Action Spotlight
Cut Social Security & Veterans' Benefits? Cut the Pentagon Instead!
President Obama has endorsed cutting Social Security and veterans' benefits by using the "chained CPI" to lower the cost-of-living adjustment. The Congressional Budget Office says cutting Social Security and veterans' benefits in this way would save the government $163 billion over ten years. But there are much better ways for the government to save $163 billiion. Email President Obama and Congress >
Tags
Archives
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- December 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
Subscribe
Does AIPAC Want War? Lieberman "Capability" Red Line May Tip AIPAC's Hand
For all it has done to promote confrontation between the United States and Iran, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee has worked to avoid the public perception that AIPAC is openly promoting war. In AIPAC's public documents, the emphasis has always been on tougher sanctions. (If you make sanctions "tough" enough - an effective embargo - that is an act of war, but it is still at one remove from saying that the U.S. should start bombing.)
But a new Senate effort to move the goalposts of U.S. policy to declare it "unacceptable" for Iran to develop a nuclear weapons capability - not a nuclear weapon, but the technical capacity to create one - gives AIPAC the opportunity to make a choice which all can observe. If the Lieberman resolution becomes an ask for AIPAC lobbyists at the March AIPAC policy conference, then the world will know: AIPAC is lobbying Congress for war with Iran.
Sponsors of the Lieberman resolution deny that it is an "authorization for military force," and in a legal, technical sense, they are absolutely correct: it is not a legal authorization for military force. But it is an attempt to enact a political authorization for military force. It is an attempt to pressure the Administration politically to move forward the tripwire for war, to a place indistinguishable from the status quo that exists today. If successful, this political move would make it impossible for the Administration to pursue meaningful diplomatic engagement with Iran, shutting down the most plausible alternative to war.
The first "resolved" paragraph of the Lieberman resolution affirms that it is a "vital national interest" of the United States to prevent Iran from acquiring a "nuclear weapons capability."
The phrase "vital national interest" is a "term of art." It means something that the U.S. should be willing to go to war for. Recall the debate over whether the U.S. military intervention in Libya was a "vital national interest" of the United States (which Defense Secretary Robert Gates said it wasn't.) It was a debate over whether the bar was met to justify the United States going to war.
The resolution seeks to establish it as U.S. policy that a nuclear weapons capability - not acquisition of a nuclear weapon, but the technical capacity to create one - is a "red line" for the United States. If the U.S. were to announce to Iran that achieving "nuclear weapons capability" is a red line for the U.S., the U.S. would be saying that it is ready to attack Iran with military force in order to try to prevent Iran from crossing this "line" to achieve "nuclear weapons capability."
And this is reportedly being openly discussed by the bill's sponsors.
Senators from both parties said Thursday that a diplomatic solution was still the goal and they believed the sanctions on Iran were working, but that a containment strategy was less preferable than a military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities if all else fails.
So, what the Senators are reportedly saying is that if "all else fails" - that is, if diplomacy and sanctions appear to be "failing" to prevent Iran from achieving a nuclear weapons capability - according to these Senators, that's what "failure" would be - then they want war. That's not a legal "authorization of force," but it is a political one.
And it is not a political authorization of force in some far-off future. It is a political authorization of force today.
"Nuclear weapons capability" is a fuzzy term with no legal definition. But Joe Lieberman, a principal author of the bill, has said what he thinks this term means:
"To me, nuclear weapons capability means that they are capable of breaking out and producing a nuclear weapon -- in other words, that they have all the components necessary to do that," Lieberman said. "It's a standard that is higher than saying 'The red line is when they actually have nuclear weapons.'"
But many experts think that Iran already has the "components" necessary for "breaking out."
On Thursday, Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies was quoted saying that the November report from the International Atomic Energy Agency
basically laid out the fact that Iran now has every element of technology needed to make a fission weapon.
On January 24, Helene Cooper reported in the New York Times:
Several American and European officials say privately that the most attainable outcome for the West could be for Iran to maintain the knowledge and technology necessary to build a nuclear weapon while stopping short of doing so.
This suggests two things. One, these U.S. and European officials believe that Iran already has "the knowledge and technology necessary to build a nuclear weapon"; two, these U.S. and European officials believe that inducing Iran not to use this knowledge and technology to build a nuclear weapon is the best outcome that the West can achieve.
If the experts and Western officials who believe that Iran already has "the knowledge and technology necessary to build a nuclear weapon" are right, then what that says is that Iran has already crossed the "red line" of the Lieberman bill. And therefore, the supporters of the Lieberman bill are saying that they are ready for war today. Or they are ready for war any time that they decide to join the experts and officials who say that Iran has already crossed the Lieberman "red line," which of course is something that the Lieberman supporters can do anytime they want.
