Diplomacy Now!

Email the President to stop war with Iran today!

Yesterday, the AP reported that the Bush-Cheney Administration has instituted "sweeping new sanctions against Iran Thursday -- the harshest since the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in 1979 -- charging anew that Tehran supports terrorism in the Middle East, exports missiles and is engaging in a nuclear build up."

There are 3 choices in dealing with Iran. You can engage them. You can isolate them. Or you can attack them.

These sanctions could be part of any of the 3 strategies. The sanctions themselves can only be evaluated within the context of the overall policy. Currently, the administration has chosen a path of isolation with the threat of an attack.

This is the wrong strategy. The Bush-Cheney Administration's failure to use diplomacy in conjunction with these sanctions is unlikely to change Iran's behavior.

Please join VoteVets.org and me. Send a message to President Bush to use diplomacy to deal with Iran. War is not the answer.

The AP reported that Condoleezza Rice says Washington remains committed to "a diplomatic solution" and open to negotiations with Iran. Yet the Bush Administration refuses to speak with Iran unless the Iranians pre-emptively surrender their interests. This is not likely to happen, and the Administration will be left with two options: a nuclear Iran or war.

Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) stated yesterday:

"Unilateral sanctions rarely, ever work...I just don't think the unilateral approach and giving war speeches helps the situation. It will just drive the Iranians closer together...It escalates the danger of a military confrontation."

Diplomacy is about carrots and sticks. Unfortunately, the Administration seems to believe it only has sticks. They have continued their saber-rattling, and without diplomacy, the announced sanctions only serve to escalate the tensions between the U.S. and Iran.

Tell President Bush it is time to begin direct dialogue without conditions. War with Iran is not the answer. Send a letter to President Bush today.

Thank you for your support.

Sincerely,

Wes Clark

Speak out now!

Joe Lieberman is at it again

After wrongly supporting George W. Bush's strategic blunder of attacking Iraq, and continuing to support Bush's failed policies after the invasion, Senator Joe Lieberman made irresponsible comments this weekend regarding military action against Iran.

On CBS's Face the Nation, Lieberman said, "If [the Iranians] don't play by the rules, we've got to use our force, and to me, that would include taking military action to stop them from doing what they're doing."

This type of "tough-talk" by the Bush Administration and folks like Senator Joe Lieberman is why VoteVets.org and I collaborated to create StopIranWar.com, calling for heavy diplomatic, economic, and political action to discourage the acquisition of nuclear capabilities by the Iranian government.

Over 40,000 people have signed our petition to President Bush, urging him to work with our allies and use every diplomatic, political, and economic option at our disposal to deal with Iran. Add your name to the petition today!

StopIranWar.com.

Senator Lieberman's saber rattling does nothing to help dissuade Iran from aiding Shia militias in Iraq, or trying to obtain nuclear capabilities. In fact, it's highly irresponsible and counter-productive, and I urge him to stop.

This kind of rhetoric is irresponsible and only plays into the hands of President Ahmadinejad, and those who seek an excuse for military action. What we need now is full-fledged engagement with Iran. We should be striving to bridge the gulf of almost 30 years of hostility and only when all else fails should there be any consideration of other options. The Iranians are very much aware of US military capabilities. They don't need Joe Lieberman to remind them that we are the militarily dominant power in the world today.

Only someone who never wore the uniform or thought seriously about national security would make threats at this point. What our soldiers need is responsible strategy, not a further escalation of tensions in the region. Senator Lieberman must act more responsibly and tone down his threat machine.

We cannot let people like Joe Lieberman dictate the terms of this debate.

Sign the petition to President Bush today!

StopIranWar.com

Thank you for all you do.

Sincerely,

Wes Clark

Clark slams Lieberman on Iran

UPI | June 13, 2007

LITTLE ROCK, Ark., June 13 (UPI) -- Retired Gen. Wesley Clark has slammed Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., for threatening military force against Iran.

Clark, the former Supreme Allied NATO Commander and chair of the Board of Advisers of VoteVets.org, Monday said in a statement that Lieberman, the former Democratic candidate for vice president in the 2000 presidential election, had been irresponsible in saying Sunday that such action against Iran might be necessary.

"Sen. Lieberman's saber rattling does nothing to help dissuade Iran from aiding Shiite militias in Iraq, or trying to obtain nuclear capabilities. In fact, it's highly irresponsible and counter-productive, and I would urge him to stop," Clark said.

"This kind of rhetoric is irresponsible and only plays into the hands of (Iranian) President (Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad and those who seek an excuse for military action," the retired four-star general said.

"What we need now is full-fledged engagement with Iran," he said. "All options are on the table, but we should be striving to bridge the gulf of almost 30 years of hostility before, and only when all else fails should there be any consideration of other options."

"Only someone who never wore the uniform or thought seriously about national security would make threats at this point," Clark said. "What our soldiers need is responsible strategy, not a further escalation of tensions in the region. Sen. Lieberman has to act much more responsibly and tone down his threat machine."

Clark, Lieberman Spar Over Iran

Hartford Courant | David Lightman | June 12, 2007

Joe Lieberman has triggered a war of words over Iran.

The senator told CBS' "Face the Nation" Sunday that the U.S. should be prepared to strike Iran if necessary. He repeated that view Monday on the Fox News Network, saying, "It's time to understand we're prepared to take military action" to "take out" the bases where Iranians are training extremists to kill U.S. military personnel in Iraq.

