www.twincities.com
del.icio.usDiggRedditYahooMyWebGoogleFacebookWhat's this?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Print Email
Checking in about Iran with senators and would-bes
Pioneer Press
Article Last Updated: 12/22/2007 03:15:24 AM CST
Elections can be exciting and even inspiring but the issues we fight about often turn out not to be the ones that the elected officials have to worry about. Which is why we direct our readers' attention to Iran, the large and populous Middle Eastern nation that borders Iraq.
Iran is ruled by a theocratic regime that is anti-Israel, anti-U.S and supportive of such groups as Hamas and Hezbollah. The Bush administration, while prosecuting the 4-year-old war in Iraq, has been describing Iran as a growing menace, particularly in its attempts to develop a nuclear bomb.
The nation's intelligence community issued a public report last month that seemed to contradict the administration's position, saying Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003.
The president said the report makes it clear that Iran did have a secret weapons program and that Iran is still making progress in a "civilian" nuclear program that could lead to the development of a bomb. Bush has declined to rule out the possibility of military action.
Others - particularly those angry about the way the war in Iraq was sold to the U.S. public - believe the report trapped the Bush administration in a second attempt to build support for war where it there is no imminent threat. They believe diplomacy and international pressure are called for.
Iran may or may not be the hot issue in the next four years. But hearing how our politicians would deal with Iran as the situation stands today
It gives us a look at how they might handle the as-yet-unknown issues that will come up tomorrow.
-- U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat in her first year, said: "The silver lining is, we finally have some more comprehensive, open intelligence that we didn't have with Iraq.'' She said the U.S. needs to work with allies to put pressure on Iran and its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whom she regards as "a negative force in the Mideast.''
Klobuchar said the report suggests there is no need "for anything premature or cowboylike when it comes to Iran" but she said the U.S. "can't take the military option off the table.''
-- U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman, a Republican who will seek a second term in November, said: "I don't think you take the military option off the table.'' He said "it's not a first option" but "taking it off the table is an entirely different matter." He said he is concerned that Iran's program to enrich nuclear fuel continues and that previous predictions of the time it would take Iran to produce a weapon haven't changed.
"This is good news, saying international pressure does have an impact,'' Coleman said. "But that does not slow up their ability to do what they were clearly intending to do in 2002 ... the same time frame still exists.'' He said Iran remains a threat in its sponsorship of terrorist groups and the U.S. must work with other nations to continue to bring pressure.
-- Jim Cohen, a lawyer and activist seeking the DFL Senate endorsement to challenge Coleman, said the new intelligence "takes any of this talk of imminency or potential war off the agenda. That would be absurd ... it would be reckless, to start thinking about, or planning for a war.'' But he said it means the U.S. has to engage in "some very firm diplomacy'' with Iran, involving other nations and using economic pressure where necessary. He said "sunshine is better than darkness'' and the U.S. must seek to contain Iran's attempts to expand its influence.
-- Mike Ciresi, a trial lawyer who is seeking the DFL Senate endorsement, said the release of the intelligence report was a "remarkable development,'' reflecting mistrust between the intelligence community and the Bush administration. He said he remains concerned about the continued uranium enrichment but believes economic pressure and a multinational peace conference for Iraq would be the best way to bring all the players together.
Ciresi said the population of Iran is relatively young and not particularly happy with the mullahs holding power. He said he fears U.S. military action would increase support for the government the U.S. opposes. "From a strategic standpoint, the last thing you'd want to do is drive people toward a government you don't like,'' he said.
-- Al Franken, a comedian and writer who is seeking the DFL Senate endorsement, said the intelligence report does not suggest that the problem of Iran is solved. "It's just not so urgent that a crisis is upon us,'' he said. "This is a problem for which we have time if we use it."
He noted reports that the U.S. rebuffed a 2003 overture from Iran. "We're going to need patient diplomacy, and that involves two things - patience and diplomacy,'' Franken said. This may include continuing economic sanctions and attempts to verify and assess Iran's nuclear programs.
He believes the Bush administration has been focusing on "regime change'' when the U.S. should make it clear this is about a "policy change.'' He said the new assessment should eliminate any idea of military force. "It would have been crazy to invade or strike, anyway,'' he said. "It would alienate the entire Muslim world.''
-- Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer teaches Justice and Peace studies at the University of St. Thomas and is seeking the DFL Senate endorsement. He said the intelligence estimate caught President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney "in the process once again of lying us into another confrontation that was unnecessary.'' He spoke of Bush and Cheney, not Ahmadinejad, when he said: "This is a very dangerous administration.''
He said he favors high-level diplomacy with Iran and believes the U.S. should try to assist dissidents within Iran who want to challenge the regime. "Congress should make absolutely clear that this administration has no framework or legal foundation for a military action against Iran without the support of Congress,'' he said.
Nelson-Pallmeyer said he believes it would "not be a good thing" for Iran to get a nuclear weapon but that it would not be "the end of the world,'' either. He said the U.S. needs a more aggressive and consistent position on nuclear nonproliferation.

