# Nuclear deal with Iran **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 14, 2015, 11:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128 "2015-07-14T11:37:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 25
**Author:** ![Donald\_Rump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Donald\_Rump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donald_Rump)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2015, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/481 "2015-07-31T15:13:04Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > ETA: I just realized she doesn’t get a vote. How’s that? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2015, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/482 "2015-07-31T16:56:51Z")
She’s not in the senate. On further reading it appears Congress has voted itself the power to disapprove the deal by vote of both houses, though. No idea how that works. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2015, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/483 "2015-07-31T17:39:15Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > She’s not in the senate. On further reading it appears Congress has voted itself the power to disapprove the deal by vote of both houses, though. No idea how that works. IIRC it’s based on the deal they made with the White House – both houses will have the opportunity to vote to approve or disapprove any deal after the review period, but the President can veto any disapproval and this would require a 2/3rds majority in both houses to override. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/484 "2015-08-03T02:35:16Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > MTV didn’t begin broadcasts in the former Soviet states until 1998. You could probably have received MTV Europe broadcasts via satellite in a small area of the western Soviet Union from 1987 to 1991, in the unlikely event you had the appropriate receiving equipment and decoder. When did MTV become available in East Berlin? Of course I’m being allegorical. MTV is just an easy symbol. > [@](#): > > It takes wisdom, grit and leadership to register a symbolic protest vote to appears your constituents, you know. > > ETA: I just realized she doesn’t get a vote. So… a symbolic protest press release, I guess. She needs more than her base in Flushing to get her where she wants to go. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/485 "2015-08-07T02:32:38Z")
Chuck Schumer will not support the deal: > **[Chuck Schumer Breaks With Obama, Will Oppose Iran Deal](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/chuck-schumer-planning-to-break-with-obama-oppose-iran-deal_n_55c3f7e9e4b0d9b743dba71d?kvcommref=mostpopular)** > > Chuck Schumer Breaks With Obama, Will Oppose Iran Deal ---
**Author:** ![Donald\_Rump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Donald\_Rump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donald_Rump)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/486 "2015-08-07T03:22:54Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Chuck Schumer will not support the deal: > > [Chuck Schumer Breaks With Obama, Will Oppose Iran Deal | HuffPost Latest News](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/chuck-schumer-planning-to-break-with-obama-oppose-iran-deal_55c3f7e9e4b0d9b743dba71d?kvcommref=mostpopular) Interesting. This may be wishful thinking on his part, but James Fallows in the Atlantic thinks a Schumer no vote is a sign the deal will likely NOT be successfully blocked: > [@](#): > > How can a powerful Democrat’s opposition be a good sign? Because it suggests that Schumer has already calculated that the administration can do without his vote. > > For rococo parliamentary reasons, the crucial voting showdown is still several legislative rounds into the future. First the Congress would have to pass a measure condemning the deal, which Republican majorities in both the House and Senate will certainly do. Then President Obama would have to veto the measure, which he will certainly do. Then the Congress would have to override the veto, which requires a two-thirds majority in both chambers—and this is what the Democrats, even in their diminished numbers, should still be able to block with some votes to spare. > > Schumer doesn’t put it this way, but obviously he is hoping that one of those spare votes will be his. His life will be easier in many ways—in minimizing hassle during his upcoming reelection run in New York, and thus maximizing his efforts to help other Democratic candidates so that he has a chance of becoming Senate majority rather than minority leader—if he doesn’t have to spend time explaining away a vote for the deal to his conservative and AIPAC-aligned constituents. If the deal goes through despite Schumer’s opposition, people who support the deal won’t care, and those who oppose it can blame evil Barack rather than valiant Chuck. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/487 "2015-08-07T03:24:33Z")
That’s what I was thinking too. The vote will probably be close, much like the ACA vote in the House. Anyone who needs to vote no for political cover will be allowed to do so if there are votes to spare. And Schumer is the whip, isn’t he? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/488 "2015-08-07T14:40:01Z")
No, it’s Dick Durbin. For 10 years now, apparently. If last night’s debate was supposed to show the American people why the deal is bad, I can’t see it failing to pass Congress now. Not one person was able to identify a specific aspect of the deal that was bad, other than unrelated issues (“he forgot our hostages!”) ---
**Author:** ![rsa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/839c29/32.png) [@rsa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rsa)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/489 "2015-08-07T14:57:34Z")
Shumer is the presumed successor to Harry Reid. Sad to see him be such a sellout on the Iran deal. Then again, he also sold himself out to the financial industry prior to the financial collapse. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/490 "2015-08-07T15:15:08Z")
> [@rsa](#): > > Shumer is the presumed successor to Harry Reid. Sad to see him be such a sellout on the Iran deal. Then again, he also sold himself out to the financial industry prior to the financial collapse. He’s getting criticized by the anti deal crowd… they wanted him to wait until just before the vote to announce his disapproval for maximum impact. That he’s coming out early could be a sign that the Democrats have counted their votes and have enough to save the deal, and Shumer just wants the cover of a no vote without sinking the deal. ---
**Author:** ![Pashnish\_Ewing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8797f3/32.png) [@Pashnish\_Ewing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pashnish_Ewing)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/491 "2015-08-07T15:19:20Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > If last night’s debate was supposed to show the American people why the deal is bad, I can’t see it failing to pass Congress now. Not one person was able to identify a specific aspect of the deal that was bad, other than unrelated issues (“he forgot our hostages!”) Not that he gave much detail, but Trump went on a bit about ‘24 hours’ and how outrageous it was. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/492 "2015-08-07T15:30:06Z")
Suppose the Iranians decide to rub Obama’s and Kerry’s noses in the dirt? they immediately buy advanced weapons from Russia, and announce they will be sending aid to Yemen, Hizbolla, Assad, etc. Netanyahu starts yammering again, and missiles start raining down on Israel from Gaza-what then? Iran hasn’t violated anything, so what would Obama do? ---
