Posted on 09/25/2007 11:12:13 AM PDT by MNJohnnie
WASHINGTON (AP) - Congress signaled its disapproval of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with a vote Tuesday to tighten sanctions against his government and a call to designate his army a terrorist group.
The swift rebuke was a rare display of bipartisan cooperation in a Congress bitterly divided on the Iraq war. It reflected lawmakers' long-standing nervousness about Tehran's intentions in the region, particularly toward Israel—a sentiment fueled by the pro-Israeli lobby whose influence reaches across party lines in Congress.
"Iran faces a choice between a very big carrot and a very sharp stick," said Rep. Tom Lantos, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. "It is my hope that they will take the carrot. But today, we are putting the stick in place."
The House passed, by a 397-16 vote, a proposal by Lantos, D-Calif., aimed at blocking foreign investment in Iran, in particular its lucrative energy sector. The bill would specifically bar the president from waiving U.S. sanctions.
Current law imposes sanctions against any foreign company that invests $20 million or more in Iran's energy industry, although the U.S. has waived or ignored sanction laws in exchange for European support on nonproliferation issues.
In the Senate, Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., and Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., proposed a nonbinding resolution urging the State Department to label Iran's military—the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps—a terrorist organization.
The Bush administration had already been planning to blacklist a unit within the Revolutionary Guard, subjecting part of the vast military operation to financial sanctions.
The legislative push came a day after Ahmadinejad defended Holocaust revisionists, questioned who carried out the Sept. 11 attacks and declared homosexuals didn't exist in Iran in a tense question-and- answer session at Columbia University.
The Iranian president planned to speak Tuesday at the U.N. General Assembly.
Lantos' bill was expected to draw criticism from U.S. allies in Europe. During a visit to Washington last week, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner told lawmakers that France opposes any U.S. legislation that would target European countries operating in Iran. He argued that such sanctions could undermine cooperation on dealing with Iran.
No, having personal decision freedom is enough for you to support him.
Life is good...
I recall him stating to the public "why just the other day my 8 year old Amy asked me why is there nuclear proliferation daddy"?
I promise I wont ;)
***But Jimmy was honest. He was so uncorrupted by politics. He was a saintly man, just like Ron Paul. I’m sure Jimmy Carter would have voted exactly like Ron Paul did on this referendum.
Jimmy Carter and Ron Paul are like two peas in a Pod.****
I don’t think so. Jimmy Carter was very much a politician, which meant he blew with the wind. Jimmy Carter could have easily voted for sanctions on Iran, as it wouldn’t have been aginst his religious convictions.
They are both useful idiots. As are his supporters.
And what did Bush say?
“Guess it’s ok.”
WTF?!
Talk about a lack of leadership.
Jimmy Carter was a politician who, once he achieved his goals politically, couldn't handle the pressure and we all suffered for it.
Ron Paul’s statements and votes put an otherwise attractive Repub candidate into the “whatanut!” category.
I assume options that promote the being in the middle of it will be rampant and sensible to boot. /s
So are you saying the next time Senator Byrd pulls out his pocket Constitution, Dr. Paul will be attached?!?
I would LOVE to see that! ;-)
The "Freak State" is keeping you freaked!
I can't believe I moved here to escape the evil Rendell empire. Where can one go in this country any more?
Not a problem my lady...
Make mine a double...
He has to be the biggest shill and tool in this country that the anti-Semetic Ahmanutjob has ensnared to help carry out his evil work.
The irony is mind-boggling (and sick).
Leni
He only sponsors shrimps...
Republicans back then are much different from the Republicans nowadays..
My mom is not corrupt. She'd be a horrible politician. Ask her. Not being corrupt is not a sufficient condition to be elected president. Having a cogent, coherent foreign policy which deals with the reality of radical Islam, our alliance with Israel, our NATO membership (to mention the bare minimum) would be a good start. RP does not have a cogent, coherent foreign policy.
The man who beats his swords into plowshares will have to plow for the guy who didn't.
I don't think that's even a partially accurate statement. We thought (as did almost every other civilized nation) that Saddam Hussein had WMD. I understand that isolationists think that WMDs cannot breach the invisible Constitutional wall around the United States, but that's naivete on display. Thus our involvement in Iraq. If you want to believe that we made up things to go into Iraq, you have to believe that the rest of the world was a willing participant in the farce. Hard to swallow.
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.