Sen. McConnell suggests use of force in Iran

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., on "Face the Nation" Sunday, Feb. 12, 2012. / CBS

WASHINGTON - The Senate Republican leader said Monday the United States should use overwhelming military force against Iran if American intelligence shows that Tehran has decided to build a nuclear weapon or it has started to enrich uranium to weapons-grade level, a bold call certain to reverberate in U.S.-Israeli talks about how to deal with an emboldened Iran.

Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said President Barack Obama's repeated pronouncement that the administration keeps "all options on the table" is a talking point, not a policy, and the United States needs a straightforward, deliberate plan that would force Tehran to negotiate to preserve its survival. McConnell was making the case for his proposal in a speech to the influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee on Monday night, shortly before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was to address the gathering.

"If Iran, at any time, begins to enrich uranium to weapons-grade level, or decides to go forward with a weapons program, then the United States will use overwhelming force to end that program," McConnell said, according to an advanced text of the speech.

Bombs could not stop Iran from getting nukes
Obama to Netanyahu: U.S. will "always have Israel's back"
IAEA: "Serious concerns" over Iran nuke plans
McCain: Sanctions not deterring Iran from nukes

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and National Intelligence Director James Clapper told Congress last month that Tehran has not made a decision on whether to proceed with development of an atomic bomb amid growing fears of its disputed nuclear weapons program and the possibility of an Israeli attack that could lead to a Mideast conflagration.

Prior to private talks with Netanyahu on Monday, Obama said the United States and Israel agree that diplomacy is the best way to resolve the crisis. But Netanyahu also said Israel must remain "the master of its fate."

McConnell said that if U.S. intelligence, at any time, informs Congress that Iran has begun to enrich uranium to weapons-grade standards or decided to develop a nuclear weapon, he would consult with the president and the joint congressional leadership on legislation authorizing the use of American military force.

Congress has not voted on such a resolution since October 2002 when it gave President George W. Bush the authority to use military force against Iraq. Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill have been unified in pushing hard for sanctions against Tehran, including the latest round of penalties targeting Iran's Central Bank, but a vote on using military force would test a war-weary Congress and any bipartisanship.

Rep. Adam Smith of Washington state, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said in a statement that while Obama has been correct it holding out the option of military force, sanctions should be given enough time to work.

"We should allow enough time to see if the sanctions and international isolation cause Iran to rethink its course of action. Taking unilateral military action at this point is unnecessary and would only serve to undermine international consensus," Smith said.

McConnell said the authorization for U.S. military against Iran would make clear that if Iran or its proxies retaliate against the United States or its interests, they would face an overwhelming response.

The Kentucky lawmaker called Iran a "self-described revolutionary state that is determined to shift the balance of power in the Middle East." He cited its support for Hezbollah and Hamas, its backing for the Syrian regime, the attempt last year to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States and its threat to close the Strait of Hormuz.

"In the weeks and months ahead, Israel and the United States face a day of reckoning," McConnell said. "We either do what it takes to preserve the balance of power within the broader Middle East or risk a nuclear arms race across the region that's almost certain to upend it."

McConnell called Iran a "self-described revolutionary state that is determined to shift the balance of power in the Middle East." He cited its support for Hezbollah and Hamas, its backing for the Syrian regime, the attempt last year to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States and its threat to close the Strait of Hormuz.

McConnell and other congressional leaders are scheduled to meet with Netanyahu on Tuesday when he travels to Capitol Hill.

In his speech to AIPAC, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., jabbed at Obama, saying U.S. policy in the Middle East must shift from "confusion to clarity."

"Where is the leadership? Who is leading from the front with a finger pointing in the right direction rather than a finger pointing in the wind? America needs to be a compass, not a weathervane, in the Middle East," Cantor said.

Separately, Cantor and Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the No. 2 Democrat in the House, introduced legislation reaffirming the military and security ties between the United States and Israel. The measure also restates U.S. policy that Israel has the right to defend itself against threats and the U.S. is committed to Israel's security.

