FACTCHECK.ORG

Soft on Iran?

McCain misrepresents Obama's stand on naming Revolutionary Guard as terrorists.

 
Sponsored by
 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

 

Summary
John McCain is attacking Barack Obama's opposition to the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, which (among other things) called for labeling Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization. McCain claims that Obama's opposition means that he also opposed calling the IRGC terrorists. We find otherwise.

  • Obama cosponsored an earlier bill that also called for designating the IRGC as a terrorist organization.
  • The Kyl-Lieberman amendment did more than just label the IRGC terrorists. Obama stated at the time that he opposed the bill on the grounds that it constituted "saber-rattling."
  • McCain claims that Obama must oppose calling the IRGC a terrorist group because Obama's Web site doesn't say anything about the IRGC. McCain's argument is a glaring example of the logical fallacy of argumentum ad ignorantiam.

Analysis
For the past two weeks, presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain and Democratic front-runner (and now presumptive nominee) Barack Obama have engaged in a war of words over their respective positions on Iran. In a June 2 speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, McCain upped the ante, criticizing Obama's failure to support an amendment that called for designating Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization, a charge that McCain repeats on his Web site. It's true that Obama opposed the amendment in question. But McCain is wrong to suggest that Obama's opposition had anything to do with the IRGC's designation. And McCain fails to mention that Obama cosponsored an earlier bill that would have named the IRGC a terrorist organization.

Wait, What Are We Fighting About Again?
Let's start with that whole Revolutionary Guard business. Here's McCain at AIPAC:

McCain (June 2): We must apply the full force of law to prevent business dealings with Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps. I was pleased to join Senators Lieberman and Kyl in backing an amendment calling for the designation of the Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization responsible for killing American troops in Iraq. Over three quarters of the Senate supported this obvious step, but not Senator Obama. He opposed this resolution because its support for countering Iranian influence in Iraq was, he said, a "wrong message not only to the world, but also to the region."

On his Web site, McCain makes the point even more bluntly:

McCain Web site: The Kyl-Lieberman Amendment Designated Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps A Terrorist Organization - But Senator Obama Opposed It.

McCain implies that Obama doesn't think Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is a terrorist organization. That's wrong. Before the Kyl-Lieberman amendment was introduced, Obama cosponsored a bill that called for the IRGC to be designated as "a Foreign Terrorist Operation." Obama was one of 72 cosponsors of the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act, which states (in part):

Iran Counter-Proliferation Act: The Secretary of State should designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a Foreign Terrorist Organization ... and the Secretary of the Treasury should place the Iranian Revolutionary Guards on the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists under Executive Order 13224.

The McCain campaign notes that the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act has yet to come to the floor for a vote. But that doesn't change the fact that Obama's sponsorship put him on record in favor of labeling the IRGC a terrorist organization, contrary to McCain's insinuation.

 
Discuss
Member Comments
  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 06/24/2008 12:02:47 AM

    Comment: We need to get out of Iraq and transfer responsibility and management of that country to the IRAQ's themselves. THEY SHOULD be backed by a multinational force led by Middle Eastern countries until they are able to fight extremist on their own.
    Our unilateral approach in the MIDDLE EAST has to come to an end. ECONOMICALLY, IRAQ IS KILLING the average tax payer and making a few private contractors and oil firms rich.

    We need Oil. WE NEED OIL. Therefore, getting rid of the Iranian regime is at the top of our agenda.
    The majority in Iran want change but not under and American led invasion. It has to be done from within. We lost the support of moderate Arabs and Muslims over the last six years. Hopefully, PRESIDENT OBAMA can empower this group and encourage them to meet with their counterparts.

    Inotherwords there should be an alliance between all moderates in the Middle East, JEWS, ARABs, MUSLIMS, ect... These forces must be self motivated by a common cause, Peace. IF this group can be strengthened they themselves will defeat or at least contain the force of extremism.
    WE must strengthen the forces behind peace and weaken those against peace on both sides.

    THE UNITED STATES CANNOT SOLVE THE CONFLICT IN THE MIDDLE EAST. WE CAN ONLY STRENGHTEN AND SUPPORT THE PEOPLE OF THE MIDDLE EAST TO SOLVE THEIR OWN PROBLEMS.

    IN THE SHORT RUN WE NEED MIDDLE EASTERN OIL. THIS COMPLICATES OUR ROLE OVER THERE.
    WE Should have had an ENERGY SUMMIT TEN YEARS AGO. WE NEED TO COME UP WITH A TWENTY YEAR PLAN to RID OURSELVES of OIL DEPENDENCY IN THE MIDDLE EAST. TWENTY YEARS WILL GO BY LIKE NOTHING. WE HAVE TO START NOW.

    THE most dangerous threats are the ones you do not see coming. LIKE CHINA, RUSSIA, EASTERN EUROPEAN organized crime. Monitoring these entities will be our great challenge.
    ARE WE READY FOR CYBER WAR. I DON't THINK SO.

  • Posted By: AmeriKhan Lobo @ 06/21/2008 4:11:47 PM

    Comment: You need to view the video of Obama's speech on Foreign Affairs he gave this month in Foreign Policy Summit in Washington DC. the title on Youtube is:
    Barack Obama: Foreign Policy Summit in Washington DC

  • Posted By: AmeriKhan Lobo @ 06/21/2008 4:07:55 PM

    Comment: "pearl harbor"
    You post lots of words. Too bad most of your sentiments are filled with generalizations, stereotypes and an obvious hate for anyone anti-Bush/McSame. You must have been one of the sheep that voted Bush into office.
    On a basis of intelligence: Obama WIns.
    Who has less political baggage, corrupt connections: Obama.
    For someone who has "no experience", Obama knows more about Foreign Affairs than McSame or Bush.

Sponsored by
 
 

FACTCHECK.ORG

The Georgia Senate run-off is filled with misleading claims from both sides.

 

Video

Newsweek Originals: Politics Video

 
 
The Peek
 
 
STRATEGIES

Isn't it ironic: Xerox is hoping it can profit by teaching companies how to reduce their printing.

Sponsored by
 
 
 
 
THE WHITE HOUSE
Sponsored by
 
 
 
loadingLoading Menu