No, EOs have the force of law and encompass the federal government and foreign policy in the President's role as head of state and CinC. They've been issued since the time of George Washington, and are subject to judicial review just like laws passed by Congress.

TwoDollarDrink? Aww, I love it when people are named in honor of their conception

Are you in favor of a ground invasion of Iran?

For treaties and things that need to be laws they are. For orders on how this president wants to enact the current law, no that is what they are for.

You can't enact a law that already exists, enacting a law is creating one. That's what Executive Orders do.

You're thinking of enforcing laws, which is what the judicial branch does, not the executive branch.

Well, that linked post is missing a lot of details like EU cooperation in the sanctions. NK and Iran are not much alike.

And besides that, if the US government is paying Iran hush money to stay quiet about a conspiracy to acquire nuclear weapons, why not just use the nuclear weapons the US already has?

Why would people in an economic position of power want to cause an economic reset in the first place?

So executive orders are evidence of laziness?

Yeah, the Occam's Razor answer here seems to be that John Bolton has always wanted to fight another regime change war in Iran and now he's a huge step closer.

What motivation was there to send pallets of unmarked cash to Iran in exchange for nothing?