Are the tables of history rotated to the opposite position since the start of WW II ?

[PHILIP SCHNEIDER]

In WW II then president Franklin Roosevelt took actions and imposed trade sanctions (oil and assets) against Japan. The congress wanted no part of getting into the wars.

Today our president wishes only to sit down and talk with IRAN while our congress imposes the sanctions.

GOP senator says support for Obama Iran policy 'has collapsed'

By John T. Bennett - 12/06/11 01:27 PM ET

The Obama administration’s strategy for securing congressional support for its Iran policy “has collapsed,” a GOP senator charged Tuesday.

Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) offered harsh words for the White House, which he said should support tougher Senate sanctions meant to curtail Iran’s drive for nuclear weapons.

“Not one senator stood with the administration” last week when the upper chamber unanimously approved a plan to sanction firms and other governments that do business with the Central Bank of Iran, Kirk said.

He said the 100-0 vote in the Senate on that language “sent a message” that senators feel the administration is not moving aggressively enough with Iran.

Kirk and Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) pushed the measure, which would prohibit any U.S. financial entity from engaging in transactions with any foreign government, central bank or other financial firm that does business with the Central Bank of Iran.

In the current era of ultra-partisan politics, Kirk said, “you don’t get any better than 100-to-zero.”

Administration officials strongly oppose the new sanctions, saying it could drive up global oil prices and dissuade allies from joining efforts to further isolate Tehran. The amendment was added to a Defense authorization bill that must still be approved after a conference between House and Senate lawmakers.

Menendez and Kirk say the White House negotiated with them on the final language of their amendment and signaled their approval, only to slam it last week in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Menendez publicly rebuked administration officials during that hearing.

The senators had added waivers to allow the White House to waive the terms of the sanctions should oil market conditions or a national security crisis occur, and they believed these provisions had been enough to secure administration support.

But the administration has stepped up its effort to kill the plan this week by sending a letter to House and Senate conferees hammering out the final 2012 Pentagon authorization bill. Kirk and Menendez responded on Tuesday with a letter of their own arguing that the Senate language approved last week on Iran should be rolled into the final Defense authorization bill.

Lawmakers can no longer afford to “listen and nod while the administration talks of incrementalism … and engagement,” Kirk said. “Time is running out.”

Pressure on the administration has stepped up since the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) revealed Iran is closer than ever to fielding a nuclear weapon.

Kirk’s comments came during a forum on Capitol Hill where the American Enterprise Institute rolled out a new report about how a nuclear-armed Iran might be contained.

There is a growing consensus in Washington and other Western nations “that preemptive military action is unappealing, leading many to suggest that containing a nuclear Iran is a reasonable option,” states the AEI report.

But, the conservative think tank warns, “containment is hardly a cost-free policy.”

Such a policy would require enhanced diplomatic efforts and economic sanctions, but it also would require “increased efforts on other fronts,” including: diminishing Iran’s economic efforts and its influence in energy markets, the think tank said.

“The keystone of any containment policy is a military strategy of deterrence,” AEI said.

The U.S. would have to beef up its own nuclear arsenal — at a time when further cuts there are possible — while also committing to “prolonged” counterintelligence, counterterrorism and counterinsurgency presence “around Iran’s perimeter,” according to the report.

AEI said a containment strategy also would require “a large and persistent conventional covering force operating throughout the region and a reinforcing force capable of assured regime change.”

But the Obama administration is shifting its foreign policy focus toward the Asia-Pacific region, which will include moving some military forces and platforms out of the Middle East.

FDR was the liberals best president but now with the opposite in foreign policy, will  Obama become the liberals best president?

Do we have reason to fear IRAN as we did Japan?

Is the threat of an Iranian Atomic Bomb reason enough to apply World War II sanctions to Iran?

Or should we already be at DEFCON II ?

[Leon Ewers]

There is very little to fear from Iran. This is nothing more than fear mongering to take your rights away, to fondle you at the airports, have TSA traffic stops to illeagally search you your car your home, micro chip you, spy on you, take your guns, take your property, put you in some work camp, on and on and on.

China controls Iran and they are not about to get into war to lose that control. Or will they?

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/pentagon-warning-order-prepar...


http://theintelhub.com/2011/12/07/new-internal-kbr-document-confirm...

Have I stirred the pot enough or should I stir a little bit more?

You will be assimilated!

Texas castle laws! Just give me a reason. Yeeeeehaaaaw com'on Jethro, w'll show'em.
Just don't take my beer and ESPN! Ye can have everything else even my wife if ye wants her.

"They tried to make me surrender but they couldn't so they took my horse and made him surrender."