Breaking: Sen. Schumer (D-NY) to oppose Iran deal

[Antonio the Sixth]

The key provisions of the deal are already public. Iran won't get any closer to an atom bomb for 10 years, frequent controls will take place, and if there's any reason to believe Iran isn't playing by the rules, sanctions can be reinstated with the snap of a finger. There is literally no downside for the US, unless you think Iran is inherently evil and should be crippled economically regardless of the nuclear issue.

[Landslide Lyndon]

The key provisions of the deal are already public. Iran won't get any closer to an atom bomb for 10 years, frequent controls will take place, and if there's any reason to believe Iran isn't playing by the rules, sanctions can be reinstated with the snap of a finger. There is literally no downside for the US, unless you think Iran is inherently evil and should be crippled economically regardless of the nuclear issue.

Antonio, you don't understand. Republicans just know in their gut that this deal is bad because it is signed by Obama.
Haven't you heard the concept of truthiness?

[Maxwell]

Democrats have better kick this spineless moron in the ass and elect Durbin as minority leader.

Durbin is pretty weak too. If I were a Democrat, I would love Patty Murray as the leader - strong, progressive, but able to work across the aisle if it calls for it. And doesn't capitulate to Israel.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

I actually agree that Obama should have just let Schumer oppose this without a fuss. Schumer did tacitly admit that it would pass without him, and it's not like anybody who knows Schumer could reasonably have expected anything different anyway.

[Angel of Death]

The people applauding Schumer over this and not believing he is doing this out of pure personal expediency are really dumb, because if anyone honestly believed that a consequential deal such as this one is that bad, he should not only have made his voice loudly clear, but actively try to get others to come to his side, instead of meekly mumbling about making a personal vote of conscience.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

Democrats have better kick this spineless moron in the ass and elect Durbin as minority leader.

Durbin is pretty weak too. If I were a Democrat, I would love Patty Murray as the leader - strong, progressive, but able to work across the aisle if it calls for it. And doesn't capitulate to Israel.

Patty Murray would be great too but she won't challenge Schumer. Durbin is next in line after him and it's public knowledge that the two don't like eachother.

[Torie]

The key provisions of the deal are already public. Iran won't get any closer to an atom bomb for 10 years, frequent controls will take place, and if there's any reason to believe Iran isn't playing by the rules, sanctions can be reinstated with the snap of a finger. There is literally no downside for the US, unless you think Iran is inherently evil and should be crippled economically regardless of the nuclear issue.

That seems to assume that in fact they will, if there is a violation. But there are many other issues, like whether the sanction regime would fail with or without a deal, adequacy of verification, and so forth.

[SWE]

sooo much tolerance of diversity of opinions in here!

Thanks for confirming that you have nothing to back up your opinion!

[Ebowed]

There is no conscientious objection to this, unless you conscientiously oppose diplomacy and support war as an alternative.  By legitimizing this opposition in a fashion which makes it seem as though there were actually reasonable concerns about the deal, Schumer has done a great disservice to the people affected by this deal.  He is a disgrace and Obama is right to shame him.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

There is no conscientious objection to this, unless you conscientiously oppose diplomacy and support war as an alternative.  By legitimizing this opposition in a fashion which makes it seem as though there were actually reasonable concerns about the deal, Schumer has done a great disservice to the people affected by this deal.  He is a disgrace and Obama is right to shame him.

It's a terrible deal and Schumer doesn't owe anyone - including the President - his blind fealty.

I hope he shows Obama just how much of a lame duck he is right now.

[Torie]

Alan Dershowitz asks some of the questions, and weighs the pros and cons, in sort of the way I would be doing it. It may be at this point, the way things have evolved, that there really are no good options at all. The sanctions regime is effectively dead, no matter what the US does now vis a vis this deal. And if so, where does that leave us?  Aside from that, if Iran cheats, what are the odds that it will be caught?

As to the final musings of The Dersh, I guess it would be interesting to know what Obama thinks the scenario is after 10 years, but he won't be in power then, so I am not sure that aspect is particularly relevant.

[muon2]

Dershowitz makes some of the points that I heard other neutral foreign policy analysts make immediately after the deal came out. My takeaway was that the US negotiators assumed that Iran would get nukes under any scenario short of all-out war. Therefore they determined that it was better for them to get nukes in a controlled path and integrate them into the world community so that they would have no desire to use them as a threat. One thing all the analysts agreed on was that under this agreement Iran would have nukes at the end of the 10-year period. What they didn't agree on was whether the terms would result in the reduction of their threat of use of them to advance their policy goals.