Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is this our Democratic Party?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
EbenezerMcIntosh Donating Member (154 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-08 01:36 AM
Original message
Is this our Democratic Party?
96 House Democrats are co-sponsoring a virtual declaration of war on Iran.

NO WAR!

"HR 362 and the Alarming Escalation of Hostility Towards Iran
by Alan Nasser

The current tension among political observers as to whether the U.S. and/or Israel will undertake military action against Iran before president Bush leaves office has been greatly intensified by the prospect that Congress will pass a frightening resolution, HR 362, as early as this week.

The Demands of HR 362

HR 362, sponsored by Rep. Gary Ackerman, a New York Democrat, calls for the president to enact more draconian economic sanctions against Iran. These include an embargo against any imports of refined petroleum. (While Iran is of course a major exporter of oil, it imports at least 40% of its refined petroleum.) The wording of the Resolution is chilling in the extreme: “Congress… demands that the President initiate an international effort to immediately and dramatically increase the economic, political and diplomatic pressure on Iran to verifiably suspend its nuclear enrichment activities by… prohibiting the export to Iran of all refined petroleum products; imposing stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran; and prohibiting the international movement of all Iranian officials not involved in negotiating the suspension of Iran’s nuclear program.” The resolution is moving quickly through the House and could pass as early as this week.

The “stringent inspection requirements” listed would require a naval blockade, thereby constituting an act of war. And this is how the resolution would be perceived by virtually all Iranians. The result would surely marginalize moderates in Iran who would shun retaliatory measures against the Bush administration’s aggressive rhetoric, which has been escalating since fall of 2007. Iranians would unify behind their most belligerent leaders and the country would have been handed, by the president and Congress, powerful reasons to develop nuclear weapons for purposes of deterrence.

The final clause of the Resolution contains a classic example of political doubletalk: “… nothing in this Resolution shall be construed as an authorization of the use of force against Iran.” But an embargo-with-inspections scheme can be put in effect only by means of a blockade, which logically entails the use of force.

Congressional Democrats, the IAEA and Factual Falsehoods in HR 362

There is more support now than there was a year ago in Congress, especially among the Democrats, for military action against Iran. Thus HR 362’s co-sponsors include 96 House Democrats and 111 House Republicans. These are the same Democrats whom Americans voted into Congress, in November 2006, as majorities in both houses, based on what voters believed to be the Democrats’ opposition to war in the Middle East.

To add insult to injury, HR 362 justifies its content with demonstrably false accusations about Iran’s nuclear program. The Resolution charges that Iran’s importing and manufacturing of centrifuges are “covert” and “illicit.” But under both the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, to which Iran is a signatory, and Iran’s agreements with the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), these activities are entirely permitted. The IAEA has publicly stated its support of Iran’s uranium enrichment program, which it states is in full accord with all treaty requirements to which Iran is subject. . . ."

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/07/08/10204 /
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-08 02:45 AM
Response to Original message
1. AIPAC is Blackmailing Them
AIPAC infiltrated the NSA. The NSA is plugged into everything now. They have Congress by the…



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-08 03:28 AM
Response to Original message
2. no, a virtual declaration of war would include some declaration of war
:eyes:

not that i'm crazy about it but you don't have to make stuff up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-08 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. Boarding sovereign ships in international waters is an act of war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ikojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-08 06:33 AM
Response to Original message
3. Bbbbut they don't want to appear soft on
"terror"

Chickenhawks each and every one of them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-08 07:25 AM
Response to Original message
4. No, it's THE Democratic party. It's top down. We are the squeeky
wheel constantly ignored. Our purpose is to send money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fla nocount Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-08 07:47 AM
Response to Original message
6. My friend, I like you,
I started following you around a/b 5 o'clock this morning and you're nothing if not consistent. You're good for this board. Many of the members of the Democratic Wing of the American Corporate Party need to be called on their collusion with the corporate and religious lobbies they seem to cater to. A bootlicker is a bootlicker regardless of party affiliation. If the excuse is blackmail, weak will, expediency, go along to get along, "being a realist", whatever, then they should recluse themselves or be removed for they seem to have personal issues that interfere with their sworn duties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC