Republican Senators send a letter to Iran. Wow. Damn!

[Wyatt earp]

.

The Bibi speech was borderline, but this letter is WAY the fuck over the line.

So now, what is ANY country supposed to think of ANY thing that ANY President does at ANY time?

.

Fortunately for us, the Iranian Prime Minister saw through these assholes:

"in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy. It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history. This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.

Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.​

With regards to Israel and to the Jews, Iran over the 30 years I have been paying attention, has stated numerous times they want to wipe.off Israel off the map

I personally don't know of this is just propaganda because I know Iran has a big Jewish population and they are free in Iran to go to their house of worship.

But then again I grew up with the Iran hostage crisis, know that Iranian back thugs just took over Yemen.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The president make treaties, kid, not the Senate. The Senators can advise and consent (or not), nothing more. The Senators' letter was inv iolation of the law.

Jake can't read.

Typical obstructionism from someone who wants the words to say something else.

They don't, bub.

 

[Jarhead]

We do not negotiate with terrorists. Iran has been found to fund terrorist activity...making them, in my eyes, a terrorist nation.
"negotiating an agreement" is negotiating....so I support the letter. When we finally have a real President...be it a democrat or a republican.....any treaty will be struck down.

U 4got?

and as I debated it with others, I recognized that the letter really had no advantage and I made that clear. You just want to find fault in me, and I take pride in the fact that I have such an impact on your life. But you see, unlike you, I don't debate to be right. I debate to confirm I am right or recognize when I am wrong.

Now, that being said, my error was listening to CNN in regard to this situation. I was not aware, for example, that the President is not including congress in the details of the treaty and has not yet indicated that his plan is to present it to congress. To the contrary, it seems he plans on doing this unilaterally and treat it as an executive order as opposed to a treaty that follows the typical, constitutional process of requiring 2/3 senate vote to ratify it and have it considered the law of the land.

Now, if this is true, (and I don't know if it is yet), then the President is ignoring the will of the people for we overwhelmingly voted in republicans into the house and the senate to ensure the President does not push through an agenda that is not what the people prefer.

So, if, in fact, the president does not plan to have this treaty ratified, then the letter to Iran was necessary as we have a man giving them reason to believe they are signing a treaty, which, in fact, is nothing more than a gentlemen's agreement.

Ironically, if I had a son who was kidnapped by Iran, and I opted to pay them a ransom, I would be considered breaking the law for negotiating with a country that supports terrorism....yet the President of the United States has the right to negotiate with them and shake hands on a gentlemens agreement.

So does anyone know....is this a unilateral move by the president or does he plan to follow the constitutional process of ratification?

 

[Desperado]

.

The Bibi speech was borderline, but this letter is WAY the fuck over the line.

So now, what is ANY country supposed to think of ANY thing that ANY President does at ANY time?

.

Fortunately for us, the Iranian Prime Minister saw through these assholes:

"in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy. It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history. This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.

Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.​

With regards to Israel and to the Jews, Iran over the 30 years I have been paying attention, has stated numerous times they want to wipe.off Israel off the map

I personally don't know of this is just propaganda because I know Iran has a big Jewish population and they are free in Iran to go to their house of worship.

But then again I grew up with the Iran hostage crisis, know that Iranian back thugs just took over Yemen.

I have been paying attention to Iran about as long as you have and the one thing I have noticed is each time they said they wanted to wipe Israel off the map came only after an Israeli threat on Iran.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

How reasonable is the GOP on Iran ? look at the GOP 2008 Candidate

 

[orogenicman]

18 U.S. Code § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments

Current through Pub. L. 113-296, except 113-287, 113-291, 113-295. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
US Code
Notes...

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

.

The Bibi speech was borderline, but this letter is WAY the fuck over the line.

So now, what is ANY country supposed to think of ANY thing that ANY President does at ANY time?

.

Fortunately for us, the Iranian Prime Minister saw through these assholes:

"in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy. It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history. This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.

Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.​

With regards to Israel and to the Jews, Iran over the 30 years I have been paying attention, has stated numerous times they want to wipe.off Israel off the map

I personally don't know of this is just propaganda because I know Iran has a big Jewish population and they are free in Iran to go to their house of worship.

But then again I grew up with the Iran hostage crisis, know that Iranian back thugs just took over Yemen.

Iran has had decades to destroy Israel. It is noteworthy that in all that time they have not fired a single shot at the "evil Jewish state". I vote that it is propaganda for internal consumption, and the Israelis are silly to pay any heed to it.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Last time we saw a treacherous knifing like the GOP Senators did with the letter to Iran was a week ago when our Ambassador to Korea was slashed...

 

[Jarhead]

18 U.S. Code § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments

Current through Pub. L. 113-296, except 113-287, 113-291, 113-295. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
US Code
Notes...

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

.

The Bibi speech was borderline, but this letter is WAY the fuck over the line.

So now, what is ANY country supposed to think of ANY thing that ANY President does at ANY time?

.

Fortunately for us, the Iranian Prime Minister saw through these assholes:

"in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy. It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history. This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.

Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.​

With regards to Israel and to the Jews, Iran over the 30 years I have been paying attention, has stated numerous times they want to wipe.off Israel off the map

I personally don't know of this is just propaganda because I know Iran has a big Jewish population and they are free in Iran to go to their house of worship.

But then again I grew up with the Iran hostage crisis, know that Iranian back thugs just took over Yemen.

Iran has had decades to destroy Israel. It is noteworthy that in all that time they have not fired a single shot at the "evil Jewish state". I vote that it is propaganda for internal consumption, and the Israelis are silly to pay any heed to it.

Do you recall the old Charles Atlas ads in comic books? The big guy picks on the little guy and the little guy says "one day I will get back at him"...and then the little guy does the Charles Atlas isometrics and becomes bigger than the big guy and beats the crap out of him.

Now, that being said...Iran is saying "death to Israel" but they have not yet fired a shot because they know there is little they can do to beat Israels airforce. But once they have nuclear weapons? They will be the bigger guy.

Just a thought.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, accused Republicans of trying to “sabotage” the nuclear talks.

“This bizarre, inappropriate letter is a desperate ploy to scuttle a comprehensive agreement and the chance for a peaceful resolution, which is in the best interests of the United States, Israel and the world,” Boxer said in a statement.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

18 U.S. Code § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments

Current through Pub. L. 113-296, except 113-287, 113-291, 113-295. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
US Code
Notes...

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

.

The Bibi speech was borderline, but this letter is WAY the fuck over the line.

So now, what is ANY country supposed to think of ANY thing that ANY President does at ANY time?

.

Fortunately for us, the Iranian Prime Minister saw through these assholes:

"in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy. It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history. This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.

Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.​

With regards to Israel and to the Jews, Iran over the 30 years I have been paying attention, has stated numerous times they want to wipe.off Israel off the map

I personally don't know of this is just propaganda because I know Iran has a big Jewish population and they are free in Iran to go to their house of worship.

But then again I grew up with the Iran hostage crisis, know that Iranian back thugs just took over Yemen.

Iran has had decades to destroy Israel. It is noteworthy that in all that time they have not fired a single shot at the "evil Jewish state". I vote that it is propaganda for internal consumption, and the Israelis are silly to pay any heed to it.

Do you recall the old Charles Atlas ads in comic books? The big guy picks on the little guy and the little guy says "one day I will get back at him"...and then the little guy does the Charles Atlas isometrics and becomes bigger than the big guy and beats the crap out of him.

Now, that being said...Iran is saying "death to Israel" but they have not yet fired a shot because they know there is little they can do to beat Israels airforce. But once they have nuclear weapons? They will be the bigger guy.

Just a thought.

Even with a nuclear bomb or a number of Nuclear bombs they would be destroyed...US and Russia had a MAD standoff even though each had thousands of Nukes...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jarhead, the President has no duty to include the Congress in the deliberations or where they stand at any given time. That is not how the Constitution reads. The Senators interfered illegally in the President's constitutional duties.

 

[orogenicman]

18 U.S. Code § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments

Current through Pub. L. 113-296, except 113-287, 113-291, 113-295. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
US Code
Notes...

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

.

The Bibi speech was borderline, but this letter is WAY the fuck over the line.

So now, what is ANY country supposed to think of ANY thing that ANY President does at ANY time?

.

Fortunately for us, the Iranian Prime Minister saw through these assholes:

"in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy. It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history. This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.

Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.​

With regards to Israel and to the Jews, Iran over the 30 years I have been paying attention, has stated numerous times they want to wipe.off Israel off the map

I personally don't know of this is just propaganda because I know Iran has a big Jewish population and they are free in Iran to go to their house of worship.

But then again I grew up with the Iran hostage crisis, know that Iranian back thugs just took over Yemen.

Iran has had decades to destroy Israel. It is noteworthy that in all that time they have not fired a single shot at the "evil Jewish state". I vote that it is propaganda for internal consumption, and the Israelis are silly to pay any heed to it.

