Sen. Murray on Iran and my thoughts

[chknltl]

Last month I sent a letter of concern to my Representatives from Wa. State. I expressed my concerns over the Bush Administrations increasing likelihood of opening military action against Iran. I received this letter back from Senator Patty Murray. I have rarely taken issue with Sen. Murray but this time I was less than happy with her position. Here is that letter and below are my thoughts:

Dear Mr. (chknltl):

Thank you for contacting me regarding U.S.-Iran relations and your concerns about possible U.S. military action against Iran. I appreciate hearing from you on this important matter.

I share your concern about the Bush Administration's rhetoric arguing for military confrontation with Iran. While I am very concerned about the Iranian government's violation of human rights, support of terrorism, threats against Israel and its neighbors, and continued withholding of information regarding its nuclear ambitions, I believe that diplomacy and targeted sanctions are the right way to deal with the Iranian regime. This approach is supported by the recent intelligence report that stated that Iran most likely halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003.

During consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2008, I voted in favor of an amendment offered by Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) and Senator John Kyl (R-AZ) that recognized the destabilizing role Iran plays in Iraq. I did so only after working with my colleagues in the Senate to remove inflammatory language about using force against Iran; the amendment passed by a 76-22 margin.

Some have interpreted my vote for the Kyl-Lieberman amendment as support for an unilateral, pre-emptive military attack on Iran. Nothing could be further from the truth. To emphasize that point, I cosponsored S. Res. 356, introduced by Senator Durbin (D-IL), stating that offensive action against Iran would require explicit Congressional authorization. I also joined Senator Webb (D-VA) and 30 other Senators in a letter to President Bush that states clearly to the President that no congressional authority exists for unilateral military action against Iran.

During this Congress, I have supported efforts to maintain effective sanctions against the Iranian government and allow Americans to take their investments out of Iranian companies and companies that do business there. I believe that we must recognize and address the negative role that Iran's government plays in the Middle East by utilizing the diplomatic tools available to us to the practicable extent possible.

Please know that I share your concerns about U.S. relations with Iran and will continue to closely monitor developments in Iran and the Middle East. As the Senate addresses this and other issues, I will keep your thoughts in mind.

Again, thank you for writing me and please keep in touch.

I hope all is well in Tacoma."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

chknltl's thoughts:

I like Senator Murray and will continue my support for her. My only big issue with her so far is related to the impeachment of the bush crime family. She supports Senator Clinton and I support Senator Obama, I take NO issue with that at all.

OTOH:
THE first paragraph of her response to me is bothersome. Iran seeks stability for both of its neighbors, Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran has even aided America in the fight against the destabilization of Afghanistan and arguable aided us in Iraq as well, (teaming up with Al-Sadr to broker cease fire and showing support for Maliki). OTOH the bush gang wants us to believe that Iran is the scourge of the Middle East, they WANT to start a fight with Iran. (Iran does have all that nice oil...sadly it mostly goes to China and Russia and Japan)

When Senator Murray mentions Iran's human rights abuse, does she mention human rights abuses which are ongoing in other countries worldwide? She must surely be greatly concerned for the Tibetan Monks! She must surely be concerned about Zimbabwe! She must surely be concerned about Darfur! Sadly I have gotten no response on those issues from her. When I go to her official web-page and type in human rights I see little to nothing relevant to her concerns regarding human rights abuse abroad.

When Senator Murray mentions Iran's support of 'terrorism', is she meaning the terrorists who are out to destroy democracy in America or is she referring to Iran's support for those 'terrorists' who want the American backed oil thieves out of Iraq? I want the American backed oil thieves out of Iraq, does that make me a terrorist??? We have seen time and time again where the bush gang has tried to paint Iran as the ant-farm of terrorists...I am bothered by Senator Murray passing this meme along. This meme is old and tired. It was used as a reason for invading Iraq and is now accepted as being discredited-(due to lack of evidence), by most of the world. Hindsight will NOT bring back our dead boys and girls, it won't bring back the dead Iraqi citizens.

When Senator Murray mentions Iranian threats against Israel, is she concerned that Iran is able to back those threats up??? Does she think that the Iranians army is about to invade Israel? Is she fearful that Israel can not take care of itself??? Is she fearful that Iran will build a nuke and stick it on a scud missile and launch it at Israel while knowing that the retribution from Israel's well stocked nuclear arsenal would turn pretty much all of Iran into glass minutes later? Sounds like more of that same bush meme to me. Did Saddam have those nukes that Cheney, Rumsfeld and others in the Bush administration warn us about? Were they really about to launch a Nuke tipped scud at Osh Kosh??? Hindsight...I am not afraid of this "threat" from Iran here in Tacoma Senator Murray, I doubt Israel needs to have this fear either. The world WILL NOT tolerate such aggression Senator Murray. Do you remember how the world reacted when Saddam Hussein invaded tiny Kuwait??? I am thinking Iran has just as good a memory regarding that event as we do.

