When All You Have is a Hammer...

... Every Iran Problem Looks Like a Nail

Share/Save/Bookmark

When All You Have is a Hammer...
by NIAC
09-Aug-2009
 

For most of the month of August, U.S. Congress will be on recess. Consider this the calm before the storm.

Most in Washington are aware that September will bring with it the biggest push for Iran sanctions in years. AIPAC has been lobbying for months on the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act (IRPSA), and on September 10 the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations will kick off a massive nationwide lobbying effort, which they compare to the "Save Darfur" movement. All of this will culminate at the end of the month when, conveniently enough, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrives in New York for the UN General Assembly.

Yes, right around the time Ahmadinejad is at the podium in the UN, Congress is expected to impose what it calls "crippling sanctions" on Iran's economy. The plan is to blockade Iran's foreign supplies of gasoline, hoping that an increase in the price per gallon at the pump will cause the Iranian people to rise up and demand a halt to Iran's nuclear program.

But this plan has number of obvious flaws.

First, the Iranian people have already risen up against the government's hardline leadership. What we have witnessed in Iran for the last two months is unprecedented. To think that marginally higher gas prices will mean anything to a population willing to risk their lives for freedom and democracy is at once naïve and hubristic. According to Juan Cole, imposing broad sanctions on Iran will likely only destroy Iranian civil society and bolster the state's repressive apparatus--as it did in Iraq.

What's more, even if the Iranian people were to demand that the government halt its enrichment program--which they wouldn't, since the vast majority of Iranians support Iran's right to peaceful nuclear technology--does anyone think that the government will actually go along with it? Has Tehran been particularly responsive to the wishes of its citizens lately? No, in fact, that is what these people are fighting for each and every day: to have their voices heard.

Next, even if the sanctions were effective in harming the Iranian economy, there isn't a single historical example of economic sanctions translating into a desirable change in the Iranian government's behavior. Just as the hardliners are resisting their people's calls for change, so too will they refuse to be seen as capitulating to the demands of the West.

So why is Congress fixated on this idea if it doesn't stand a chance of stopping the nuclear program? Some would say that the government has to be punished for the brutality with which it has treated its people. Politicians in Washington were universally outraged by the violence against the Iranian people. And for many lawmakers, this was a time to stand up in support of these brave Iranians.

Senator John McCain spoke passionately from the floor of the US Senate, saying: "The United States of America must, and this body must, affirm our support for fundamental human rights of the Iranian people who are being beaten and killed in the streets of Tehran and other cities around Iran. We are with them."

Republican Mike Pence of Indiana said: "We are bound to support the courageous and decent people in Iran who are struggling for their rights and their freedom."

And even Minority Whip Eric Cantor spoke up, saying: "We must rally the world around the cause of the Iranian people."

But now, almost in the same breath, those same lawmakers are calling for "crippling sanctions" on the Iranian economy. They are quick to mention that Iran imports 40% of its refined petroleum, making that industry Iran's "Achilles heel" so these sanctions will be able to "bring the economy to its knees."

So much for standing with the Iranian people.

What better way to show our support than by casting the common man into financial ruin? Think about who suffers the most in the US when gas prices rise due to shocks--it's the poor. Why would it be any different in Iran? Certainly the elite won't suffer the brunt of these sanctions--the Revolutionary Guards have been getting rich off smuggling sanctioned goods into the country for years. And with Russia and China ready to provide anything the US won't sell to Iran, the mullahs will surely find a way to fill their gas tanks. So that will just leave the poor and middle class to suffer.

Even neoconservative scholar Fred Kagan has acknowledged the real effect of these petroleum sanctions, saying "Look we need to be honest about this: Iranians are going to die if we impose additional sanctions." So despite all their lip-service, it seems that Congress' priorities haven't changed. They are planning to continue the same failed approach to Iran of the last three decades. To them, these petroleum sanctions made sense before Iran's election, and miraculously, they are still our best option after the election.

Iran changed forever on June 12. We are now dealing with a completely altered country, and we would be wise to tailor our policies to reflect that reality. Congress should brainstorm some new ideas for how to support the Iranian people and still protect our security and nonproliferation objectives.

To start, they should throw out these sanctions.

