Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

FrodosPet

(5,169 posts)
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 11:50 AM Jun 2014

Elizabeth Warren on Iran and the Middle East

Since many people are on Hillary Clinton's back about a hawkish foreign policy - what would electing Elizabeth Warren bring in terms of our relationship with Iran?

------------------------------------------

http://elizabethwarren.com/issues/foreign-policy

~ snip ~

In the Middle East, the facts on the ground are changing rapidly. The United States and the European Union are imposing some of the toughest sanctions ever on Iran - including sanctions against Iran's central bank. In March 2012, a group of global powers, including the United States, agreed to resume talks with Iran on the nuclear issue. In April, they met for talks in Istanbul, and they met to continue talks in Baghdad in May.

I support the approach President Obama - joined by a bipartisan consensus in Congress - has taken in working to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. A nuclear Iran would be a threat to the United States, our allies, the region, and the world. I support strong economic sanctions in conjunction with other countries that have placed serious political pressure on Iran, as well as vigorous diplomacy to try to resolve the situation through negotiations. Like the President, I believe that careless talk of rushing to war is unhelpful, and, like the President, I believe the United States must take the necessary steps to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

As a country, we have been fortunate to have avoided any devastating attacks since 9/11. It's a testament to the hard work of our intelligence, law enforcement, homeland security, and military personnel. As recently as May, these professionals disrupted an Al Qaeda plot to target civilian aircraft using an explosive designed in Yemen.

It has now been more than one year since the death of Osama bin Laden, and the President's assertive operations have eliminated many of Al Qaeda's senior leadership and weakened its affiliates. But the threat of terrorism remains, and we must remain vigilant. We must continue our political, military, economic, and diplomatic efforts against Al Qaeda and its affiliates, and we need to continue to support the efforts of our intelligence, law enforcement, homeland security, and military professionals.


~ snip ~

------------------------------------------

Ms Warren is more and more impressive across a range of issues. I think this country would be in good hands with her as president. She is NOT the radical socialist peace-at-all-costs progressive that some are projecting on her.

And I am sorry, but I think that is a good thing.
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

FrodosPet

(5,169 posts)
1. The U.S.-Israel Relationship and Middle East Peace
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 11:55 AM
Jun 2014

More From Sen Warren's campaign website:

------------------------------------------


Since its founding more than 60 years ago, Israel and the United States have been steadfast, trusted, and reliable allies. I unequivocally support the right of a Jewish, democratic state of Israel to exist, and to be safe and secure. The U.S.-Israel relationship is rooted in shared values and common interests, based on a commitment to liberty, pluralism, and the rule of law. These values transcend time, and they are the basis of our unbreakable bond.

To me, it is a moral imperative to support and defend Israel, and I am committed to ensuring its long-term security by maintaining its qualitative military edge. Israel must be able to defend itself from the serious threats it faces from terrorist organizations to hostile states, including Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, and others.

I am also a strong proponent of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which I believe to be in the interest of Israel and the United States, with a Jewish, democratic state of Israel and a state for the Palestinian people. The U.S. can and should play an active role in promoting a diplomatic resolution to the conflict that is agreed to by the parties, but I do not believe that a lasting peace can be imposed from the outside or that either party should take unilateral steps - such as the Palestinians' application for UN membership - that move the parties further away from negotiations.

I am also deeply proud that Israel and Massachusetts are natural economic allies. Like Massachusetts, Israel has a real commitment and advantage in high-tech and innovative industries. There are approximately 100 companies in Massachusetts with Israeli founders or based on Israeli technologies - creating $2.4 billion in value and thousands of jobs for our economy.

As a United States Senator, I will work to ensure Israel's security and success, and I will support active American leadership to help bring peace and security to Israel and the region.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
6. I agree. I wonder why people think that those of us who support candidates will be upset
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 12:30 PM
Jun 2014

and/or influenced by them when we learn more about them?

I WANT to know more about those who seem worth supporting. We have learned the hard way that blindly supporting ANYONE is a huge mistake.

If she supports US foreign policies that we opposed under Bush, then I want to know that.

She is careful to first make her position on Iran and Israel clear, then goes on to say she is for diplomatic solutions when possible.

Not too impressed with this, heard it before and was fooled by it. It seems to be a standard speech for those who NEED the support of Liberals, but if they have political aspirations, MUST declare their support for the current policies of the US.

 

ChisolmTrailDem

(9,463 posts)
4. Even though they had different methods and motives, republicans at least used to be
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 12:20 PM
Jun 2014

reasonable and willing to work across the aisle. Warren is from that era. republicans today are more like the confederates in America's pre-centennial era, only more hateful and less intelligent.

Le Taz Hot

(22,271 posts)
9. So was Hillary
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 12:40 PM
Jun 2014

and it shows. Plus Elizabeth Warren isn't backed by Goldman-Sachs nor was ever a Board Member on Wal-Mart. One of them left the Republican party far behind. The other is right of center, voted for the IWR, and thinks the TPP and the XL Pipeline are just peachy. I care more about where they stand TODAY.

SomethingFishy

(4,876 posts)
5. Apparently there is much more going on in Iran than I know about...
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 12:29 PM
Jun 2014

Because I have been watching all this hand wringing about Iran's nuke dreams for.. OVER 15 YEARS NOW. For over 15 years there have been screams of "Iran will have a nuke in 3 years... Iran will have a nuke in 5 years... " Yet still no nukes.

I smell bullshit when it comes to Iran. Hopefully it's because there is some top secret info I don't have and not because we need a new boogyman.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Elizabeth Warren on Iran ...