21st Congressional candidates weigh in on Iran resolution

Vasquez also spoke strongly against the resolution, saying that the United States is picking and choosing which countries it wants to enforce nuclear compliance with.

"Essentially there's wording inside of it telling the President, for all intents and purposes, to enact a blockade, which is an act of war," Vasquez said. "There is no true provocation here. Why aren't we targeting North Korea or Pakistan? Not that I want to, but it think it's hypocritical."

Vasquez said the language used in the resolution was "reasonable if it sought to start a war," adding, "What if China were to put up a blockade against the U.S. for its weapons of mass destruction?"

The three men who supported the resolution " Tonko, Buhrmaster, and Sullivan " all said the resolution fundamentally deals with the important issue of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Although Buhrmaster and Sullivan fully support the resolution, Tonko said he supports it but would like to see some of its wording changed.

"I agree with the resolution that Iran is a destabilizing force in the Middle East, but I'm concerned with some of the language used in this resolution," Tonko said. "I think all efforts should be made for economic and diplomatic negotiations."

Tonko said any type of strong action should be a "last-ditch effort" and that "negotiations should be the tone and spirit" of talks with Iran.

In contrast, Sullivan took a hard line stance against Iran and its nuclear program, saying, "there is no doubt in my mind" that a pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities would occur if it did not comply.

"I support Congressman's McNulty's co-sponsorship of the resolution. As congressman, I would do the same, and more. Iran is providing arms and training that is resulting in U.S. troop deaths and injuries in Iraq and Afghanistan,"” Sullivan said. "Iran is a threat to the stability of the Middle East, and a nuclear Iran is a threat to world peace. U.S. military and naval forces must remain on station in the Middle East. Withdrawal from Iraq is not an option so long as Iran poses the threat it does."

Vote on this Story by clicking on the Icon


Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.

Sign in to comment