Webnovel Test1108 38 Test15

Growing tensions in the Gulf sparking new arguments on Capitol Hill. Iranian provocations are the result of President Trump withdrawing from the 2015 nuclear agreement, say Democrats. That this was eminently predictable. In fact, that the intelligence could have and did warn of exactly these kind of increased risks of conflict with Iran if we pursued the course that we have been pursuing for the last two years.

But Iranian aggression is a sign the Trump administra

Growing tensions in the Gulf sparking new arguments on Capitol Hill. Iranian provocations are the result of President Trump withdrawing from the 2015 nuclear agreement, say Democrats. That this was eminently predictable. In fact, that the intelligence could have and did warn of exactly these kind of increased risks of conflict with Iran if we pursued the course that we have been pursuing for the last two years.

But Iranian aggression is a sign the Trump administration's tough sanctions policy is working, Republicans said. And what the administration is doing effectively correctly is increasing the maximum pressure on them, keeping the maximum pressure campaign going and it's very important we do that. It's very important that the Iranians recognize and understand that we will defend freedom of navigation that will defend the Straits of Hormuz, will defend our interests and the interests of our allies. The hope is for peace, a State Department diplomat told lawmakers.

We have put the possibility of a much brighter future on the table for the Iranian people and we mean it. The comprehensive deal we seek with the Iranian regime should address four key areas: Its nuclear program, its ballistic missile development and proliferation, its lethal support and financial support to terrorist groups and proxies, and its arbitrary detention of US citizens.

But with the deployment of a thousand US troops to the Middle East, the administration is signaling all options, including military force are still available. This worries Democrats.

Rather than force Iran back to the negotiating table, the administration's policy is increasing the chances of miscalculation which then would bring the United States and Iran closer to a military conflict. A conflict Democrats say only Congress has the power to authorize, if the administration sees a threat that requires military force against Iran.

Your first step is right here on Capitol Hill. There is no law, no aging authorization from another conflict that's the 2001 AUMF, that could apply to war against Iran. The administration would need authorization from Congress before going to war.

Pa.s.sed just days after the September 11 terrorist attacks, the AUMF is an 18 year old statute authorizing military action against the Taliban and Al-qaeda. The 2001 AUMF is worded very broadly.

Democrats say the administration's claim of linkage between Al-qaeda and Iran isn't strong enough to subvert congressional authority, setting up the potential for yet another const.i.tutional conflict between the branches of the US government.

Catherine Jibsen VOA news capitol hill.

tion's tough sanctions policy is working, Republicans said. And what the administration is doing effectively correctly is increasing the maximum pressure on them, keeping the maximum pressure campaign going and it's very important we do that. It's veress four key areas: Its nuclear program, its ballistic missile development and proliferation, its lethal support and financial support to terrorist groups and proxies, and its arbitrary detention of US citizens.

But with the deployment of a thousand US troops to the Middle East, the administration is signaling all options, including military force are still available. This worries Democrats.

Rather than force Iran back to the negotiating table, the administration's policy is increasing the chances of miscalculation which then would bring the United States and Iran closer to a military conflict. A conflict Democrats say only Congress has the power to authorize, if the administration sees a threat that requires military force against Iran.

Your first step is right here on Capitol Hill. There is no law, no aging authorization from another conflict that's the 2001 AUMF, that could apply to war against Iran. The administration would need authorization from Congress before going to war.

Pa.s.sed just days after the September 11 terrorist attacks, the AUMF is an 18 year old statute authorizing military action against the Taliban and Al-qaeda. The 2001 AUMF is worded very broadly.

Democrats say the administration's claim of linkage between Al-qaeda and Iran isn't strong enough to subvert congressional authority, setting up the potential for yet another const.i.tutional conflict between the branches of the US government.

Catherine Jibsen VOA news capitol hill.