Quantcast

Antiwar group says McNulty and Gillibrand support Iranian blockade

Outgoing Congressman Michael McNulty and freshman Congresswoman Kirstin Gillibrand are being called on by Women Against War to remove their sponsorship of resolution that takes a tough stance on Iran.

The group says the resolution being supported by the two Democrats calls for a blockade of Iran and could result in a direct military confrontation with the country.

McNulty told Spotlight Newspapers he does not intend to remove his name as a sponsor and that Resolution 362 calls for economic sanctions if Iran does not comply with the non-proliferation treaty it has ratified.

It's a resolution to place pressure on Iran to suspend their nuclear enrichment activity, McNulty said. "A number of people have characterized this as a blockade. It's a legislative vehicle; it's not a binding law, it will not be something sent to the president to sign."

These types of resolutions are referred to as "a sense of congress," or an opinion that urges actions or issues.

Maud Easter, a spokeswoman for Women Against War, said the strong language used in the resolution is eerily familiar to that used before the Iraq invasion and that she doesn't want to see another war.

"This is very poignant for McNulty. He voted for the authorization that gave Bush the green light to go to war with Iraq and subsequently said he made a mistake and apologized and I respect him very much for that," Easter said. "We don't want him, and don't really think he would want, to make the same mistake again."

The resolution doesn't use the word blockade, but states that economic sanctions could be imposed through the use of search and detainment.

"Whereas the November 2007 National Intelligence Estimate reported that Iran was secretly working on the design and manufacture of a nuclear warhead until at least 2003," the resolution states, "but that Iran could have enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon as soon as late 2009."

0
Vote on this Story by clicking on the Icon

Comments

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

Sign in to comment