Share/Save/Bookmark

more from NIAC
ex programmer craig

Ayhab

by ex programmer craig on

Do you support what Jaleho just laid out? Do you think most Americans would agree with Jaleho? Do you think people like Jaleho should be immune from being made to suffer the consequences of what the Islamic republic which she openly supports has done?

If you don't want innocent Iranians to suffer because of people like Jaleho, what is the alternative? Are you going to offer to bring them to justice on our behalf?


vildemose

Captain: Thank for the info.

by vildemose on

Captain: Thanks for the info.


Ostaad

Q, just wanted to add...

by Ostaad on

AIPAC's last October herculean efforts for comprehensive sanctions "fizzled out" not because of a miracle.

Numerous American people, who vehemently opposed AIPAC's pro-Israel lobbying efforts to hurt American national interests further, put up immense resistance and pushed back the Zionista's anti-American proposals. Achieving this goal took time, efforts, trips to DC and, yes, money. I am a witness to that, and I promise we'll do it again. That said, I believe the Iranian regime's words, policies and actions are, as always, the main enabler for the Zionista and other Iran's enemies.

I wants everyone to know that among these patriotic Americans were, and are, numerous American Jewish people who are sick and tired of these traitors to the homeland, and the policy of creating enemies of the US for the benefit of a few.

The American people have awaken and realized who is screwing and tatooing them, as we say in the good old US of A. 


ex programmer craig

Joe

by ex programmer craig on

Flagged you for being abusive and racist. We'll see if this website means what they say about posting standards or not, now.


Jaleho

PC jan, how much more provocation do you want?!

by Jaleho on

-As you said, since you were a teenager, you HATED IRI since for a year and half they had you watch IMPOTENTLY your buddies captured by Iranians in the news every night.

- You hated them when Khalkhali covered his nose from the stench of the burned bodies of America's failed operation EAGLE CLAW planned to rescue the hostages.

-You hated it when two hundred plus marines were killed in Lebanon and you attributed IRI for kicking the US out of Lebanon.

-You hated IRI as they helped Hezbollah in Lebanon kick your Israeli bulldogs out of South Lebanon.

- You hated IRI as they didn't give a hoot about US ultimatum over its missile programs.........its space program......its nuclear program......breaking EVERY RED line US draw about uranium enrichment and the IRI didn't give a damn and just went forward .....Now you are mad that the US had to sit afar and PRAY that somehow Iranian youth help it with a "soft" regime change and that failed too.

Man, don't fool yourself. You hate IRI because IRI is the symbol of your IMPOTENCY, it hurts the former marine's sense of masculinity, no? You hate it because you know no matter how much Iran provokes the US, you pretty much gotta swallow it as you have learned that you can't do anything about IRI, no?

Hillary can bark toothlessly a bit more just like Bush did for the past 8 years, and yet you know that your government will HAVE TO DEAL with Ahmadinejad who has hurt your masculinity! So, you dream about Iranian people starving, or you make Iran a radioactive zone, but you know that's not gonna happen :-)

PS. The above psycho-analysis is given to you for free of charge because of your clear obsession with Iranians and your loyalty to Iranian.com by Jaleho who is loved by smart American-born americans :-)

You're welcome for my clarifying for you where your obsession with Iranians comes from.

 

 


ex programmer craig

Oh, see Ayhab?

by ex programmer craig on

You have support of this joke persona Joe, now :D

Bet it feels good, right?


capt_ayhab

vildemose

by capt_ayhab on

Congress is the legislative body. Meaning that they are the ONLY ones who can make laws. Executive branch[meaning the Administrative] puts them into the action.

However I do not know if in cases like these if Mr. Obama can veto such a bill? Or even if he would dare to do so? I have to admit ignorance on this part ;-)

 

-YT 


ex programmer craig

ayhab

by ex programmer craig on

Jaleho, Ostad, Mola Nasredeen, Q, IRANdokht.

Are those the people you stand with? Because, it looks that way to me.


ex programmer craig

Ayhab

by ex programmer craig on

Stop your belligerent and accusatory tone, prove your allegation.

I've made my allegations in other threads, and you've replied to them so I know you read them. Why do you demand I provide proof?