The mountains are where I live, the Oregon Coast is where I hope to live.
del.icio.usDiggRedditYahooMyWebGoogleFacebookWhat's this?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Print Email
Checking in about Iran with senators and would-bes
Pioneer Press
Article Last Updated: 12/22/2007 03:15:24 AM CST
Elections can be exciting and even inspiring but the issues we fight about often turn out not to be the ones that the elected officials have to worry about. Which is why we direct our readers' attention to Iran, the large and populous Middle Eastern nation that borders Iraq.
Iran is ruled by a theocratic regime that is anti-Israel, anti-U.S and supportive of such groups as Hamas and Hezbollah. The Bush administration, while prosecuting the 4-year-old war in Iraq, has been describing Iran as a growing menace, particularly in its attempts to develop a nuclear bomb.
The nation's intelligence community issued a public report last month that seemed to contradict the administration's position, saying Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003.
The president said the report makes it clear that Iran did have a secret weapons program and that Iran is still making progress in a "civilian" nuclear program that could lead to the development of a bomb. Bush has declined to rule out the possibility of military action.
Others - particularly those angry about the way the war in Iraq was sold to the U.S. public - believe the report trapped the Bush administration in a second attempt to build support for war where it there is no imminent threat. They believe diplomacy and international pressure are called for.
Iran may or may not be the hot issue in the next four years. But hearing how our politicians would deal with Iran as the situation stands today
It gives us a look at how they might handle the as-yet-unknown issues that will come up tomorrow.
-- U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat in her first year, said: "The silver lining is, we finally have some more comprehensive, open intelligence that we didn't have with Iraq.'' She said the U.S. needs to work with allies to put pressure on Iran and its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whom she regards as "a negative force in the Mideast.''
Klobuchar said the report suggests there is no need "for anything premature or cowboylike when it comes to Iran" but she said the U.S. "can't take the military option off the table.''
-- U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman, a Republican who will seek a second term in November, said: "I don't think you take the military option off the table.'' He said "it's not a first option" but "taking it off the table is an entirely different matter." He said he is concerned that Iran's program to enrich nuclear fuel continues and that previous predictions of the time it would take Iran to produce a weapon haven't changed.
"This is good news, saying international pressure does have an impact,'' Coleman said. "But that does not slow up their ability to do what they were clearly intending to do in 2002 ... the same time frame still exists.'' He said Iran remains a threat in its sponsorship of terrorist groups and the U.S. must work with other nations to continue to bring pressure.
-- Jim Cohen, a lawyer and activist seeking the DFL Senate endorsement to challenge Coleman, said the new intelligence "takes any of this talk of imminency or potential war off the agenda. That would be absurd ... it would be reckless, to start thinking about, or planning for a war.'' But he said it means the U.S. has to engage in "some very firm diplomacy'' with Iran, involving other nations and using economic pressure where necessary. He said "sunshine is better than darkness'' and the U.S. must seek to contain Iran's attempts to expand its influence.
-- Mike Ciresi, a trial lawyer who is seeking the DFL Senate endorsement, said the release of the intelligence report was a "remarkable development,'' reflecting mistrust between the intelligence community and the Bush administration. He said he remains concerned about the continued uranium enrichment but believes economic pressure and a multinational peace conference for Iraq would be the best way to bring all the players together.
Ciresi said the population of Iran is relatively young and not particularly happy with the mullahs holding power. He said he fears U.S. military action would increase support for the government the U.S. opposes. "From a strategic standpoint, the last thing you'd want to do is drive people toward a government you don't like,'' he said.
-- Al Franken, a comedian and writer who is seeking the DFL Senate endorsement, said the intelligence report does not suggest that the problem of Iran is solved. "It's just not so urgent that a crisis is upon us,'' he said. "This is a problem for which we have time if we use it."
He noted reports that the U.S. rebuffed a 2003 overture from Iran. "We're going to need patient diplomacy, and that involves two things - patience and diplomacy,'' Franken said. This may include continuing economic sanctions and attempts to verify and assess Iran's nuclear programs.
He believes the Bush administration has been focusing on "regime change'' when the U.S. should make it clear this is about a "policy change.'' He said the new assessment should eliminate any idea of military force. "It would have been crazy to invade or strike, anyway,'' he said. "It would alienate the entire Muslim world.''
-- Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer teaches Justice and Peace studies at the University of St. Thomas and is seeking the DFL Senate endorsement. He said the intelligence estimate caught President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney "in the process once again of lying us into another confrontation that was unnecessary.'' He spoke of Bush and Cheney, not Ahmadinejad, when he said: "This is a very dangerous administration.''
He said he favors high-level diplomacy with Iran and believes the U.S. should try to assist dissidents within Iran who want to challenge the regime. "Congress should make absolutely clear that this administration has no framework or legal foundation for a military action against Iran without the support of Congress,'' he said.
Nelson-Pallmeyer said he believes it would "not be a good thing" for Iran to get a nuclear weapon but that it would not be "the end of the world,'' either. He said the U.S. needs a more aggressive and consistent position on nuclear nonproliferation.

The mountains are where I live, the Oregon Coast is where I hope to live.