When Senator Murray mentions Iran's withholding info regarding their nuke development, is she concerned because the Sovereign nation of Iran is supposed to keep America apprised of it's internal affairs? Who died and made America the judge and jury and 'deciderer' when it comes to Iran building it's own energy programs? If Iran wants nuclear energy why is it up to ANYBODY other than Iran to decide if Iran can or can not do this? What if Iran decided America should not have nuclear energy plants and decided to launch an Iranian Air-Force strike to take our plants off-line? Pretty damned arrogant of them wouldn't you say? Well why then do we think that it is OK to be the bully and tell Iran what it can or can-not do?

"Senator Murray, I am concerned about Iran as well. I had the exact same concern regarding Iraq over half a decade ago now. That did NOT turn out so well for ANYONE except the war profiteers. Those same "War Pigs" are now saying about Iran the very same things they once said about Iraq and you are repeating their words. WHY are you doing this Senator Murray? I honestly want to believe that you on the side of We The People and not on the side of the war profiteers but this first paragraph in your response to me has given me honest room for doubt!" (I may send this to her in a revamped version of this very post.)

I am at least glad that Senator Murray favors diplomacy when it comes to Iran...that is light-years better than what bush or mCcain wants...BUT that first paragraph makes me wonder if the rest of her response and the actions she and her colleagues have taken to limit the bush administration is little more than a cover for her political career when Bush and his gang of world class crooks hit Iran.

Today I have heard that we have a second Aircraft Carrier Group heading to the Middle East.....
c

[guyanakoolaid]

1. K&R

[chknltl]

2. kick?

[chknltl]

3. kick

[SeattleGirl]

4. What I like most about Patty is her support of veteran's issues.

She is an absolute bulldog when it comes to that.

I do have some disagreements with her, and I write her on occasion to express those disagreements, as well as to tell her when I'm please about something she has done.

She often sends back correspondence that, while it is probably written by a staffer, does seem more like it is a personal thought from her.

[chknltl]

5. I like her too. I like her quite a bit actually

As a Vet, I agree that she backs us VERY well. So does Jim McDermott and my own congressman Norm Dicks. Patty and Norm are involved with the military industrial complex...not that this is bad thing in our case considering that we have: Ft. Lewis; McChord AFB; Bremerton Naval Shipyards; Whidbey NAS; Bangar Trident Base and Boeing all in our backyards.

That said, I am concerned because of her response to me. My concern is that she may be seeking not only cover for her backing Kyl-Lieberman but perhaps cover for future military action by the bush-hawks against Iran. ALL of her great works on our state's behalf and all of her great leadership in the Senate will not balance out in my book if she fails to stop bush from hitting Iran. Kyl-Lieberman will haunt her hard in spite of everything else among her constituents. Many of us are counting on our Representatives to be our final line in the sand on this issue...what else do we have??? If she won't help save perhaps millions of lives and a potential for WWIII, her good deeds of the past won't be worth the paper it was written on.

I am VERY sensitive to this issue...perhaps she is too but that first paragraph in her reply to me gives me great grounds for worry.

[SeattleGirl]

6. I understand (as best I can, not being a vet).

I know that Patty grew up going to VA hospitals because of her dad, but yeah, I can see how you would be bothered by the first paragraph of her response to you.

Good treatment of veterans and returning active military personnel is something that matters to me more than I can say. As I said, I'm not a vet, and I've never served in the military, but maybe growing up in the Vietnam era had that effect on me: that if we send our men and women overseas to fight a war, justified or not, we ARE obligated to take care of them when they come home.

The fact that we don't is a source of deep shame for me.

[chknltl]

7. Well let me alleviate a bit of that shame for you.

I am pleased to report that the VA Hospital at American Lake is top notch and staffed by some first class folks. I go there quite a bit and I am confident that I am in GREAT and very caring hands. I have only been to the VA Hospital in Seattle once a long long time ago...it is quite a bit larger but it felt to me to be a better place than Harborview. (I was in Harborview for a week and found it dingy, dirty and the staff felt...well harried).

Your Representative Jim McDermott has a medical background. He is BIG on helping our Vets. He worked tirelessly for years to pass legislation to aid Vets who were exposed to depleted uranium oxide from our use of depleted uranium munitions over in the Gulf Wars and from Bosnia as well. That man rarely gets the recognition and accolades he deserves for his efforts on ALL of our Veterens behalf.

Yes there is reason to be ashamed of America's treatment of it's Vets but there are some bright spots too. We are very VERY fortunate to have Senator Murray, Congressman Norm Dicks and Representative Jim McDermott in western Wa. Take it from this vet SeattleGirl, you can take pride in these three when it comes to the treatment our Veterans.
:patriot:

[chknltl]

8. kick

[Leopolds Ghost]

9. Thanks n/t