It's as if someone wearing a bag over their head says, "I'm ready for war whenever I see light." All they have to do to see light is take the bag off their head, so they are saying that they are ready for war whenever it is convenient for them to say that they are.
Anyone who supports the Lieberman bill is declaring themselves for war. If AIPAC makes the Lieberman bill an ask for its March policy conference, then at least we'll be done with the pretense that AIPAC is doing anything besides trying to get the U.S. into another Middle East war.
Robert Naiman is Policy Director at Just Foreign Policy.
How about publishing the names of the 32 co-sponsoring Senators, so their constituents can contact them to voice their disapproval?
Here's the list of the 32 co-sponsoring Senators, per http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29370
Please publish it here and elsewhere and ask readers to contact their Senators to pressure them to withdraw their support.
Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and Bob Casey (D-Pennsylvania), with support from Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland), John McCain (R-Arizona), Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-Texas), Jim Inhofe (R-Oklahoma), Ron Wyden (D-Oregon), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Chuck Schumer (D-New York), Bill Nelson (D-Florida), Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Mark Pryor (D-Arkansas), Bob Menendez (D-New Jersey), Ben Cardin (D-Maryland), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri), Mark Udall (D-Colorado), Jim Risch (R-Idaho), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York), Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts), Chris Coons (D-Delaware), Dan Coats (R-Indiana), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), John Boozman (R-Arizona), John Hoeven (R-North Dakota), Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut), Kelly Ayotte (R-New Hampshire), Dean Heller (R-Nevada).
And it also means that the policy would have to include destroying all elements of that "nuclear capability", in order to make it so that Iran no longer has it; that means destroying not just buildings (a lot of them) but people too, because people are the core of a capability, as opposed to a nuclear weapon, which is of course an object.
You'd have to kill a lot of engineers to ensure the destruction of that "nuclear capability".
More important, though, you'd have to destroy Bushehr, an operating nuclear reactor, and trigger another Chernobyl, possibly rendering large parts of the Persian Gulf uninhabitable.
I wonder how the Saudis, the Gulf States, and Kuwait are going to feel about that when they realize what's in store for them?
And it also means that the policy would have to include destroying all elements of that "nuclear capability", in order to make it so that Iran no longer has it; that means destroying not just buildings (a lot of them) but people too, because people are the core of a capability, as opposed to a nuclear weapon, which is of course an object.
You'd have to kill a lot of engineers to ensure the destruction of that "nuclear capability".
More important, though, you'd have to destroy Bushehr, an operating nuclear reactor, and trigger another Chernobyl, possibly rendering large parts of the Persian Gulf uninhabitable.
I wonder how the Saudis, the Gulf States, and Kuwait are going to feel about that when they realize what's in store for them?
Simple Joe resign from the US Senate go to Israel , renounce your American Citizenship Totally, ask your namesake Avigdor for a rifle and a Parachute, and you go and attack Iran as an Israeli Citizen.
By the way Iran is a country and its soldiers are all covered by Geneva none of those but they arent real soldiers so we can Torture them.
Some Thoughts and Questions: Is Iran developing nukes according to IAEA and American and Israeli Intelligence? No. Has Iran broken any covenant of IAEA, No. Has Iran attacked any country in the last 500 years, No. Has Iran vowed to attack any country, No. How many nukes does Israel has, about 400. Is Israel holds the membership of IAEA, No - and that is a violation. Does America punishes Israel for not a member of IAEA, No. As if the Americans and Europeans are all bent to punish a driver who holds the driving license and do not break the traffic laws, while they turn a blind eye for three other drivers like Israel, India and Pakistan who are in the violation of not holding driving licenses and still allow to drive their vehicles freely breaking every traffic law - they are not the members of IAEA and all of them get rewards for that. This is a law of jungle. Coming back to questions and thoughts: How many nukes are in the inventory of America 10 thousand. How many in Europe, over one thousand. How many in Russia, about 15 thousand. How many in China about 300. How many in India and Pakistan, around 100 each. Who has the most transparent nuclear program in the history of mankind, Iran. Vow.
I don,t understand what the Jews wants. Total discussion of the world. They will force one day americans to act furiously. You can,t always use illegal means to promote wars.
I think Jews have forgotten their history and intrigues against humanity.
Even if Iran has a nuke will harm non and will prevent wars like in Pakistan and India.
When American foreign policy is in the hands of Zionists, every move will be made for the benefit of Israel. If Lieberman wishes to deny Iran the right to develop peaceful uses of nuclear physics, he should start by rewriting the IAEA and NPT treaties that guide these operations and guarantee that right to Iran and all other signing nations. He doesn't seem to be concerned about Israel's non-compliance with the NPT treaty. And since much more subtle weapons can now be manufactured in any molecular biology lab, does Lieberman want the world to deny Iranians any peaceful benefits from this science? Give me a break and throw the bum out.
