Iran arms treaty is treasonous

Iran is an enemy of the U.S. To negotiate a treaty favorable to an enemy is aiding and abetting that enemy. Aiding and abetting an enemy is treason under the U.S. Constitution.

For the president to threaten Congress in its role of representing the American people in questioning his motives and the terms of the treaty furthers his treason. When do impeachment proceedings begin against the president?

Roman emperors negotiated treaties with Middle East leaders in the waning days of the Empire. Such treaties with duplicitous leaders did not lead to peace in the region, nor did they prolong the Empire. Thus, current assertions that the proposed treaty is a new concept in U.S. and Middle East relations is false because Iranian duplicity continues. Further, Russia was represented by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov who could not bring himself to admit that Russian troops were actively engaged in the Ukrainian conflict. How much trust should the US give him in his role as a participant in the negotiations of the Iranian treaty?

The treaty allegedly provides for U.S. and UN inspections of Iranian nuclear sites. What is to prevent Iranian nuclear scientists from setting up shop in Russia, China, North Korea or elsewhere to complete their developmental work? Will U.S. and UN inspectors have access to these alternative sites? I think not given Russian and North Korean attitudes toward the U.S. even if language to that effect is found in the treaty, especially when North Korea is not even a party to the treaty.

Treason is treason, and a bad deal is a bad deal.

George Banas

Lisle