[You've made a couple of posts about Iranians getting revenge
against the IRI, but you've viciously attacked me for wanting the same.
]

You want to bring either starvation or war and destruction to Iranians,
then get upset when you are confronted.
 

No. I want justice for Americans who ahve been victimized by teh Islamic Republic. Same as you claim you want justice (though you said "revenge") for Iranians who have been victimized by the Islamic Republic.

Where is my justice? How can I get it? Tell me.

You have NOTHING to lose in
Iran if Iran is  sanctioned or destroyed, I DO, that is the difference.
So lets get that straight.

I DO have something to lose if the Islamic Republic gets nuclear weapons, though. And lets be perfectly STRAIGHT about that, since that is the issue that is driving US policy.

I shall challenge ANYONE who so cowardly and IMMORALLY propagates
sanction or war on Iran. An sorry dude I will not sugar coat it either.

I don't give a damn whether you dugar-coat it or not. Amercians have rights too.

1) I'll ask you to answer one more time: Do you believe Iranian children are more valuable than American or Israeli children?

2) Do you believe the Islamic Republic is guiltless in acts that have caused the intentional killing or heinous mistreatment of innocent non-Iranians? 

These are easy questions, are they not?


P/S And for crying outloud, lets not play the reverse race card[Rush Glen Beck], it is rather immature and Glen Beckish.

Dude, I'm quite accustomed to having bigotted comments made about me on this website. What I'm not accustomed to is people who make long ass posts condemning bigotry who turn out to be bigots themselves. I've confronted you aboiut bigotted commenst you made several times in the last few weeks, and you've denied you meant them the way they sounded. But your behavior continues. If you don't wnat to be accused of being a bigot, then stop acting like one. It's easy.

 


Ostaad

vildemose - since you don't seem to have a descent answer...

by Ostaad on

to my questions, you're using the oft-used trick of answering a question by asking one in order to cover derriere. 

Here are my answers to you questions:

I have not seen ANY formal policy announcements by the Obama administration about a "new round of sanctions" despite some talk about  among various talking-heads. It is certainly true some right wing Jewish lobby groups and their agents in the congress are introducing some proposals and resolutions but none has passed either house yet. Therefore it a false statement that the Obama administration "has decided" anything as far as new sanctions are concerned. Please let me know when you see or hear the announcement. I'm all ears.

Obama is the worst thing that has happened to AIPAC. Obama KNOWS how to deal with them and has the right persons to send to fight engage them. They are who Israel-firster Zionist call "self-hating Jews". AIPAC and its supporters don't seem to be able to muzzle these people who have very high positions in the Obama administration.

Obama has garners the support of numerous influential progressive Jewish organizations that have no problem voicing their opposition to the right wing Likudniks and their henchmen in the media and the congress.

Now can I have an answer to my questions, please?

 

 


vildemose

There is a rumor that NIAC

by vildemose on

There is a rumor that NIAC has lost its clout in Washington, is it true?


vildemose

Q: Ok, I got it. thanks.

by vildemose on

Q: Ok, I got it. thanks.


Q

vildemose, we've been here before

by Q on

Don't forget it has been at this stage before several times. It's far from a "done deal." If you recall last October, before the elections, AIPAC made a big push for comprehensive sanctions of the kind being discussed now. It fizzled out at the last minute. They couldn't do it.

In no small part with thanks to organizations like NIAC.

Think about in whose benefit it is for you and me to think it's "done deal" and "we can't do anything about it."


vildemose

Captain: If Obama is not in

by vildemose on

Captain: If Obama is not in the Pocket of AIPAC then why the looming tougher sanctions are on the way? Do you mean Obama has not signed off on this sanction policy yet?


capt_ayhab

Mr./Ms. vildemose

by capt_ayhab on

If I may interject since you directed your question at Mr. Ostaad.

AIPAC does not have Mr.  Omaba in their pocket, or at least I hope so since I have all the confidence in him. What they[AIPAC] have in their pocket is the congress and neocons. If they do not go they way AIPAC wants them, their allowance[campaign contribution and support] will be cut-off.

 

-YT 


Mola Nasredeen

Captain, Irandokht,

by Mola Nasredeen on

ما برای وصل امدیم نی برای فصل آمدیم.

ما هم مخلصیم.


capt_ayhab

craig

by capt_ayhab on

take a look at this State Dept's memorandum and then tell me I am lying:

//www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/iraq2...

I regret to say that your knowledge of your OWN country is minimal and Fauxish[as in Fox News] at best, let alone about another country, particularly as complex as Iran.

 

-YT 


vildemose

oostad: Let me ask you this

by vildemose on

oostad: Let me ask you this question:

Why do you think the Obama adminstration has decided on this new round of sanctions in the first place? Don't you think he doesn't know all the pro- and con arguments on efficacy of sanctions? Do you think AIPAC has Obama in his pocket?


Ostaad

vilenmose, do you really think...

by Ostaad on

gasoline imports are the "problem" here? Do you think if, as you have coninced yourself the "problem" will go away by Iran not needing gasoline imports? I hope you dont' mind me asking.


Q

Craig, talk is real cheap, and yours, even cheaper

by Q on

I continuously have to laugh. It's comical how you always try to "pull rank" as if being a white American means anything (14th generation "Anglo," you proudly proclaim).

Of me, you have said

Americans hate you.

You have also said I'm "repugnant anti American".

The other day you demanded I show that I'm a legal citizen and I have not come in on a student visa.

Forget refuting you for a second. since this is a powerplay for you, I'm happy to pretend whatever you say about me is true. But I once asked you What are you going to do about it? and your answer was "nothing." Perhaps it is this very impotence that has you all angry and riled up trying to "defend" your country that you scarcely even understand.

As a matter of fact, I believe I have some very mainstream views that I think are shared the American people (whom you don't seem to know very well, or else you wouldn't try to speak on their behalf so much.)

You also seem to have a self-serving mental block. You keep saying the "hostage crisis" means somehow Iran attacked America first and that's the hostility. But you don't think 1953 operation AJAX was anything. In the past you have dismissed this, dismissed US support for Saddam, and opportunistically want to start the "clock" at your convenience. Classic hypocrisy.

But like I said I believe most Americans are with me on some fundamental issues which I'll be happy to share if you are actually interested in a real discussion.


vildemose

Problem solved:   Iran

by vildemose on

Problem solved:

 

Iran to end petrol import

Iran will be able to export gasoline in the next one and a half years as refinery upgrades and construction plans will also end costly petrol imports to the country. "

//www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=102237&sectionid=351020102

Also: While they are doing so, a substancial part of the iranian fleet of cars is being retrofitted with high pressure-canisters, to use natural .g.a.s (NG) as fuel, which doesn't need any refining at all for use in cars.

Also, many cars in Iran are being retrofitted for use of LPG (Liquid Petroleum-G.a.s) which is a free by-product of oil-froduction, too.

Also, many cars manufactured in Iran (Iran manufactures ONE MILLION passenger cars a year and is the only Middle East country with a substantial car-industry - did you know?) are being sold factory-equipped with provision to use either NG or LPG these days.

Simply put: Iran WILL NOT NEED any more gasoline imports - starting this summer.


vildemose

Patrick Disney Acting

by vildemose on

Patrick Disney //www.huffingtonpost.com/patrick-disney/when-all-you-have-is-a-ha_b_253556.html

capt_ayhab

Craig

by capt_ayhab on

[That's the 5th time I've seen you either make bigotted comments about white Americans,]

Stop your belligerent and accusatory tone, prove your allegation.

[You've made a couple of posts about Iranians getting revenge against the IRI, but you've viciously attacked me for wanting the same.]

You want to bring either starvation or war and destruction to Iranians, then get upset when you are confronted.  You have NOTHING to lose in Iran if Iran is  sanctioned or destroyed, I DO, that is the difference. So lets get that straight.

I shall challenge ANYONE who so cowardly and IMMORALLY propagates sanction or war on Iran. An sorry dude I will not sugar coat it either.

-YT 

P/S And for crying outloud, lets not play the reverse race card[Rush Glen Beck], it is rather immature and Glen Beckish.


vildemose

How about an impartial

by vildemose on

How about an impartial mediator to resolve the outstanding conflicts between the US and Iran?


ex programmer craig

ayhab

by ex programmer craig on

That's the 5th time I've seen you either make bigotted comments about white Americans, or laugh when somebody else did. You've made several posts recently where you condemned bigotry in Iran.

You've made a couple of posts about Iranians getting revenge against the IRI, but you've viciously attacked me for wanting the same.

You're all over the place. I don't particularly want to insult you, but you seem like a hell of a hypocrite, to me. Just being honest! I wouldn't trust a word you say if you claimed to be on my side on anything. I'm kinda glad you aren't.


ex programmer craig

capt_ayhab

by ex programmer craig on

So,  your proposed sanction  is kind of smart sanction[like smart bomb]
which only going to target the ruling class? Ohhh boy, I really should
keep up with technology!

No. What I support is total unilateral sanctions by the US against Iran. I've said it at least 10 times in the last few weeks. If you still don't understand my position, I suggest we drop it?

Imposed Iran Iraq war for 8 year not enough? Supplying Saddam with chemical and biological arsenal not enough?

Both lies, ayhab. I had thought you were better than that. Saddam didn't need US permission to attack Iran, nor did he seek it. He saw an opportunity and he took it. With much enthusiasm. And the myth about the US supplying Saddam with WMD has been proven to be false so many times, I have to believe you know better. You aren't a stupid person.

Lets not change what we said, You said NO moral justification needed,
lets stick to that for now. Besides are you referring to shooting of
passenger airline in Persian Gulf? That kind of self defense?

US says that was an accident. Are you claiming that the embassy seizure and the sponsoring of Hezbollah in Lebanon was an accident? Have Iranian sponosored attacks on Americans in Iraq been accidents too?

Opppps sorry I did not realize that your state of the art
[smart]sanction and your bombing did not kill any children. Just like
Iraq.

Does Hezbollah kill Israeli children? Does HAMAS kill Israeli children? How many Iranian children has Israel killed? What have they done to deserve the proxy war that Iran is waging against them?

Just a HINT: This round of sanction and possible war won't be for
anything you are referring to. Just read bit more news and you shall
find the reasons why.

It will be because we don't trust teh Islamic Republic with nuclear weapons. Would you? If the Islamic Republic dismantled its nuclear program right now, we wouldn't even be having a discussion about UN sanctions or possible military attacks. 

But since that isn't going to happen, I'm still waiting from the people who oppose both sanctions and war to suggest a third way that might be acceptable to US/Israel/other concerned parties? What's your suggestion, ayhab? Criticizing is fine, but if you don't have any better ideas thanit isn't CONSTRUCTIVE criticism, is it?


capt_ayhab

Mola

by capt_ayhab on

Mokhlesim, you hit the KHAL right in the center.

Sepass

-YT 

Mr. Craig says, I love you LET me bomb the hell out of you, or starve you to death, you pick.


capt_ayhab

Craig

by capt_ayhab on

[However, I try not to carry that animosity over to ordinary Iranians]

So,  your proposed sanction  is kind of smart sanction[like smart bomb] which only going to target the ruling class? Ohhh boy, I really should keep up with technology!

[What kind of punishment do you think would be more appropriate?]

Imposed Iran Iraq war for 8 year not enough? Supplying Saddam with chemical and biological arsenal not enough?

[You do have moral objections to the US defending itself from acts of war committed by the IRI against the US? On what basis? Self-defense is the most moral of all justifications for war.]

Lets not change what we said, You said NO moral justification needed, lets stick to that for now. Besides are you referring to shooting of passenger airline in Persian Gulf? That kind of self defense?

[Why do you bring children into the discussion?]

Opppps sorry I did not realize that your state of the art [smart]sanction and your bombing did not kill any children. Just like Iraq.

As you said dude, no MORALITY is needed. right?

 

-YT 

Just a HINT: This round of sanction and possible war won't be for anything you are referring to. Just read bit more news and you shall find the reasons why.


vildemose

Trita Parsi: With Iran, a

by vildemose on

Trita Parsi: With Iran, a Tactical Pause Is Needed

The best way to enhance prospects for diplomacy with Iran might actually be not to pursue diplomacy for now. Better instead to make a tactical pause and be ready to engage at the right time. //www.huffingtonpost.com/trita-parsi/with-iran-a-tactical-paus_b_255505.html

IRANdokht

Mola Nasredeen

by IRANdokht on

Smart observations Mola.

I really like your sense of humor :o) 

IRANdokht