Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Freddie Stubbs

(29,853 posts)
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 12:28 PM Jan 2014

Majority of senators back new Iran sanctions, pressuring Obama

Source: The Hill

A majority of senators now back new sanctions on Iran, complicating the Obama administration's efforts to avoid a vote on legislation it claims could derail nuclear talks.

Fifty-three lawmakers have now signed on to the measure from Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), according to the latest count from the Library of Congress.

The bipartisan bill had 26 co-sponsors when it was introduced on Dec. 19 and has quickly been gaining traction since then; it drew another seven before the recess and 20 more this week.

The bill calls for new sanctions if Iran reneges on its commitments under an interim deal reached last year or fails to agree to a final bill that would ban it from enriching uranium. The White House has threatened to veto the measure.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/middle-east-north-africa/194916-its-official-most-senators-now-back-iran#ixzz2pumLKVgB

33 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Majority of senators back new Iran sanctions, pressuring Obama (Original Post) Freddie Stubbs Jan 2014 OP
ugh. La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2014 #1
Senators, let the White House handle foreign policy, please. Comrade Grumpy Jan 2014 #2
Too many of these Senators accept AIPAC & defense contractor donations and kimbutgar Jan 2014 #3
Can you name any Senators who have received donations from AIPAC? Freddie Stubbs Jan 2014 #22
15 Dems ... GeorgeGist Jan 2014 #4
Make a list of these Senators and primary them all. nilesobek Jan 2014 #5
The LIST... KoKo Jan 2014 #7
Two from the blue state of NY. How suprising. adirondacker Jan 2014 #16
Chuck Scummer (D) (Tel Aviv) warrant46 Jan 2014 #28
The multi-headed snake Plucketeer Jan 2014 #6
bad idea. ... Deep13 Jan 2014 #8
what is wrong with OneCrazyDiamond Jan 2014 #9
Then to be fair atreides1 Jan 2014 #15
How would that be "fair"? Behind the Aegis Jan 2014 #18
Israel never signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, Iran did n/t Lurks Often Jan 2014 #19
Your reply doesn't address the question. OneCrazyDiamond Jan 2014 #20
Obama: 'no need' for new Iran sanctions proposed in Senate Jefferson23 Jan 2014 #23
Doesn't the bill back up what the President says. OneCrazyDiamond Jan 2014 #24
No, the bill is not what Obama wants at all...he has been steadfast about it. Jefferson23 Jan 2014 #25
Reid better not bring it up for a vote. EC Jan 2014 #10
I'm Glad My Senator Is Not On the List Wolf Frankula Jan 2014 #11
Glad Sen. Bill Nelson's not on there, lark Jan 2014 #12
Bad idea. Xyzse Jan 2014 #13
democrats won't even heaven05 Jan 2014 #14
no different then those that endorsed christie. It is way past due, and time to clean the party out lostincalifornia Jan 2014 #29
Dangerous and stupid. n/t Jefferson23 Jan 2014 #17
Thanks AIPAC! Ezlivin Jan 2014 #21
Don't blame AIPAC, BLAME THE F**KING Seantors who are voting for this. The fact remains that lostincalifornia Jan 2014 #27
can someone provide one reason why anyone should support any senator who votes for this? What we lostincalifornia Jan 2014 #26
Can the President veto this without it being overruled? If the answer is yes, then this is just lostincalifornia Jan 2014 #30
Ask these Senators Dyedinthewoolliberal Jan 2014 #31
Obama officials to Jewish groups: New Iran sanctions are 'dangerous' Jefferson23 Jan 2014 #32
Just the fact that Joe Liebermann and that weasel Normie Coleman support this dflprincess Jan 2014 #33

kimbutgar

(21,137 posts)
3. Too many of these Senators accept AIPAC & defense contractor donations and
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 12:58 PM
Jan 2014

Israel should have no say in our foreign policy, nor should the mililitary industrial complex.

Get rid of citizens united immediately there has got to be some republicans who are tired of prostituting for campaign contributions.

nilesobek

(1,423 posts)
5. Make a list of these Senators and primary them all.
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 01:19 PM
Jan 2014

Perhaps the NSA has the dirt to take them down. We tried to remake the Middle East and failed, and its time to pull back and let them slug it out. How are we going to get our trillions of dollars back we spent on nothing results?

Just make the list and look at the cancer in the Democratic Party. Its clearly there and needs to be excised. Stop doing the bidding of foreign governments such as S.A. We've got people hurting in the USA!