**Author:** ![Donald\_Rump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Donald\_Rump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donald_Rump)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/493 "2015-08-07T15:37:20Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > Suppose the Iranians decide to rub Obama’s and Kerry’s noses in the dirt? they immediately buy advanced weapons from Russia, and announce they will be sending aid to Yemen, Hizbolla, Assad, etc. Netanyahu starts yammering again, and missiles start raining down on Israel from Gaza-what then? Iran hasn’t violated anything, so what would Obama do? If they did that, we could impose unilateral sanctions or try to assemble multilateral sanctions addressing those specific activities. Or, of course, we could consider a military response. As the overwhelmingly more powerful party, I’m not too worried that the US could mount an adequate response if our interests so dictated. Withholding relief from nuclear sanctions after Iran has agreed to constraints that will make pursuit of a bomb impossible would be extremely damaging to US credibility as a future negotiating partner, both with respect to our allies and to our adversaries. ---
**Author:** ![Steken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e274bd/32.png) [@Steken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steken)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/494 "2015-08-07T18:11:28Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > Suppose the Iranians decide to rub Obama’s and Kerry’s noses in the dirt? Why the fuck would they suddenly want to do that? > [@ralph124c](#): > > they immediately buy advanced weapons from Russia Already happening. > [@ralph124c](#): > > and announce they will be sending aid to Yemen, Hizbolla, Assad, etc. Already happening. > [@ralph124c](#): > > missiles start raining down on Israel from Gaza-what then? Iran hasn’t violated anything, so what would Obama do? If Gaza attacked Israel, Israel would defend itself. What does that have to do with Iran? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/495 "2015-08-07T22:07:14Z")
Judging by the hostility coming from the administration, this doesn’t sound like Schumer saying “no” because they already have the votes. When many Democrats voted against ACA in the House, there was no criticism of them from inside the beltway because it was understood that the Democrats had the votes and that they needed to protect some members. We’re not seeing that now, which means that there are still not enough votes in the can to uphold the agreement. And Schumer is the Democrats’ presumptive new Senate leader come 2017. He can take some votes with him. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/496 "2015-08-07T22:17:31Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Judging by the hostility coming from the administration, this doesn’t sound like Schumer saying “no” because they already have the votes. What “hostility” (beyond vehement disagreement)? > [@](#): > > When many Democrats voted against ACA in the House, there was no criticism of them from inside the beltway because it was understood that the Democrats had the votes and that they needed to protect some members. Pretty sure that’s not the case. I recall lots of criticism. > [@](#): > > We’re not seeing that now, which means that there are still not enough votes in the can to uphold the agreement. And Schumer is the Democrats’ presumptive new Senate leader come 2017. He can take some votes with him. I think your analysis is off here. We’ll see. If Schumer were to succeed in sinking this deal, I’m quite doubtful he would ascend to lead the Democrats in the Senate. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/497 "2015-08-07T22:22:34Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > What “hostility” (beyond vehement disagreement)? They are suggesting that he should be Democratic leader. > [@](#): > > Pretty sure that’s not the case. I recall lots of criticism. Yeah, from Daily Kos maybe. > [@](#): > > think your analysis is off here. We’ll see. If Schumer were to succeed in sinking this deal, I’m quite doubtful he would ascend to lead the Democrats in the Senate. The Washington Post vote counter still shows the Iran deal as having too many undecideds. I have to conclude at this point that the Democrats do not actually have the votes yet. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/498 "2015-08-07T22:29:14Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The Washington Post vote counter still shows the Iran deal as having too many undecideds. I have to conclude at this point that the Democrats do not actually have the votes yet. Nearly all of the undecideds would have to vote “no” in order to sink the deal, including folks like Cory Booker. If Booker votes no on this deal, I’ll be incredibly surprised. I think it’s [extremely unlikely](http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/08/07/why-schumer-isnt-actually-going-to-kill-the-iran-deal/) that the “no” votes will get 2/3rds in both houses. But we’ll see. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/499 "2015-08-07T23:08:22Z")
Not so: > **[President Obama’s Iran deal nears a major symbolic victory](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/14/whip-count-where-the-senate-stands-on-the-iran-deal/)** > > Bookmark this. Current whip count is 27-58. Opponents only need to get 9 out of the 15 undecideds. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/500 "2015-08-07T23:34:14Z")
It seems the overwhelming GOP objection to the deal (other than that they want Obama to fail as much as possible without regard for the health of this country) seems to be that they are afraid Iran will do something just within the bounds of the deal that’s threatening or break it when they have a bomb and that the treaty binds the hands of the US to respond. To those people I ask: do you have any idea of history and what the US has done unilaterally in the past hundred years? Your fears are unfounded, your suspicion is unwarranted, and your beliefs are misguided. This deal doesn’t bind the US’s hands, it binds Iran’s. Its akin to a parent telling their child they’ll get ice cream if they do the chores and finish their plate. The parent is 100% in control. If the kid screws up in any way, or tries to trick the parent by getting someone else to do the chores and feeding broccoli to the dog, the parent is going to withhold the reward. The kid can throw all the temper tantrums it wants, but its not going to do shit. The only difference is that in international politics, you need to at least give the impression that both sides got what they want so the leaders can go back to their people and save face. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128.md?page=24) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128.md?page=26)