Joey, Joey Joey...We hear you, you want war...No problem at all. Here's your rife and your
camo fatigues, I hope the helmet fits, it was the biggest one they had. I'll swing by your
office this afternoon to take you to Andrews for the flight. We'll let them know you are
coming. Let us know how it works out for you..
Best
The American People
Members of AIPAC should have to register as "Foreign Agents" exactly as JFK wanted .
"diplomacy and sanctions "--Isn't that somewhat of an oxymoron? How can you have diplomacy on one hand while holding a gun in the other?
just one question..
when has joe ever not been for a war.
on a side note i think in order to secure the united states and our ever loyal and helpful ally israel
we must bomb to rubble any country that teaches any science beyond high school chemistry, although that to must be strictly regulated.
Lieberman is a Nazi. He has never met a war he didn't loike. Heclost in the Democratic primary in Connecticut a couple of year ago and promptly deployed his endless economic assets to run as an indepenrent and get re-elected anyway. He is bad news anbyway you look at him. I hope he is ignored.
We'll let Lieberman and the rest of his dual-citzen traitors be on the FRONT LINES leading the charge for Israel.
If Lieberman wants war now by Galee, let's give it to him. Give the guy a helmet, a uniform and a loaded gun, put him on a military plane and drop him over Iran. Surely, he'll know what to do once he gets there. And while we're at it, send in any and all of his offspring and the offspring of his offspring and theirs...just to make sure.
Joseph Lieberman is nothing more than a TRAITOR. He belongs in prison, not in the US Senate. Every member of Congress (both Houses) swears UNDER OATH to uphold and defend the US CONSTITUTION; and, those such as Lieberman, who place their allegiance to a hostile foreign power such as Israel, are traitors for putting hostile foreign interests above our own.
Waging aggressive war - as well as threatening such war - is the number one war crime, according to the UN Charter, of which the US is a signatory. Already, G.W. Bush and his regime are war criminals according to this Charter, for their aggression against Afghanistan and Iraq; so are their successors, for continuing these aggressive wars.
It is beyond belief that the U.S. has become an agent -- a gelded agent -- for Israel. Every member of the U.S. senate and 95% of all House members should resign immediately or be indicted and tried for treason.
As for Joe Lieberman, it's clear where his loyalties are. His dedication to Israel is such that he would gladly see the U.S. bankrupt or even destroyed if Israel would benefit.
Hermess
jew liberman the mayor of izreal is no American..he is a neocon turncoat who would throw
300 million Americans under the bus for 6 million dirtbags in izreal..the man is a pig and a creep
Hmmm
There will be no war with Iran. The entire Iranian senario was dreamed up to provde cover for to major zionist operations. First it allows the media to entirely forget about the annexation ofJeruselum and the thousands of new housing starts in the West Bank in January on top of the thousands of starts last year. It also allows the media to totally ignore the outright voter fraud going on as we speak in primary after primary against Ron Paul.
And of course it has the added benefit of restarting the cold war. The military industrial complex has been at a loss as to how to con the American people into a new phony cold war.
Terrorism as it turns out is actually a uniter so that will slowly start to fade away and the new cold war will step in.
Fashion is about a global ambiance than climatic situations . So it is difficult not to acquire motivated by worldwide style tendencies even though Indian winters may perhaps nonetheless be around the milder aspect in comparison with the West Moncler Pas Cher . Following the established guidelines, Veste Moncler blacks as well as the greys have already been dominating the scene, but considering the fact that traits travel at the speed of light, the bright items have caught the attention of many designers and style watchers. Semi-fitted and knee-length leather jackets within the brightest of colors can be a sensible solution to defeat the coolness, confirms designer Nachiket Barve.
Fashion is about a global disposition than climatic situations. So it is actually hard not to obtain influenced by international fashion developments even when Indian winters could nonetheless be for the milder facet when compared with the West. Subsequent the established guidelines, Cheap Beats By Dre Studio blacks and the greys have already been dominating the scene http://lancelfrances.com , but due to the fact trends journey at the speed of sunshine, pas cher moncler boutique en ligne the bright items have caught the interest of lots of designers and fashion watchers Soldes Sac Lancel . Semi-fitted and knee-length leather-based jackets within the brightest of colours is a smart technique to defeat the chilliness, confirms designer Nachiket Barve.
When i was searching i found that you have an amazing sense of honor and keen helpful material for users who came across the globe and read your stuff. quite nice sharing www.juniperdesert.com
Post new comment