House Votes This Week to Tie Obama's Hands on Iran

[Scurrilous]

<snip>

"On Tuesday, the House of Representatives is slated to vote on a resolution designed to tie the president's hands on Iran policy. The resolution, which is coming up under an expedited House procedure, was the centerpiece of AIPAC's recent conference. In fact, 13,000 AIPAC delegates were dispatched to Capitol Hill, on the last day of the conference, with instructions to tell the senators and representatives whom they met that supporting this resolution was #1 on AIPAC's election year agenda.

Accordingly, it is not particularly surprising that the resolution is being rushed to the House floor for a vote, nor that it is expected to pass with very little opposition. Those voting "no" on this one will pay a price in campaign contributions (the ones they won't receive) and, very likely, will be smeared as "anti-Israel." That is how it works.

Most of the language in H. Res.568 is unremarkable, the usual boilerplate (some of it factual) denouncing the Islamic Republic of Iran as a "state sponsor of terrorism" that is on the road to nuclear weapons capability.

The resolution's overarching message is that Iran must be deterred from developing weapons, a position the White House (and our allies share). That is why the sanctions regime is in place and also why negotiations with Iran have resumed (the next session is May 23).

But the resolution does not stop with urging the president to use his authority to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. If it did, the resolution would be uncontroversial."

more


Israel fears nuclear deal between Iran, world powers as Baghdad talks draw near

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/diplomania/israel-fears-nuclear-deal-between-iran-world-powers-as-baghdad-talks-draw-near-1.430423

Israel fears ‘intermediate agreement’ between Islamic Republic and world powers on May 23 could cancel option of military strike.

[cthulu2016]

1. Um... kind of a fake story

But there is also this: The House "urges the President to reaffirm the unacceptability of an Iran with nuclear-weapons capability and opposition to any policy that would rely on containment as an option in response to the Iranian nuclear threat."

Think about that.

The resolution, which almost surely will pass on Tuesday, is telling the president that he may not "rely on containment" in response to "the Iranian nuclear threat."

The author of this article seems intent on deceiving the reader. He manages to turn "urges the President" into "telling the president that he may not..."

The bill in question is a bad thing, but since it has no effect or authority whatsoever, and is a "sense of the House" thing, it cannot tie anyone's hands.

[azurnoir]

2. Really here is the Senate version of the bill

Resolved, That the Senate--

(1) affirms that it is a vital national interest of the United States to prevent the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability;

(2) warns that time is limited to prevent the Iranian government from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability;

(3) urges continued and increasing economic and diplomatic pressure on the Islamic Republic of Iran to secure an agreement from the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran that includes--

(A) the full and sustained suspension of all uranium enrichment-related and reprocessing activities;

(B) complete cooperation with the IAEA on all outstanding questions related to Iran's nuclear activities, including--

(i) the implementation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty Additional Protocol; and

(ii) the verified end of Iran's ballistic missile programs; and

(C) a permanent agreement that verifiably assures that Iran's nuclear program is entirely peaceful;

(4) expresses support for the universal rights and democratic aspirations of the Iranian people;

(5) strongly supports United States policy to prevent the Iranian Government from acquiring nuclear weapons capability;

(6) rejects any United States policy that would rely on efforts to contain a nuclear weapons-capable Iran; and

(7) urges the President to reaffirm the unacceptability of an Iran with nuclear-weapons capability and oppose any policy that would rely on containment as an option in response to the Iranian nuclear threat.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r112:S16FE2-0044:/

[WilliamPitt]

3. Senate Tells House To Fuck Off

Again.

[azurnoir]

5. not really the Senate version of the bill has the same stuff about noncontainment n/t

[Enrique]

4. not just Obama, but future presidents

remember the 1998 Iraq resolution that Clinton signed? The Bushies used that in their case for their war.