Posted by
arandomguy on Monday, March 12, 2007 11:57:49 PM
According to statements released from the United Nations, the major powers on the UN security council are close to agreement on what sanctions to inflict on Iran as the result of its continual non-compliance with UN orders to cease all uranium enrichment activities. The new sanctions, described as "modest," would likely include an arms embargo (why haven't we done this before now?), as well as freezing the assets of companies connected with Tehran or nuclear development (why hasn't this been done either?
There will not be an embargo on arms imports (just exports), and there will not be a travel ban, however the sanctions will cut off loans to the Iranian government.
Ambassadors came out of the closed door meeting optimistic at what had been accomplished, but also cautious because every proposal in the package is up for potentially heated debate as the 5 veto-wielding powers decide what course to pursue against the rogue state.
"There are still some concerns, and some delegations have not given full
agreement. But we have, I think, made overall good progress," Acting US Ambassador Alejandro Wolfe said. "It's a
package approach, and so there are things that we're very pleased about, and
things that we're less pleased about — and likewise for probably every
delegation involved."
This is troubling. Iran is actively pursuing nuclear weapons, and the Security council can't decide what type of sanctions to inflict? What amount of taunting, of snubbing, and of illegal uranium enrichment does Iran have to carry out before the UNSC realizes the importance of inflicting heavy sanctions? And these proposed sanctions - they are far from as harsh as is needed.
WHY AREN'T WE FREEZING ARMS IMPORTS!! Iranian made weapons are turning up (not perhaps coincidentally in the hands of Iranian born, Iranian trained fighters) all over Iraq, and we aren't stopping them from just buying more weapons from the outside world? And will an arms export embargo really matter? It seems to me that you can never have enough guns in this region - forcing them to hang onto theirs would only help, not hurt.
This decision is stupid. The choice to drop the mandatory travel ban is also stupid. The sanctions should freeze, cripple, and isolate Iran from the rest of the world. Anything less is far short of the ultimate goal, which is forcing Iran to disarm. It is becoming increasingly likely - as far as I can tell - that the only remaining option is the military option. The UN is worthless on this matter (like almost all others), and has proven its worthlessness time and time again by failing to implement harsh sanctions immediately.
I've called this post "The US Must Declare War on Iran part IV" If you've read the other 3 parts, you'll know what my case is, and why I believe we can no longer wait. Suffice to say, the fate of our nation - potentially of the world - and certainly of freedom hangs in the balance, should we not be able to defeat Iran. Make no mistake - I believe the United States will win in a conflict with Iran. It is nearly inevitable that we will.
The question is, will that conflict come before or after Iran has developed a nuclear weapon? The Natanz facility, which Iran has refused to let inspectors or cameras into, will eventually have enough reactors to create dozens of nuclear weapons per year. Are we going to wait until Iran has a nuke stockpile? By then it's too late - any conflict will quickly become a nuclear one.
We are running out of time. The US must declare war on Iran, and destroy them before their nuclear weapons are armed and aimed at our country. Their government must be toppled now, if we are to avert nuclear holocaust in the future.