KoKo

(84,711 posts)
7. The LIST...
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 02:01 PM
Jan 2014

Democratic Co-Sponsors...

Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY]* 12/19/2013
Sen. Cardin, Benjamin L. [D-MD]* 12/19/2013
Sen. Casey, Robert P., Jr. [D-PA]* 12/19/2013
Sen. Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE]* 12/19/2013
Sen. Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT]* 12/19/2013
Sen. Begich, Mark [D-AK]* 12/19/2013
Sen. Pryor, Mark L. [D-AR]* 12/19/2013
Sen. Landrieu, Mary L. [D-LA]* 12/19/2013
Sen. Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY]* 12/19/2013
Sen. Warner, Mark R. [D-VA]* 12/19/2013
Sen. Hagan, Kay [D-NC]* 12/19/2013
Sen. Donnelly, Joe [D-IN]* 12/19/2013
Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ]* 12/19/2013
Sen. Manchin, Joe, III [D-WV] 12/20/2013
Sen. Bennet, Michael F. [D-CO]

OneCrazyDiamond

(2,031 posts)
9. what is wrong with
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 02:05 PM
Jan 2014

The bill calls for new sanctions if Iran reneges on its commitments under an interim deal reached last year or fails to agree to a final bill that would ban it from enriching uranium.

Iran is not a strong partner to the US, or Obama. I am not debating their reasons.

OneCrazyDiamond

(2,031 posts)
20. Your reply doesn't address the question.
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 04:01 PM
Jan 2014

Can someone tell me what the catch is? Why does the President not support this bill? There has to be a reason.

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)
23. Obama: 'no need' for new Iran sanctions proposed in Senate
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 05:54 PM
Jan 2014


President Barack Obama said on Friday he understands why some US lawmakers want to "look tough" on Iran, but insisted now is not the time to impose new sanctions on Tehran while it is set to negotiate over a long-term nuclear deal with world powers.

"There is no need for new sanctions legislation, not yet," Obama told a White House news conference, a day after a group of US senators introduced a bill to impose new punitive measures on Iran if it breaks an interim nuclear deal reached last month in Geneva.

Obama, who has warned that new sanctions could scuttle the negotiations, said that "if we are serious" about seeking a final nuclear agreement, the US must act in ways that do not increase Iranian suspicions.

He said Iran has agreed to actions that will let other nations determine whether it is trying to weaponise nuclear materials. Iran says the materials are for peaceful uses only. The president says he would support tougher sanctions later if Iran violated the agreement.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/20/obama-iran-sanctions-senate-nuclear-weapons

You could also ask yourself why Israel's government will not sign not sign NPT.

OneCrazyDiamond

(2,031 posts)
24. Doesn't the bill back up what the President says.
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 09:02 PM
Jan 2014

The president says he would support tougher sanctions later if Iran violated the agreement.


The bill calls for new sanctions if Iran reneges on its commitments under an interim deal reached last year or fails to agree to a final bill that would ban it from enriching uranium.

You could also ask yourself why Israel's government will not sign not sign NPT
They won't even cop to their existence, let alone sign a treaty.

Folks seem to want to shift the focus to Israel.

I hope the results will be good for the world (I write as less enriched uranium in the world). I think this shows Iran that congress will act if they snub the President, but would like to see where I am wrong.

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)
25. No, the bill is not what Obama wants at all...he has been steadfast about it.
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 09:22 PM
Jan 2014

Google can be your guide.

(You could also ask yourself why Israel's government will not sign not sign NPT
They won't even cop to their existence, let alone sign a treaty.)

Who is, they? Why would the focus not be on all who have nukes?

Are you aware Israel does not officially acknowledge their arsenal? No inspections...nothing.

You remain steadfast that you are correct, and Obama is asking the Congress to back
off for no reason? ok

EC

(12,287 posts)
10. Reid better not bring it up for a vote.
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 02:18 PM
Jan 2014

I can't believe the lack of faith in John Kerry and President Obama. They confirmed Kerry, why don't they let him do his job with a vote of confidence. This just sucks.

lark

(23,097 posts)
12. Glad Sen. Bill Nelson's not on there,
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 02:30 PM
Jan 2014

but very very surprised to see DiFi not there. This is really disgusting that so many Dems are so pro-war.

Xyzse

(8,217 posts)
13. Bad idea.
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 02:36 PM
Jan 2014

Ugh, Cardin... I didn't want him for my senator, I was really hoping Kweisi Mfume to win the primary, but got Cardin instead. He was still the better option against Michael Steele, but, I was never really in to the guy.

