Obama Urged to Ready Tougher Iran Sanctions, Military Strike

[Purveyor]

Source: Bloomberg

By Janine Zacharia

Sept. 15 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. should begin preparing crippling sanctions on Iran and publicly make clear that a military strike is possible should the Iranian government press ahead with its nuclear effort, a bipartisan policy group said.

“If biting sanctions do not persuade the Islamic Republic to demonstrate sincerity in negotiations and give up its enrichment activities, the White House will have to begin serious consideration of the option of a U.S.-led military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities,” said the study from the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington.

The report was written by Charles Robb, a former Democratic senator from Virginia; Daniel Coats, a former Republican senator from Indiana who also served as ambassador to Germany, and retired General Charles Wald, the former deputy commander of U.S. European command. Their assessment comes as the U.S. prepares to participate in preliminary talks with Iran on Oct. 1 designed to gauge its commitment to address concerns about its nuclear aims.

The report echoes the Obama administration’s conclusion that Iran’s atomic work is approaching a destabilizing point at which it may be able to build a bomb.

Coats, Robb and Wald write that Iran will have enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon by next year, “leaving little time for the United States to prevent both a nuclear- weapons capable Islamic Republic and an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities.”

Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aGXuRWqsEFos

[Captain Hilts]

1. Is it "bipartisan" if the 'liberal' voted in favor of Clarence Thomas's nomination?

[fascisthunter]

2. stupidest thing they could possibly do

we have some really sick fools running things... time to round them up and throw away the key.

[ixion]

3. oh yeah, let's go back to the blather and bluster of the Bush years

that worked so great before. :eyes:

[iceman66]

4. "Iran will have enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon by next year"

They were saying this last year, and the year before, etc.

[madfloridian]

5. Robb, a founder of the DLC...I am pretty sure.

LBJ's son in law isn't he?

[no_hypocrisy]

6. AIPAC is bipartison last time I looked . . . .

[Soylent Brice]

7. boom boom boom boom boom .... you hear that...?

the war drums are a' beatin'...

[peace13]

8. I bet we will really scare them.

We have two wars going and have run our troops into the ground. We have become the Soviet Union with only the Peace marchers giving a damn for the condition of our soldiers. We will be on the street corner this afternoon at 5:00 trying to keep this in the face of the people. How much more can our military take?

[seafan]

9. Sept 11: Headline: U.S. accepts Iran's offer of talks with major powers

U.S. accepts Iran's offer of talks with major powers, September 11, 2009

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States said on Friday it would accept Iran's offer of wide-ranging talks with major powers despite the Islamic Republic's stated refusal to discuss its nuclear program.

"We will seek an early meeting and we will seek to test Iran's willingness to engage," State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley told reporters.

European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana issued a statement in Brussels saying he was seeking an urgent meeting with Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, to try to resolve Western concerns about Iran's nuclear program.

The U.S. State Department made clear that Solana wanted to arrange a meeting between Iran and senior officials from the six major powers that have been seeking to resolve the nuclear dispute with Tehran.

.....

That didn't take long...



September 15, 2009


Obama Urged to Ready Tougher Iran Sanctions, Military Strike

Sept. 15 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. should begin preparing crippling sanctions on Iran and publicly make clear that a military strike is possible should the Iranian government press ahead with its nuclear effort, a bipartisan policy group said.

“If biting sanctions do not persuade the Islamic Republic to demonstrate sincerity in negotiations and give up its enrichment activities, the White House will have to begin serious consideration of the option of a U.S.-led military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities,” said the study from the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington.

.....

The authors back a bill that would sanction foreign companies that export gasoline to Iran, if negotiations fail. They say the administration should have prepared “sufficient financial, political and military pressure” before agreeing to negotiations.

.....

The authors say a deadline of 60 days should be set for determining Iran’s seriousness once it commits to negotiations. If those negotiations fail, the administration should toughen sanctions and “prepare overtly for any military option.”
Such preparations could include deploying an additional aircraft carrier battle group to the waters off Iran and conducting joint exercises with U.S. allies.

In the absence of U.S. action, Israel is more likely to strike, the authors argue, saying that an Israeli strike “entails more risks than a U.S. strike.”
Israeli officials say that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a threat to their country’s existence.

[lib2DaBone]

10. Ya...great idea..let's start another war .. get really strung out....

especially when the US has NO MONEY and all our factories are shut down... Friggin' PERFECT.

Maybe we can beg China to give us some ammo if we ask them nice.

[Wizard777]

11. So we propose crippling sanctions that will only hurt Iranian civilians.

That will also increase anti American sentiment inside Iran when Iranian are leaning toward a more friendly stance toward the west as evidenced by their green revolution. Then Russia and China take turns vetoing those sanctions in the Security Council.

As for military strikes. We should not engage in a military strike against Iran. This has the potential to make the middle east go up in flames and even possibly trigger WW III as Russia and China have allied with Iran. If Israel strikes first. This could provoke a response from Russia. Hopefully it will not be a nuclear response. They can't just go lobbing nuclear bombs at each other like HDE bombs. Their is a global impact and M.A.D. to take into account.

[Nihil]

12. Yeah, it worked so well in Iraq didn't it?

Looks like they're right out of original stupidity and having to
fall back on the old stuff from the last three presidents ...
:banghead:

There are times when I think that M.A.D. would be the best path to take
given the genocidal fuck-nuts that seem to be in charge (officially
or otherwise).
:nuke:

[Wizard777]

13. Containment was working with Iraq. To the point of their being nothing to contain.

Except 200 tons of High Density Explosives. Bush & Cheney thought it was more important to protect the oil ministry offices. So the HDE was looted. So that last IED bring that cache down to what? 199 tons to kill our troops and Iraqi's with. Talk about giving aid and comfort by omission. With President's like Bush. Who needs enemies?

[jakeXT]

14. great..