Do you recall the old Charles Atlas ads in comic books? The big guy picks on the little guy and the little guy says "one day I will get back at him"...and then the little guy does the Charles Atlas isometrics and becomes bigger than the big guy and beats the crap out of him.

Now, that being said...Iran is saying "death to Israel" but they have not yet fired a shot because they know there is little they can do to beat Israels airforce. But once they have nuclear weapons? They will be the bigger guy.

Just a thought.

Except that Israel has had nukes for decades (and the means to deliver them). Next.

 

[Jarhead]

Jarhead, the President has no duty to include the Congress in the deliberations or where they stand at any given time. That is not how the Constitution reads. The Senators interfered illegally in the President's constitutional duties.

From what I understand, the President wants to sign this unilaterally and without the approval (ratification) of congress. Again, I don't know if this is true, but if it is, then he is not following the proper procedure for treaty ratification.

As for the negotiations themselves, I agree. He does not need to consult congress. However, if he plans on getting senatorial ratification, would it not make sense to keep congress in the loop to ensure what he is working towards is something they would ratify?

 

[Jarhead]

18 U.S. Code § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments

Current through Pub. L. 113-296, except 113-287, 113-291, 113-295. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
US Code
Notes...

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

.

The Bibi speech was borderline, but this letter is WAY the fuck over the line.

So now, what is ANY country supposed to think of ANY thing that ANY President does at ANY time?

.

Fortunately for us, the Iranian Prime Minister saw through these assholes:

"in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy. It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history. This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.

Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.​

With regards to Israel and to the Jews, Iran over the 30 years I have been paying attention, has stated numerous times they want to wipe.off Israel off the map

I personally don't know of this is just propaganda because I know Iran has a big Jewish population and they are free in Iran to go to their house of worship.

But then again I grew up with the Iran hostage crisis, know that Iranian back thugs just took over Yemen.

Iran has had decades to destroy Israel. It is noteworthy that in all that time they have not fired a single shot at the "evil Jewish state". I vote that it is propaganda for internal consumption, and the Israelis are silly to pay any heed to it.

Do you recall the old Charles Atlas ads in comic books? The big guy picks on the little guy and the little guy says "one day I will get back at him"...and then the little guy does the Charles Atlas isometrics and becomes bigger than the big guy and beats the crap out of him.

Now, that being said...Iran is saying "death to Israel" but they have not yet fired a shot because they know there is little they can do to beat Israels airforce. But once they have nuclear weapons? They will be the bigger guy.

Just a thought.

Except that Israel has had nukes for decades (and the means to deliver them). Next.

Sure....and they most certainly don't want to use them or they would have by now. But if Iran has them, are you so sure Iran wont use them? And if they do, are you so sure Israel wont retaliate?

 

[orogenicman]

Jarhead, the President has no duty to include the Congress in the deliberations or where they stand at any given time. That is not how the Constitution reads. The Senators interfered illegally in the President's constitutional duties.

From what I understand, the President wants to sign this unilaterally and without the approval (ratification) of congress. Again, I don't know if this is true, but if it is, then he is not following the proper procedure for treaty ratification.

As for the negotiations themselves, I agree. He does not need to consult congress. However, if he plans on getting senatorial ratification, would it not make sense to keep congress in the loop to ensure what he is working towards is something they would ratify?

Since they stated from the beginning that they disagreed with any negotiations with Iran, what would be the point in the president keeping them in the loop? So they can tell him again and again what he already knows?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Oppose gay rights, or oppose a gay agenda stuffed down our throats and pushed on 5-8 year old children?

There is a difference you know.

No difference, supporting/promoting gay is gay too.

18 U.S. Code § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments

Current through Pub. L. 113-296, except 113-287, 113-291, 113-295. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
US Code
Notes...

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

.

The Bibi speech was borderline, but this letter is WAY the fuck over the line.

So now, what is ANY country supposed to think of ANY thing that ANY President does at ANY time?

.

Fortunately for us, the Iranian Prime Minister saw through these assholes:

"in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy. It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history. This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.

Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.​

With regards to Israel and to the Jews, Iran over the 30 years I have been paying attention, has stated numerous times they want to wipe.off Israel off the map

I personally don't know of this is just propaganda because I know Iran has a big Jewish population and they are free in Iran to go to their house of worship.

But then again I grew up with the Iran hostage crisis, know that Iranian back thugs just took over Yemen.

Iran has had decades to destroy Israel. It is noteworthy that in all that time they have not fired a single shot at the "evil Jewish state". I vote that it is propaganda for internal consumption, and the Israelis are silly to pay any heed to it.

