Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Senators introduce another Iran sanctions bill, Cruz signs on

  1. #1

    Senators introduce another Iran sanctions bill, Cruz signs on

    Twenty-Six Senators Introduce the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act

    Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act of 2013 Proposes Prospective Sanctions on Iran if the Regime Breaches the Joint Plan of Action or Fails to Conclude a Final Agreement, Provides Flexibility to Pursue a Diplomatic Track

    December 19, 2013

    WASHINGTON, DC. – U.S. Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), joined by 24 U.S. Senators, introduced the Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act, bipartisan legislation proposing prospective sanctions on Iran should the regime violate the interim Joint Plan of Action agreed to in Geneva or should Iran fail to reach a final agreement.

    ...

    The prospective sanctions legislation requires further reductions in purchases of Iranian petroleum and applies additional penalties to strategic elements of the Iranian economy, to include the engineering, mining and construction sectors.

    Simultaneously, it gives the Administration continued flexibility and up to one year from the conclusion of an implementing agreement to pursue a diplomatic track resulting in the complete and verifiable termination of Iran’s illicit nuclear weapons program.
    More:
    http://www.menendez.senate.gov/newsr...-free-iran-act



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    That's not surprising. What I still don't know yet is how Rand is going to vote on this. He's voted in favor of all of the sanctions so far.

  4. #3
    No reason for this legislation at this point. If it is needed, it could be brought up at a later time. This actually puts American credibility at risk for a variety of reasons.

    This is just a way for these kiss-ass politicians to cater to special interests. This is not in the interest of the United States right now during negotiations.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  5. #4
    SEC. 401-404 are exemptions for special interests and cronies.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Traditional Conservative View Post
    That's not surprising. What I still don't know yet is how Rand is going to vote on this. He's voted in favor of all of the sanctions so far.
    No, actually Rand has NOT voted for all of the sanctions previously.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  7. #6

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    No reason for this legislation at this point. If it is needed, it could be brought up at a later time. This actually puts American credibility at risk for a variety of reasons.

    This is just a way for these kiss-ass politicians to cater to special interests. This is not in the interest of the United States right now during negotiations.
    Actually, I think there *is* a reason for it. Given the phrasing, "proposing prospective sanctions on Iran should the regime violate the interim Joint Plan of Action agreed to in Geneva or should Iran fail to reach a final agreement," it looks like a pre-emptive attempt to brow-beat Iran with "waiting in the wings" consequences for not acceding to whatever demands the US decides to be unilaterally obstinate about. If Iran refuses to dance to the tune the US calls for it, the US just says, "Hey, look, we tried. And they knew what would happen if they weren't reasonable ..."

    It is, in other words, an attempt to set up a "gun to the head" situation for Iran. You are right that it damages US credibility, that it is not in Americans' interest, and that it caters to special interests. But when did any of those things ever matter to the hubristic bastards running the show?
    The Bastiat Collection · FREE PDF · FREE EPUB · PAPER
    Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)

    • "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law."
      -- The Law (p. 54)
    • "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
      -- Government (p. 99)
    • "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
      -- Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)
    • "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
      -- Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)

    · tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito ·

  9. #8
    "The White House says President Barack Obama would veto any new legislation imposing additional sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program. " VOA
    Last edited by hated; 12-19-2013 at 09:48 PM.
    Any fate but submission.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by hated View Post
    "The White House says President Barack Obama would veto any new legislation imposing additional sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program. " VOA
    Obama does two right things in one day - this and that. Gotta be some kind of record ...

  12. #10
    Your whores in the US Senate doing the bidding of the wealthy lobbyists, amazed how they'll spin the 'Israel before Obama, Biden, and Kerry' who are nutcase puppets of war to start with... well, well, the Kabuki Theater is writing so absurd scripts. No Secret, Pro-Israeli lobby groups own Senators Porn King Menedez and Chicagoan Elitist Mark Kirk. One only needs to look at the refinement acceleration of Iran nuclear program. Brfore sanctions, 5% enrichment... after sanctions 20% enrichment. RP correct again, sanctions unite the people/country... guess the Fascist will eventually get their next profit war.
    Mark Kirk - Profile - Right Web - Institute for Policy Studies

    rightweb.irc-online.org › ProfilesIndividualsFeatured Content
    In November 2013, Kirk led a bipartisan group U.S. senators in opposition to the Obama administration's efforts to cut a deal with Iran over its nuclear program. ... with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee to push new sanctions ... at pressuring President Obama to adopt Iran sanctions that observers ...

    Iran condemns US Senate sanctions bid


    http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/1...sanctions-bid/
    Iran has slammed the recent sanctions bid approved by the US Senate against the Islamic Republic as contradictory to Washington’s declared support for diplomacy over Tehran’s nuclear energy program.


    “The recent measure by the [US] Senate is incompatible with the claims made by the US government in support of diplomacy and negotiation,” Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said on Monday.

    On November 30, the US Senate approved a new round of sanctions against Iran's energy, port, shipping and shipbuilding sectors. The amendment should pass through the House of Representatives and should be signed by US President Barack Obama before turning into law.

    A report published on the website of Foreign Policy on Friday, however, said that the White House had been against the new measure and that it had conveyed a message indicating its opposition to the senators through its National Security Council Spokesman Tommy Vietor hours before the amendment was passed.
    Even if the opposition of the US President Barack Obama administration to the new round of sanctions is verified, it will be indicative of the confusion in the corridors of power in the United States, Mehmanparast said, adding that the policies of such confused power systems are “untrustworthy.”
    Mehmanparast said the approval of such laws undermines the basic principles of international law, including sovereign equality.

    “The measure demonstrates to the world public opinion that the logic behind Iran’s resistance against the US bullying approach is a strong one, which is aimed at the negation of unilateralism and a commitment to the principles of international law in order to strengthen international peace and stability.”

