Posted on 01/16/2014 10:51:28 AM PST by Nachum
Feinstein chairs the Select Committee on Intelligence and is considered pro-Israel, but her remarks, which echo those of anti-Israel critics, have provoked outrage. The Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) called on her to apologize, noting that the bill includes a proviso that: "Nothing in this Act or the amendments made by this Act shall be construed as a declaration of war or an authorization of the use of force against Iran."I don't see how anyone who is pro-Israel can oppose this bill. All it does is lay out what the next steps against Iran will be in the event that it continues its nuclear program. Oh wait... the Geneva agreement allows them to keep upgrading their centrifuges anyway....Adding that the Kirk-Menendez bill's language on Israel is the same as that in another bill that Feinstein co-sponsored, RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks blasted Feinstein: "We are deeply troubled to see Senator Feinstein making such incendiary and inaccurate remarks on the Senate floor. We call on her to retract this reckless and false charge and apologize to her colleagues and to the millions of Americans who support a comprehensive, robust strategy to prevent the Tehran regime from obtaining a nuclear weapons capability."
In her speech, Feinstein said that "a vote for this legislation will cause negotiations to collapse," arguing that the six-month deal reached in Geneva and finalized on Sunday represented "the best opportunity in more than 30 years to make a major change in Iranian behavior." The deal provides some sanctions relief in return for suspending parts of Iran's uranium enrichment program and allowing limited international inspections.
The Kirk-Menendez bill provides for tighter sanctions in the event that Iran fails to comply with the Geneva agreement. Yet the Obama administration has vowed to veto the bill regardless, believing that it sends a message of confrontation. Supporters of the legislation, including former Bush and Obama administration Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, believe that it will actually strengthen Obama's hand in negotiations.
The legislation currently has 59 co-sponsors in the Senate, eight shy of the two-thirds majority needed to override a presidential veto. Almost every Republican Senator supports the bill, while only a minority of Senate Democrats are co-sponsors. Some Democrats, including Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, have been caught both opposing and supporting the legislation to different audiences.
Feinstein warned that hard-liners in Iran would use the bill to "argue that the United States is not interested in nuclear diplomacy--we are interested in regime change." That, however, is what they argue already. Scholar Kenneth Pollack, who is opposed to war in Iran and favors negotiations and "containment," says in his new book on Iran that the Obama administration's failure to pursue regime change in 2009 was "reprehensible."
Democrats who wish to support the Obama administration's line are praising Feinstein's speech, and it will likely provide political cover to those who wish to oppose the bill but wish to do so without appearing to oppose Israel. Her incendiary remarks about Israel are not likely to be forgotten by Republicans, either.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Iran sanctions regime, Iranian nuclear threat, Mark Kirk, Robert Menendez
The things that she has voted for over the years, and the statements that she’s made, show clearly that she hates ALL people.
Do you want to tell her or shall I?
Considering her hubby and cohorts, Israel probably prevents them from business dealings or gubamint contract bidding.. Just a hunch.
Frankenstein makes it easy to understand why California is rotting
What a misleading thread title.
By the way, as much as a fan as I am of Israel, no country should control our policy decisions.
Why would the United States give this guaranteed support to any nation contemplating any preemptive strike?
Just because it's for Israel doesn't mean it's in the best geopolitical interest of the United States.
She is just like the Jewish Kapos who herded their fellow Jews onto the cattle cars.
what’s in the best interest of the USA is to take out those damned nukes NOW!
(USAF: has all the forward bases, equipment, expertise, and resources to accomplish this in just a day or two...but Obama keeps protecting the IslamoNazi nuclear ICBM factories...even threatening war against anybody else who might try to do the job....)
the problem is in the white house... not the senate.
ps: Remember, America is Iran’s NUMBER ONE target...we are Iran’s Great Satan....so-called....the Arabs and Israel are threatened but it is the good old USA that Iran says will get its first nuke bombs....
the danger is to America, first....
Automatic military alliances in the event of attack are a big factor in how WW I started.
Too late. They're here.
You can be a racist and a bigot... ALL THAT YOU NEED IS THE LETTER “D”!
Agreed, although support doesn’t have to mean actively participating.
And isn’t Feinstein a Jewish name?
Can you imagine a Republican saying that and surviving?
This would not be American military support if Israel should be attacked .... this is guaranteed American military support if Israel preemptively attacks another country (presumably Iran).
I don't want the US in that position ... for any country, including Israel.
Definitely a Jewish name.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.