Retired Gen. Wesley Clark had heard enough.

"Sen. Lieberman's saber rattling does nothing to help dissuade Iran from aiding Shia militias in Iraq, or trying to obtain nuclear capabilities," said Clark, who in 2004 was one of Lieberman's rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination.

"In fact," said Clark, "it's highly irresponsible and counter-productive, and I would urge him to stop."

Lieberman wasn't stopping.

Asked about Clark's remarks, he said, "We've got some enemies out there ... we're not going to defeat them with a lot of talk and warm embraces."

Clark took further aim at Lieberman: "Only someone who never wore the uniform or thought seriously about national security would make threats at this point."

Lieberman got military deferments during the Vietnam era because first he was in college and was later married with children.

Click here to leave your comments and read the transcript

Bush's Iran Policy Hurts Israel

March 29, 2007

Last Friday, Iranian military forces seized 15 British sailors and marines in the Persian Gulf. Some believe this is an act of aggression by Iran and should be met with a commensurate military response.

I do not.

I believe it shows that the Bush Administration's current policy with Iran is not working. For sake of stability in the Middle East, it's time for direct diplomacy with Iran -- now more than ever.

Today, we're launching our third video blog for StopIranWar.com. I'm joined by Iraq war veteran Jon Soltz of VoteVets.org and Clark Community blogger Reg to discuss how President Bush's get tough policy with Iran is undermining the security of our most reliable ally in the region, Israel.

Watch today's video blog to understand why George Bush's policy of confronting Iran hurts the Israelis, our strongest allies in this volatile region.

We need to be shaping a new vision for the Middle East. Peace won't come through saber rattling and threats -- it will come through dialogue, negotiation and the hard work of diplomacy. While I would never rule out military action against Iran if necessary to preserve stability, protect Israel and defend America's national security, it just doesn't make sense in our current circumstances.

In fact, attacking Iran now would simply derail the Middle East peace process, further radicalize Israel's enemies, and put our friend and ally at risk. Years of diplomacy aimed at laying the groundwork for peace will be lost.

We must give the people of this region cause for hope -- not just the threat of the Sixth Fleet lurking off their shore. It's time to let the diplomats do their job.

Watch our new video blog today, and then sign our petition to President Bush asking him to pursue diplomacy with Iran -- not more military confrontation.

It's time for the United States to be a beacon of hope and the voice of reason in the Middle East. President Bush's policy of military confrontation has done enough harm. Please, help me change his course by inviting your friends and family to sign our petition at StopIranWar.com today.

Sincerely,

Wes Clark

Averting the Next Gulf War

The troop “surge” in Iraq is also a signal to Iran—but stopping Tehran’s nukes for good will require a different kind of leverage.

By Wesley Clark | Washington Monthly

March 15, 2007

The world seems headed for a showdown in the Middle East within the next two years over the issue of Iranian nuclear capacity. The stakes are high. On the one hand, there is the emergence of a new nuclear power, whose rhetoric and revolutionary record seem to pose an existential threat to Israel and challenge centuries of Sunni dominance of Islam. On the other hand, there is an explosive set of potential military actions and economic repercussions, which could begin with a sustained air and naval campaign and end with massive economic and political upheavals. The environment is emotionally charged, too, with a triumphalist Iranian government, a failing U.S. military intervention in Iraq, a weakened U.S. president, and severe tensions between Sunni and Shia sects throughout Islam. Heading into a presidential election—and the end of the Bush administration—the ramifications of all this make Democrats, and anyone else seriously forecasting global trends and economic forces, more than a little concerned. Major news magazines like Newsweek and the Economist have featured Iran as the next major crisis.

But just how acute is the problem with Iran? What is the likely outcome? And how should our policy makers and political leaders gain a peaceful resolution? Most importantly, how much leverage, and what kind of leverage, does the United States really have? There is much more than is visible.

If rhetoric is to be believed, the collision is inevitable—a new “beast” is arising in the East. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said that it would be “suicidal for a country to attack Iran,” adding that “we must not bend to threats.” The rhetoric from Washington has been equally tough, even as the diplomacy plays out in the United Nations. President George W. Bush memorably named Iran as a member of the “axis of evil,” and last year he stated unequivocally that Ahmadinejad’s hostility toward Israel is a “serious threat. It’s a threat to world peace ... I made it clear, I’ll make it clear again, that we will use military might to protect our ally Israel.”

The perception that we’re moving toward a crisis isn’t just based on rhetoric. Actions have accompanied the tough language. The Iranians have a serious nuclear program, and the United States is gearing up its response capabilities. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has reported major unresolved issues with Iran’s nuclear efforts, suggesting that Iran is engaged in a covert effort to produce nuclear weaponry. These issues include unreported design work and acquisition of uranium enrichment centrifuges; experiments with enriching uranium and creating plutonium; hidden nuclear sites; uranium purchases abroad; design work on uranium metal fabrication; and evidence of the presence of highly enriched uranium, secret testing sites, explosive facilities, and interests in warhead designs. Iran, meanwhile, continues to construct new nuclear facilities and is moving forward with the installation of a full-scale uranium enrichment facility—all the while denying that it seeks nuclear weapons.