News

AIPAC request for U.S. backing of Israeli strike on Iran gets Senators’ support

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s (AIPAC) annual policy conference is coming up this weekend, and one of their top priorities is to secure U.S. backing for an Israeli strike on Iran. Today, the AIPAC ask was taken up by two Senators who have been in the lead on pushing for aggressive U.S. policy on Iran: Lindsey Graham and Robert Menendez. 

Think ProgressHayes Brown has the story:

Two hawkish Senators want to set U.S. policy in favor of prematurely pulling the “military option” trigger against Iran, pledging American backing of absolutely any strike by Israel against Iran and its nuclear program.

Brown quotes the key part of the legislation:

Urges that, if the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in self-defense, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.

As Brown notes, while the resolution is not a Congressional authorization to use military force, it does “serve as an official announcement of U.S. policy to support any Israeli strike.” 

Iran expert Gary Sick tells Open Zion‘s Ali Gharib why the resolution is so problematic. “Initiating a war is the gravest step any nation can take,” he said. “This legislation would effectively entrust that decision to a regional state. Such a decision is an American sovereign responsibility. It cannot be outsourced.” Gharib adds that “while non-binding Congressional resolutions don’t directly make policy, the language therein often manifests itself both in later, binding legislative efforts and, more frequently, in the public discourse.”

What the Think Progress report doesn’t mention is that the Graham-Menendez resolution is exactly what AIPAC will push for at its conference, which begins on Sunday. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency‘s Ron Kampeas reports:

[AIPAC’s] agenda will focus on the Congress enacting legislation that would designate Israel a “major strategic ally” of the United States — a relationship not enjoyed by any other nation — and on facilitating a U.S. green light should Israel decide to strike Iran. Should the measures being considered by the Senate and the House of Representatives pass, it would constitute the most explicit congressional sanction for military action against Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons program.

Here’s an easy prediction to make: the Graham-Menendez resolution will get ample support in Congress. AIPAC tells Kampeas that they will be bringing 13,000 activists to the conference, similar to last year’s “record break[ing]” number. Next Tuesday is when the lobbyists will swarm Capitol Hill.

Last year, an AIPAC-backed resolution that critics derided as a “blank check for war”  was introduced ahead of the AIPAC conference. That resolution was meant to align U.S. policy with Israeli policy on the Iranian nuclear energy program. The bill called on the U.S. to prevent Iran from attaining nuclear-weapons “capability”–a nebulous term. The House of Representatives passed the Iran “capability” bill in March 2012, but it took a bit more time for the Senate to pass it, due to Kentucky Senator Rand Paul’s objections. Still, the Senate passed the “capability” bill in September 2012, and AIPAC celebrated, as M.J. Rosenberg noted at the time:

AIPAC applauds the Senate for rejecting a policy of containment of an Iranian nuclear weapons capability and calling for an increase in sanctions against the world’s leading state sponsor of terror.

Expect a repeat of last year’s legislative performance after the AIPAC conference closes out. 

58 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Isn’t this how WWI started? Everybody “greenlighted” everyone else.

Fools. Criminals. And while traitors is overused, this sure seems to be one step inside that line.

Ali Gharib
With prominent liberal Democrats already signing on, AIPAC’s lobbying heft will likely propel a bill that, in Congressional sentiment at least, commits the U.S. to active support of a potential Israeli attack that experts think could have consequences as grave as further destabilization in the region, adverse global economic consequences, and even a hardening of Iranian resolve to get a weapon.

……

At my last job, AIPAC complained when a colleague wrote that the group’s tactics were pushing the U.S. toward a new Middle East war. Make no mistake: though non-binding, this Graham-Menendez resolution—announced as an AIPAC initiative before being introduced in Congress—is a pro-war effort. During now-Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel’s confirmation hearing, the nominee’s years-old remarks about the influence of the pro-Israel lobby on Capitol Hill were seized upon: “Name one dumb thing we’ve been goaded into doing by the Israeli, Jewish lobby,” one Republican demanded. If only Graham had given Hagel an extra few weeks to hand him this shining example. – See more at: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/28/senators-press-to-green-light-israeli-attack-on-iran.html#sthash.hcNTrugD.dpuf

Now if only we Americans could separate Heidi Klum’s beautiful German ass from the Holocaust. Not likely, because Joan Rivers is in charge of official US foreign policy. What, you think those in charge are the hillbilly ducks with the ZZ top beards? LOL.
When’s the last time you heard the heavily bottomed Ms River pull a Vanessa Redgrave? See what I mean?

also:
The Stuxnet computer virus believed to have been developed by the United States or Israel to contain threats from Iran dates back at least to 2007, researchers said Wednesday. Researchers at the leading security company Symantec say they’ve discovered an early version of Stuxnet, what they call a “missing link,” that was active as early as 2005.

“The new finding … resolves a number of long-standing mysteries around a part of the attack code that appeared in the 2009 and 2010 variants of Stuxnet, but was incomplete in those variants and had been disabled by the attackers,” said Kim Zetter of the Wired.com website that specializes in defense and security affairs.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2013/02/28/Cyber-sleuths-unravel-Stuxnet-mysteries/UPI-87461362075625/#ixzz2MDxQQvk7

First came the no-fly zones, the sanctions, then came the total destruction of a millennia-old civilization. Have you seen photos of the destroyed Museums, artifacts, and one of the world’s seven wonders, the Hanging Gardens of Babylon?

After invading in 2003, US troops along with Halliburton contractors took to the Gardens with heavy machinery.

So it took Zionists about a decade before they could get the US to attack Iraq, how long do you suppose before the Zios destroy another civilization?