[expatriate2]

Why is the Republican rhetoric always directed toward starting a war somewhere?

[AOCGUY]

Perhaps since Sen McConnel failed to complete even two months of is military service he would volunteer to ride shotgun with Sen McCain in the lead aircraft.

[joe1022joe]

We continue to tie our fate to that of Israel. It is to be noted that prior to the formation of Israel and the unconditional blinders-on support of the US government for Israel, the USA had no serious problems with Arabs in the Middle East - or Moslems anywhere.

[AOCGUY]

While I agree with you to a point it must be said that prior to the formation of Israel, most of the Arab world lived in tents and rode horses into battle.

[tvwatcher5345]

did he think the invasion of iraq (which empowered iran) was a good idea in 2003? if he did i would take his thoughts with a grain of salt

[RobAla]

Faulty CIA findings caused a lot of Republicans and Democrats to vote to invade Iraq. We had witnessed the leader of Iraq use WMD (gas) to slaughter an entire village of Kurdish people (men, women, and children). There was no question that he possessed them, we just didn't know by the CIA intelligence the amount. Shortly after we began the attack on Iraq, a convoy of trucks left Iraq and went into Syria. Some believe that is what happened to the WMD, I don't know. At any rate, it is easy to judge using hindsight. Don't forget that Democrats voted to go into Iraq, as well. Have a great day.

[tvwatcher5345]

RobAla, in the summer of 2006 a poll was released, 70% of Americans thought Sadam was behind 9/11, where did they get this idea? 17 of the 19 hijackers were saudi, a repub and dem senators have come forward now saying saudi role has never been explained, when pearl harbor was attacked FDR declared war on japan not peru another pacific nation??? have a good day!!

[Fatesrider]

Just like Iraq (before the invasion) Iran lacks a delivery system capable of hurting the U.S. even if they DO develop nuclear weapons (it would probably be an atomic bomb - hydrogen bombs are much harder to make).

Let's let their neighbors - you know, the ones who already have nuclear weapons and delivery systems at their disposal - deal with them. The U.S. has NO vested or security interests in the doings of Iran inside its own borders.

[rightbehind]

It's hard to believe the people of Kentucky could send a clown like this to Washington. He can find money to attack other countries but can't seem to find enough money to repair the bridges at home.

[sweetcakesmaria]

It's politicians like McConnell that's the main reason why these small nations are seeking to arm themselves with nuclear weapons. What other security do they have against nuclear armed bullies if they themselves aren't nuclear armed? No one is going to threaten North Korea with military force in the future because they're nuclear bombs. We would not be hearing all of this war talk about preemptive strikes against Iran if Iran had nuclear weapons. Politicians like McConnell loves war. He probably gets of on sending other people young kids of to some hell hole to die.

[Jaylah54]

No surprise that it's the GOP itching to start a third war. That seems to be their answer to everything. And why should they be whining about Obama's foreign policy regarding Israel? He's ready to dive into war right along with them. In fact, I don't know why they're fielding candidates to run against him, since he's more one of them than a Democrat.

As to Israel, it's never been "the master of its fate." It's always hidden behind the United States' skirts.

[longtree-2009]

another dufus. if iran is such a threat, why isn't the arab league bombing the daylights out of iran? saudi arabia isn't sending its troops or military forces against iran or syria or egypt. syria, egypt, libya are all a mess as is iraq and afghanistan. mcconnell is like mccain, very eager to send others to die, to be wounded, to be maimed and of course to spend billions the USA needs to spend on its own citizens and infrastructure. people are nuts to volunteer for military service with people like this one who influence war decisions. people in the USA military are not defending American freedoms or dying for the USA but for afghans, iraqis, and whoever else. the all volunteer military are serving at the whim of people like mcconnell, mccain, and the sitting potus whoever it happens to be at any given moment.

[FormerUSMCSergeant]

McConnell reported for his six months of active service, primarily for training, in July 1967. After induction at Fort Knox, Kentucky, McConnell was released early from his active-duty military service in August 1967.
---
He only served a month of RESERVE training.

What a punk.