Do you recall the old Charles Atlas ads in comic books? The big guy picks on the little guy and the little guy says "one day I will get back at him"...and then the little guy does the Charles Atlas isometrics and becomes bigger than the big guy and beats the crap out of him.

Now, that being said...Iran is saying "death to Israel" but they have not yet fired a shot because they know there is little they can do to beat Israels airforce. But once they have nuclear weapons? They will be the bigger guy.

Just a thought.

Except that Israel has had nukes for decades (and the means to deliver them). Next.

Have proof? And no blog links

 

[Jarhead]

Jarhead, the President has no duty to include the Congress in the deliberations or where they stand at any given time. That is not how the Constitution reads. The Senators interfered illegally in the President's constitutional duties.

From what I understand, the President wants to sign this unilaterally and without the approval (ratification) of congress. Again, I don't know if this is true, but if it is, then he is not following the proper procedure for treaty ratification.

As for the negotiations themselves, I agree. He does not need to consult congress. However, if he plans on getting senatorial ratification, would it not make sense to keep congress in the loop to ensure what he is working towards is something they would ratify?

Since they stated from the beginning that they disagreed with any negotiations with Iran, what would be the point in the president keeping them in the loop? So they can tell him again and again what he already knows?

On the flip side, since congress made it clear that they will not agree to any treaty with a terrorist nation, why does he insist on negotiating with them anyway? So they can tell him again what he already knows when he submits the treaty to the senate for approval and it is denied?

 

[JakeStarkey]

If it is a treaty, the President must submit it to the Senate for consideration, advice, and ratification.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jarhead, the President has no duty to include the Congress in the deliberations or where they stand at any given time. That is not how the Constitution reads. The Senators interfered illegally in the President's constitutional duties.

From what I understand, the President wants to sign this unilaterally and without the approval (ratification) of congress. Again, I don't know if this is true, but if it is, then he is not following the proper procedure for treaty ratification.

As for the negotiations themselves, I agree. He does not need to consult congress. However, if he plans on getting senatorial ratification, would it not make sense to keep congress in the loop to ensure what he is working towards is something they would ratify?

Since they stated from the beginning that they disagreed with any negotiations with Iran, what would be the point in the president keeping them in the loop? So they can tell him again and again what he already knows?

On the flip side, since congress made it clear that they will not agree to any treaty with a terrorist nation, why does he insist on negotiating with them anyway? So they can tell him again what he already knows when he submits the treaty to the senate for approval and it is denied?

Because, I think, he is telling the Senate 'you are not the boss of me', 'I am the Executive of all the people while you are elected by only one state,' and 'I can.'

I wonder if they President's real target is the ODS far right, and he is hoping for an explosion that will stain the whole GOP.

 

[orogenicman]

18 U.S. Code § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments

Current through Pub. L. 113-296, except 113-287, 113-291, 113-295. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
US Code
Notes...

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

Fortunately for us, the Iranian Prime Minister saw through these assholes:

"in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy. It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history. This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.

Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.​

With regards to Israel and to the Jews, Iran over the 30 years I have been paying attention, has stated numerous times they want to wipe.off Israel off the map

I personally don't know of this is just propaganda because I know Iran has a big Jewish population and they are free in Iran to go to their house of worship.

But then again I grew up with the Iran hostage crisis, know that Iranian back thugs just took over Yemen.

Iran has had decades to destroy Israel. It is noteworthy that in all that time they have not fired a single shot at the "evil Jewish state". I vote that it is propaganda for internal consumption, and the Israelis are silly to pay any heed to it.

Do you recall the old Charles Atlas ads in comic books? The big guy picks on the little guy and the little guy says "one day I will get back at him"...and then the little guy does the Charles Atlas isometrics and becomes bigger than the big guy and beats the crap out of him.

Now, that being said...Iran is saying "death to Israel" but they have not yet fired a shot because they know there is little they can do to beat Israels airforce. But once they have nuclear weapons? They will be the bigger guy.

Just a thought.

Except that Israel has had nukes for decades (and the means to deliver them). Next.

Sure....and they most certainly don't want to use them or they would have by now. But if Iran has them, are you so sure Iran wont use them? And if they do, are you so sure Israel wont retaliate?

The only country Iran has ever directly fought with since WWII in a war is Iraq, and then only because they were attacked first. If Iran attacks Israel first, (and I suspect that if they did it would most likely be in retaliation for being attacked first, as their history has shown, something Obama is keen to prevent), of course Israel has a right to defend itself. But if we keep them via the NPTT and a new negotiated settlement from building nukes in the first place so there would be no need for anyone to come to blows, why is that a bad thing?