoners-idUSKBN0KL10K20150112?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews

CUBA OBAMA JAN 12 15