Skip to content

Iran Threat Reduction Act of 2011

December 6, 2011

From Dominic Tierney at The Atlantic:

Working its way through the congressional digestive tract like a poison pill is one of the worst ideas in modern legislative history: a bill that would make it illegal to conduct diplomacy with Iran.

In an almost unprecedented move, the Iran Threat Reduction Act of 2011 (H.R. 1905) includes a clause that reads, “No person employed with the United States Government may contact in an official or unofficial capacity any person that … is an agent, instrumentality, or official of, is affiliated with, or is serving as a representative of the Government of Iran.”

The notion of outlawing contact with Iran is one of those ideas that at first glance sounds merely awful — and then upon reflection, seems truly dreadful.


The most likely reason that the Sentinel didn’t self-destruct or safely return is that it was lost because of an onboard mechanical malfunction, said Thompson of the Lexington Institute.

“That means what the Iranians have is a pile of wreckage — many small and damaged pieces from which they could glean little in the way of technological insights,” he said.

From Don Coughlin at The Telegraph:

An order from Gen Mohammed Ali Jaafari, the commander of the guards, raised the operational readiness status of the country’s forces, initiating preparations for potential external strikes and covert attacks.

Western intelligence officials said the Islamic Republic had initiated plans to disperse long-range missiles, high explosives, artillery and guards units to key defensive positions…

“It looks like the 21st century form of war,” said Patrick Clawson of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a Washington think tank, told the Los Angeles Times.

“It does appear that there is a campaign of assassinations and cyber war, as well as the semi-acknowledged campaign of sabotage.”

Thank God the Iranians are giving us an excuse or we might never get this war started. And silly me, I thought the next war would be in Europe.

About these ads
4 Comments leave one →
  1. December 6, 2011 4:24 pm

    I was shocked to see that a bill with such a provision could have over 350 sponsors, but then I searched the bill for the clause quoted in the Atlantic piece. That language appears to have been removed.

  2. RBM permalink
    December 6, 2011 8:05 pm

    I’m sure the MIC has already made the case for how much money they can make with such a law; how much of an economic boost the US would get, jobs cash flow the works.

    • December 6, 2011 9:16 pm

      Mullahs in Charge? Is such calculus possible? Use what variables? Fascinating.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 85 other followers

%d bloggers like this: