Imagine that all trade to and from the U.S. came under the supervision of a superpower nation or international organization so that no products could be imported or exported without its approval and inspection. Imagine that the President, the Congress, and all other government officials were forbidden from traveling abroad unless they agree to certain conditions imposed by the superpower nation or world organization. Imagine that anyone traveling to and from the U.S. would also be subject to inspection under the supervision of a foreign power. What if this foreign power also prohibited the Armed Forces from developing certain weapons? What should we do if this were to happen? I would hope that Americans would see this as tyranny and defy the rules imposed upon it by this foreign power. The Declaration of Independence contains grievances against these very things and things even less tyrannical than this.
But this is what the majority of our short-sighted congressmen are in favor of doing to Iran. The bill which would authorize this action is called H. CON. RES. 362. (If the link doesn’t work, find it here.) It has 247 cosponsors which is more than enough votes to pass the House. The authors of this legislation insist that this is not a blockade. What else would you call it? This is the kind of language that is being used to justify this tyranny:
“Iran could have enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon as soon as late 2009…”
“…the possibility that Iran would share its nuclear materials and technology with others…”
Are we so depraved that we are going to attack a nation just because of “could haves” and “possibilities”? (Here we go again.) So what if Iran does have nukes. What gives us the right to attack them just because they have nukes? They are surrounded by other nations which either have nukes or are occupied by nations that have nukes (India, China, Pakistan, Russia, and Israel). Iran has been inspected nine times since 2003 and there have been no violations of the agreements they made with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). They may be in violation of U.N. resolutions, but so what? The U.S. is in violation of the resolutions of that tyrannical organization. And I’m glad that we are—we need to stand up to those tyrants.
The legislation also cites Iran’s support of Hamas and Hezbollah as a reason for this aggressive maneuver. If you don’t believe that this is hypocritical, click here.
Some people are saying that we should do this because of threats made by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He called for Israel to be “wiped off the map” and has said that the holocaust is a myth. But he is just a mouth. The Mullahs have the real power in Iran. We should not go to war unless a real violation of the sovereignty of the United States (not Israel) has occurred and only against nations guilty of such a violation. Jesus said, “But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.” (Matthew 5:39)
“No options have been taken off the table.” This is an obvious prelude to war—as if the two that we are already in aren’t enough! Supporters of the bill are saying that this blockade will weaken Iran the way that the sanctions against Iraq weakened it, and then it will be easier to win a war against them. But mark my words, this will different (even bloodier). Saddam Hussein was not religious, but was just a greedy tyrant who didn’t care about the sanctions, just as long as he could dominate and terrorize his own people. Iraq was a deeply divided nation. But people of Iran are fully behind their government and driven by their nationalism and their common (Shi’a) religion. This time, we will have a war against a much stronger opponent and we will not “win the war” so easily this time, if at all. This nation is already literally bankrupt, and in desperate need of a budget overhaul. I predict that this will cost multi-trillions of dollars and tens of thousands of U.S. service men will be killed in this conflict.
Neoconservatives Tom Tancredo and my own congressman, Steve Chabot, are on the list of cosponsors for this bill, but so are ultraliberals like Barney Frank, Steny Hoyer, and Jesse Jackson, Jr. One congressman who would never support such legislation is Ron Paul. It is interesting that neither Duncan Hunter’s name nor Nancy Pelosi’s is on the list (yet). I will never vote for anyone who supports this bill unless they change positions. I am pro-life.
So, for whom should you vote for president? It doesn’t matter. McCain and even Obama are likely to support this bipartisan death bill. The Illinois senator clearly stated that we “cannot allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon”. Barring divine intervention, we are headed for the worst war since WW II. But there is hope. This is a sign of Christ’s return. Jesus said, “And you shall hear of wars and rumors of wars: see that you are not troubled: for all these things must come to pass...” (Matthew 24:6) Be ready. If you need to get right with God, click here.
“I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.” (1 Timothy 2:1-2)
But this is what the majority of our short-sighted congressmen are in favor of doing to Iran. The bill which would authorize this action is called H. CON. RES. 362. (If the link doesn’t work, find it here.) It has 247 cosponsors which is more than enough votes to pass the House. The authors of this legislation insist that this is not a blockade. What else would you call it? This is the kind of language that is being used to justify this tyranny:
“Iran could have enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon as soon as late 2009…”
“…the possibility that Iran would share its nuclear materials and technology with others…”
Are we so depraved that we are going to attack a nation just because of “could haves” and “possibilities”? (Here we go again.) So what if Iran does have nukes. What gives us the right to attack them just because they have nukes? They are surrounded by other nations which either have nukes or are occupied by nations that have nukes (India, China, Pakistan, Russia, and Israel). Iran has been inspected nine times since 2003 and there have been no violations of the agreements they made with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). They may be in violation of U.N. resolutions, but so what? The U.S. is in violation of the resolutions of that tyrannical organization. And I’m glad that we are—we need to stand up to those tyrants.
The legislation also cites Iran’s support of Hamas and Hezbollah as a reason for this aggressive maneuver. If you don’t believe that this is hypocritical, click here.
Some people are saying that we should do this because of threats made by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He called for Israel to be “wiped off the map” and has said that the holocaust is a myth. But he is just a mouth. The Mullahs have the real power in Iran. We should not go to war unless a real violation of the sovereignty of the United States (not Israel) has occurred and only against nations guilty of such a violation. Jesus said, “But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.” (Matthew 5:39)
“No options have been taken off the table.” This is an obvious prelude to war—as if the two that we are already in aren’t enough! Supporters of the bill are saying that this blockade will weaken Iran the way that the sanctions against Iraq weakened it, and then it will be easier to win a war against them. But mark my words, this will different (even bloodier). Saddam Hussein was not religious, but was just a greedy tyrant who didn’t care about the sanctions, just as long as he could dominate and terrorize his own people. Iraq was a deeply divided nation. But people of Iran are fully behind their government and driven by their nationalism and their common (Shi’a) religion. This time, we will have a war against a much stronger opponent and we will not “win the war” so easily this time, if at all. This nation is already literally bankrupt, and in desperate need of a budget overhaul. I predict that this will cost multi-trillions of dollars and tens of thousands of U.S. service men will be killed in this conflict.
Neoconservatives Tom Tancredo and my own congressman, Steve Chabot, are on the list of cosponsors for this bill, but so are ultraliberals like Barney Frank, Steny Hoyer, and Jesse Jackson, Jr. One congressman who would never support such legislation is Ron Paul. It is interesting that neither Duncan Hunter’s name nor Nancy Pelosi’s is on the list (yet). I will never vote for anyone who supports this bill unless they change positions. I am pro-life.
So, for whom should you vote for president? It doesn’t matter. McCain and even Obama are likely to support this bipartisan death bill. The Illinois senator clearly stated that we “cannot allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon”. Barring divine intervention, we are headed for the worst war since WW II. But there is hope. This is a sign of Christ’s return. Jesus said, “And you shall hear of wars and rumors of wars: see that you are not troubled: for all these things must come to pass...” (Matthew 24:6) Be ready. If you need to get right with God, click here.
“I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.” (1 Timothy 2:1-2)
No comments:
Post a Comment