    The US, Israel and some of their allies falsely claim that Tehran is pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program. The US and European Union have use the unfounded accusation as a pretext to impose international and unilateral sanctions on Iran.

    Tehran rejects the allegations against its nuclear energy activities, arguing that as a committed signatory to Non-Proliferation Treaty and a member of International Atomic Energy Agency, it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.
    Last edited by HOLLYWOOD; 12-19-2013 at 11:33 PM.
    The American Dream, Wake Up People, This is our country! <===click

    "All eyes are opened, or opening to the rights of man, let the annual return of this day(July 4th), forever refresh our recollections of these rights, and an undiminished devotion to them."
    Thomas Jefferson
    June 1826



    Rock The World!
    USAF Veteran

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    No, actually Rand has NOT voted for all of the sanctions previously.
    Yes, he has. This has been pointed out to you before. I provided links. Rand has even said on Fox News and interviews on other stations that he's voted for all of the sanctions so far.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Traditional Conservative View Post
    Yes, he has. This has been pointed out to you before. I provided links. Rand has even said on Fox News and interviews on other stations that he's voted for all of the sanctions so far.
    Not sure where you are getting your information from, but there were occasions where he voted AGAINST sanctions on the Iranian government because he said they went too far and were not helpful. That being said, he did vote to sanction their central bank.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Not sure where you are getting your information from, but there were occasions where he voted AGAINST sanctions on the Iranian government because he said they went too far and were not helpful. That being said, he did vote to sanction their central bank.
    No, he has never voted against any of the sanctions against Iran. These are his own words at the 2:12 mark.

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/284947523...ing-with-iran/

    So are you saying that Rand is lying here?

  16. #14
    Rand Paul blocks Iranian sanctions bill:

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-con...ll-118887.html
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Rand Paul blocks Iranian sanctions bill:

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-con...ll-118887.html
    He held up the bill in order to insert language into the bill that nothing in it would give the President the legal authority to launch an attack on Iran. He wasn't opposed to the substance of the sanctions themselves. He voted for the sanctions bill after the language was included which made it clear that the bill couldn't be used as an authorization for war. And I clearly said that Rand hasn't voted against any of the sanctions, which is true. He didn't vote against this bill or any other sanctions bill. He just held it up to get language included in it that would make it clear that it wasn't an authorization for war. I'm not criticizing Rand, but simply setting the record straight.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Traditional Conservative View Post
    He held up the bill in order to insert language into the bill that nothing in it would give the President the legal authority to launch an attack on Iran. He wasn't opposed to the substance of the sanctions themselves. He voted for the sanctions bill after the language was included which made it clear that the bill couldn't be used as an authorization for war. And I clearly said that Rand hasn't voted against any of the sanctions, which is true. He didn't vote against this bill or any other sanctions bill. He just held it up to get language included in it that would make it clear that it wasn't an authorization for war. I'm not criticizing Rand, but simply setting the record straight.
    Hmmmm.... perhaps you are right... I swore he voted against one or more sanctions bills. I need to do more research on this.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Bumping this thread because a whole bunch of Senators signed on to the new sanctions bill as co-sponsors.

    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...Sanctions-Bill
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Traditional Conservative View Post
    He held up the bill in order to insert language into the bill that nothing in it would give the President the legal authority to launch an attack on Iran. .... He just held it up to get language included in it that would make it clear that it wasn't an authorization for war. I'm not criticizing Rand, but simply setting the record straight.
    This is a great idea, but in my interpretation of the bill, there is a section which would over-ride that, and does authorize force, if Israel decides to use force first:

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    Breaking this down, it seems to be an authorization for use of US military force against Iran, if Israel is "compelled to take military action". So instead of Congress turning their responsibility to declare war over to the President, they are essentially turning it over to Israel. Nice trick.

    "United States Government should...provide...military...support."
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Traditional Conservative View Post
    That's not surprising. What I still don't know yet is how Rand is going to vote on this. He's voted in favor of all of the sanctions so far.
    Rand has made it clear that he will not support added sanctions that have the effect of undermining ongoing negotiations. In other words, he will most certainly vote "no" at this point. Should Obama say "Negotiations have broken down and we need more sanctions" Rand could vote yes. And this development is a good thing. Ted Cruz is starting to make himself unelectable in the general 2016 elections by being seen as "against Obama for the sake of being against Obama." Rand will honestly be able to say "I can work with Democrats. The few times Obama was actually right about something, like negotiating with Iran, I agreed with and worked with him." Compare that with Chris "I'm happy to take more pork from Obama" Christie.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Rand has made it clear that he will not support added sanctions that have the effect of undermining ongoing negotiations. In other words, he will most certainly vote "no" at this point. Should Obama say "Negotiations have broken down and we need more sanctions" Rand could vote yes. And this development is a good thing. Ted Cruz is starting to make himself unelectable in the general 2016 elections by being seen as "against Obama for the sake of being against Obama." Rand will honestly be able to say "I can work with Democrats. The few times Obama was actually right about something, like negotiating with Iran, I agreed with and worked with him." Compare that with Chris "I'm happy to take more pork from Obama" Christie.
    Right. Good point. Rand comes across as a moderate on this issue, even though the neocons will still claim that he's a "hardcore isolationist" and whatever else.



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-30-2014, 06:35 PM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-12-2014, 09:55 AM
  3. 50 Senators Now Cosponsor Iran Sanctions Bill
    By green73 in forum World News & Affairs
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 01-12-2014, 03:09 PM
  4. The 26 Senators still pushing for Iran Sanctions (13 D, 13 R)
    By Anti-Neocon in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-08-2014, 12:02 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-02-2013, 05:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •