Actually it appears that the main sponsor of the bill is Gary Ackerman, who is a Democratic congressman from Queens, New York.

Why?

What has Iran done to warrant a blockade?

Worst. Resolution. Ever.

Ron Paul Revere: AIPAC has some pretty deep pockets.

THE JOOOS!!1!

Boy, I sure am glad we have this super-duper anti-war majority in Congress now!

/blech
//two sides of the same coin.

Ron Paul Revere: Why do you hate America?

The homogenation of culture in which mediocrity is a virtue.

Does anyone have a link where I can check how my representative voted on this?

Unright: Does anyone have a link where I can check how my representative voted on this?

Wait, nevermind. It's only been introduced, not voted on.

Doggie McNugget: Ron Paul Revere: AIPAC has some pretty deep pockets.

THE JOOOS!!1!

Did you read the part of TFA which describes how AIPAC had 7,000+ people lobbying Congress about this last week?

Unright: Wait, nevermind. It's only been introduced, not voted on.

Here's the full list of 169 cosponsors. (new window)

mcwebe0: Unright: Wait, nevermind. It's only been introduced, not voted on.

Here's the full list of 169 cosponsors. (new window)

Thanks. I found it already. I'm really surprised that Vern Bunchanan (R-FL 13) isn't on that list.

McCainDemocrat: What do the following Democrats have in common?

Answer they are setting up the Republicans for a fall in November. Because while this may pass the House it will die a horrible death in the Senate while the Senate Democrats beat this over McCain's head.

Knowing the trend of action in the Senate, it would pass.

So, apparently a resolution sponsored by a Democrat and supported by solidly liberal Democrats is supposed to show that McCain and the Republicans are stirring up war with Iran? Right?

Ron Paul Revere:

So yes, the JOOOOOSSS are behind this. Sorry if the truth is a tough thing for you to handle.

In getting co-sponsors, I suppose. Evan Bayh introduced it, apparently. Somehow I doubt PACs can force the US government to send the military on their whim. I know Truther types seem to believe this way.

I don't like this idea any more than anyone else, but with this and Bush's visit to Europe to press for more sanctions, and Europe basically agreeing, things are ratcheting up.

Foreign policy and relations difficulties might be a little more complicated than blaming a PAC or Israel.

European powers have been saying Iran must not have nuclear weapons, do Israel and AIPAC 'own' them as well? The reasons are complex.

I definitely don't like this resolution, nor am I a fan of AIPAC, but things have to be kept in perspective.

Violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty might warrant something to get their attention. Europe is starting to figure out how worthless negotiation and dialog are to a totalitarian regime. In all of history it has only been military power, or the legitimate threat of military power, that has brought such regimes to heel.

Tell me, those of you who are so opposed to any type of force, what is your idea to deal with a soon-to-be nuclear powered state sponsor of terrorism? Stick your head in the sand?

Bildo: Tell me, those of you who are so opposed to any type of force, what is your idea to deal with a soon-to-be nuclear powered state sponsor of terrorism? Stick your head in the sand?

The only reason Iran would even have a nuclear beef to pick with the US is because we pull shiat like this. We've been breeding our own trouble for the past 50 years.

It's none of our farking business if a country on the other side of the world wants nuclear weapons while we still have enough to blow up the entire planet 10 times over.

FTFA: This resolution is the current central legislative priority of the pro-war lobby AIPAC.

Why not just come out and say it? The America-Israel Political Action Committee wants to instigate shiat with Iran in order to justify a war with them. Wake up people.

/now cue the asshats that will label me an anti-Semite for not blindly supporting the state of Israel at the expense of our men and women, billions of our dollars, and the reputation of our country...

So tell me again how the Democrats are different from the Republicans?

Ron Paul Revere: Bush let Pakistan (and possibly N. Korea) get the bomb.

Bush? Pakistan started work in the 70s and had nuclear weapons capabilities by the 1980s. They conducted their first test in 1998.

Weren't N. Korea, Iran and Pakistan part of the Axis of Evil in 2001, or did you forget that?

Wrong again. It was North Korea, Iran and Iraq.

They saw how we started treating Pakistan after they developed a bomb, and they want the same respect.

Pakistan and the US were on very friendly terms because of the Soviet Union's relationship with India and its invasion of Afghanistan. Also, George HW Bush cut ties significantly with Pakistan in the 1990s after he determined they had made nuclear weapons, which is not what I'd consider respect.

doyner: /now cue the asshats that will label me an anti-Semite for not blindly supporting the state of Israel at the expense of our men and women, billions of our dollars, and the reputation of our country...

You're an asshat for not blindly supporting the state of Israel at the expense of blah, blah, blah...

/I tried...

Ron Paul Revere: I stand corrected.

Ron Paul Revere: I'm losing my grip tonight. Too busy submitting and not thinking before posting.

Ron Paul Revere: Thanks for that tidbit.

WTF is wrong with you, man?!?!? This is FARK. You don't admit when you're wrong, you just insult the person pointing it out!

Lionel Mandrake: You're an asshat for not blindly supporting the state of Israel at the expense of blah, blah, blah...

/I tried...

*sigh*

It really is disgusting how our system has been completely hijacked by uncompromising ideologies and deep pockets. How is it so easily justifiable to put the interests of another nation ahead of the interests of our own, and in the process debase dissenting voices with such undeserved labels?

That said, I guess we have it coming. After decades of interfering with other nations' internal politics I guess it is to be expected that it would happen to us.

JPJ007: WTF is wrong with you, man?!?!? This is FARK. You don't admit when you're wrong, you just insult the person pointing it out!

Nah--in his view you keep score on Fark by the number of greens one gets, not the level at which one defends silly statements.

Ron Paul Revere: Thanks for that tidbit.

I ... don't get flamed? Damnit, what do I do now? :-/

/You're welcome
//It's good to see TFers like this

Ron Paul Revere:

Bush let Pakistan (and possibly N. Korea) get the bomb. What makes Iran so different? Weren't N. Korea, Iran and Pakistan part of the Axis of Evil in 2001, or did you forget that?

Let them? Really? Pakistan started their nuclear weapons program in 1972. They began enriching weapons grade uranium in 1985. They detonated their first nuclear weapon in 1998.

N Korea resigned from the NNPT in 1993 in order to pursue nuclear weapons. Even after agreeing to halt the program they kept developing nuclear weapons throughout the 90s.

BDS is alive and well in you, isn't it?

I am less than convinced that Iran's leadership is suicidal. I believe their aim is more to equalize the balance of power in the region and not have Israel's unacknowledged nukes as a constant threat. They saw how we started treating Pakistan after they developed a bomb, and they want the same respect.

You are making a lot of assumptions that aren't necessarily based on fact. Iranian government officials have stated openly that they would pursue nuclear war against Israel because at least part of Iran would survive while all of Israel would be destroyed. Does that really sound like they aren't suicidal?

If you really think the first thing they'll do is attack Israel, well, I don't know what to tell you.

Yes, they will attack Israel. They live for it.

Gwendolyn: The only reason Iran would even have a nuclear beef to pick with the US is because we pull shiat like this. We've been breeding our own trouble for the past 50 years.

So your idea is to stick our heads in the sand and hope for the best. wow. And Democrats wonder why Americans don't take them seriously on matters of national security...

We've heard these arguments before, and they've been wrong every time. You can kiss the ass of a dictator, but that doesn't mean that they won't still attack you. We can give them everything they want, and they'll just demand more. We can either confront them while we have the ability to stop them relatively easily, or we can wait until they have nuclear weapons. Either way, we are eventually going to have to confront them.

It's none of our farking business if a country on the other side of the world wants nuclear weapons while we still have enough to blow up the entire planet 10 times over.

Except that Islamic culture has proven itself to be suicidal. The Iranian government just happens to be the worst of that culture.

doyner: It really is disgusting how our system has been completely hijacked by uncompromising ideologies and deep pockets.

Always defended by cries of "free speech!"

"Free" speech always seems to carry more weight with a multi-million dollar PAC behind it.

If you can't afford to buy off members of Congress, then your cause is not very worthy. Obviously.

Ron Paul Revere:

Sorry, I posted that before I realized that it had already been addressed.

Lionel Mandrake: "Free" speech always seems to carry more weight with a multi-million dollar PAC behind it.

Speech is free; an audience costs money.

Bildo: So your idea is to stick our heads in the sand and hope for the best. wow. And Democrats wonder why Americans don't take them seriously on matters of national security...

Actually, her idea is "If we don't go and poke the wasps' nest with a stick the odds of us getting stung go down drastically." I understand how that could be confusing, though. It's really very much like ignoring a problem.

Except that Islamic culture has proven itself to be suicidal. The Iranian government just happens to be the worst of that culture.

Actually, prior to the Axis of Evil speech in 2002, the Republic of Iran was headed firmly toward secularization. The hawkish position America has taken since then has legitimized the propaganda promulgated by the mullahs to the populous and pushed back secularization by decades. Heckuva job there, W.

Yes, a naval blockade can be considered an act of war.

Supplying insurgents with weapons and supplies, enabling them to kill another country's soldiers in the field can also be considered an act of war.

So it's probably a wash.

Last One Left: Speech is free; an audience costs money.

Well said.

Don't worry, somewhere in Virginia, someone has crunched the numbers.

CtrlAltDelete: Why?

What has Iran done to warrant a blockade?

That's pre-9/11 thinking right there. I'd be best if you didn't talk like that, comrade.

Churchill2004: Boy, I sure am glad we have this super-duper anti-war majority in Congress now!

/blech
//two sides of the same coin.

Thus, we shouldn't vote. Ass rape is ass rape, after all. Why should we be picky?

DeltaXi65:

Supplying insurgents with weapons and supplies, enabling them to kill another country's soldiers in the field can also be considered an act of war.


What? No it's not -- even if there was any evidence this was happening -- which there isn't.

Also, why in the hell don't we care about North Korea?f

Bildo: Tell me, those of you who are so opposed to any type of force, what is your idea to deal with a soon-to-be nuclear powered state sponsor of terrorism?

Well, we can go by the fact that there are nuclear powered state sponsors of terrorism, and our fearless leader is holding hands and kissing their leaders on the lips...and getting down on his knees and begging for more oil...

/Wait...that isn't begging...
//Ew.

Crap, and I was having a relatively nice evening at work, until I read this headline...

It's about the time. I want this war to happen and it's time to get rid of this Islamic Facist Nation. If we get rid of the Islamic Republic of Iran, we get rid of terrorists groups associated with Iran, the Islamic Fundamentalism and hate of Western Country from the higher ranks will lessen. There are nations supporting this like France, Great Britain, Germany, Saudi Arabia, and Israel.

Funk Brothers: It's about the time. I want this war to happen and it's time to get rid of this Islamic Facist Nation. If we get rid of the Islamic Republic of Iran, we get rid of terrorists groups associated with Iran, the Islamic Fundamentalism and hate of Western Country from the higher ranks will lessen. There are nations supporting this like France, Great Britain, Germany, Saudi Arabia, and Israel.

Is that sarcasm? I can't tell..

DeltaXi65: Supplying insurgents with weapons and supplies, enabling them to kill another country's soldiers in the field can also be considered an act of war.

...in that case, the United States declared war on every Central American country in the mid-'80s. And we have more proof that we supplied insurgents than we do that Iran did.

Anyone notice which countries border Iran on the eastern and western borders and whose military is occupying them?

Crosshair: So tell me again how the Democrats are different from the Republicans?

If you can't understand the HUGE difference between the two parties, you need your head checked. The Democans win elections by appealing for people's want of a strong mommy figure, whereas the Republicrats win elections by appealing for people's want of a strong daddy figure.

/Duh.

soy_bomb: Anyone notice which countries border Iran on the eastern and western borders and whose military is occupying them?

I dunno, it's some private contractor for Exxon I think.

Violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty might warrant something to get their attention.

Iran never signed that treaty though. Interesting the only nation in the world who did sign it and break it is the United States, to research new nuclear bunker busting technology.

The claims and outrage in the headline don't seem to be warranted by the actual text of the resolution. Here's the clause that's being complained about:

(3) demands that the President initiate an international effort to immediately and dramatically increase the economic, political, and diplomatic pressure on Iran to verifiably suspend its nuclear enrichment activities by, inter alia, prohibiting the export to Iran of all refined petroleum products; imposing stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran; and prohibiting the international movement of all Iranian officials not involved in negotiating the suspension of Iran's nuclear program;

Yes, this may be going too far, but it's not exactly calling for a naval blockade. You could say that "stringent inspection" could only be accomplished by a naval blockade, but that's kind of open to interpretation. There is no link or any documentation as to why this is considered an "act of war," and the resolution even explicitly says this:

Whereas nothing in this resolution shall be construed as an authorization of the use of force against Iran

There seems to be a bit of faux outrage here. Sure, maybe the language shouldn't be as strong as it is, or they should strike this section:

imposing stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran

...but this is hardly a call to arms.

News: Resolution calls for a naval blockade of Iran, effectively an act of war.

So are Iran's current actions against the United States within Iraq, but you never submitted that article did you shillmitter, and even if you did, it would have been redlit.

limeyfellow: Violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty might warrant something to get their attention.

Iran never signed that treaty though. Interesting the only nation in the world who did sign it and break it is the United States, to research new nuclear bunker busting technology.

Iran did sign.

Rant_Casey's_Rabies_Buffet: Also, why in the hell don't we care about North Korea?f

North Korea doesn't have oil arabs

Alphax: Is that sarcasm? I can't tell..

I can't believe the number of people who are against this blockade in the first place. Don't you guys know that Iran is building a nuclear weapon and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said some very anti-Semetic stuff on Israel which is comparable to Hitler. Remember Hitler folks? He helped persuade millions of people to convince that the Jews are the problem and cause Jewish business to be destoryed and six million Jews died from the Holocaust. We cannot repeat history again with Iran firing a nuclear weapon and destorying Israel. I can't believe how many people are falling into deaf ears about this. Ahmadinejad is as cynical as Hugo Chavez. Ahmadinejad is also a homophobe too about denying homosexuals living in Iran. Heck, we got two states that now have gay marriage. Iranians just want a McDonald's and western music, but the higher ups just completely farked them. We need to free these people and oil too.