 

heaven05

(18,124 posts)
14. democrats won't even
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 03:17 PM
Jan 2014

back their party's leader. What bullshit!!! American politics is a system driven by hypocrites.

lostincalifornia

(3,639 posts)
29. no different then those that endorsed christie. It is way past due, and time to clean the party out
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 09:46 PM
Jan 2014

of those senators that won't give peace a chance


lostincalifornia

(3,639 posts)
27. Don't blame AIPAC, BLAME THE F**KING Seantors who are voting for this. The fact remains that
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 09:43 PM
Jan 2014

the actual vote is done by a senator, and if that senator can be bribed by anyone, that senator should not be supported.

What is the difference between this and those democrats in New Jersey that endorsed christie? They both have been compromised, and need to be voted out.

lostincalifornia

(3,639 posts)
26. can someone provide one reason why anyone should support any senator who votes for this? What we
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 09:38 PM
Jan 2014

have is some senators saying they do not believe in giving peace a chance.

Is this the same mindset that voted for the Iraq War Resolution? Is it the same mindset that voted for the War Powers Act?

I really have a problem with any democrat who votes for this. There is something really wrong with this.

lostincalifornia

(3,639 posts)
30. Can the President veto this without it being overruled? If the answer is yes, then this is just
Thu Jan 9, 2014, 09:52 PM
Jan 2014

political theater. Still those Senators voting for it should be noted, and everything should be done to vote them out in the next election

Jefferson23

(30,099 posts)
32. Obama officials to Jewish groups: New Iran sanctions are 'dangerous'
Wed Jan 15, 2014, 08:49 PM
Jan 2014
A number of pro-Israel groups, led by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, are lobbying intensively for new sanctions.
By JTA | Jan. 16, 2014


Two top Obama administration officials urged Jewish groups not to back new Iran sanctions, calling them “dangerous.”

The officials — from the White House national security team and the Treasury Department — spoke Wednesday with Jewish leaders in a call convened by the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.

JTA spoke with multiple participants on the call.

The officials outlined the terms of the interim six-month sanctions-for-nuclear rollback relief set to begin next week, saying it allows Iran no more than $7 billion of relief from the $100 billion that sanctions are costing the country. They also said the agreement increases inspections and adds safeguards against any advancement in Iran’s nuclear capability.

A number of the Jewish participants pressed the government officials on why the Obama administration opposes new sanctions under consideration in Congress, noting that the sanctions would only go into effect should Iran renege.

The officials said that even with the precaution, the legislation would be perceived by Iran and U.S. partners negotiating the deal as creating new sanctions, which would violate the terms of the interim agreement and lead to the collapse of the international coalition that has drawn Iran to talks through existing sanctions. The officials called the new sanctions “dangerous.”

A number of pro-Israel groups, led by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, are lobbying intensively for the new sanctions. The U.S. House of Representatives last year passed the sanctions with a veto-proof majority, and 59 senators have sponsored the Senate version, shy of the 67 that would vitiate President Obama’s promised veto. Backers of the new sanctions say they would strengthen the hand of the six world powers at the talks, including the United States.

The officials walked back previous statements by Obama administration officials that called on supporters of sanctions to admit they would lead to war, saying that both sides are acting in good faith, but also urging those opposing the sanctions to defer to the judgment of negotiators.

The officials said that enforcement of existing sanctions remains rigorous, noting that David Cohen, the top Treasury official handling sanctions, is traveling to Turkey later this month to monitor enforcement.

They dismissed concerns raised by callers who noted visits to Tehran in recent weeks by Russian and other foreign officials, saying that such visits were routine and rarely led to actual business deals. The officials said the final status deal would not recognize an Iranian right to uranium enrichment, but that Iran likely would be allowed to continue enriching uranium at low levels.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/1.568854

dflprincess

(28,075 posts)
33. Just the fact that Joe Liebermann and that weasel Normie Coleman support this
Wed Jan 15, 2014, 10:53 PM
Jan 2014

is reason enough to find it suspect

[div class = "excerpt"]
Some five dozen conservative experts and former officials wrote to congressional leaders on Thursday urging them to set tough parameters for any final deal with
Iran, The Daily Beast reports. Signatories include former Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Norm Coleman (R-Minn.).

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/middle-east-north-africa/194916-its-official-most-senators-now-back-iran#ixzz2qWfvscIV


On the upside neither Senators Franken nor Klobuchar have signed on.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Majority of senators back...