Declaring It is the Policy of the United States That A Nuclear Islamic Republic of Iran is Not Acceptable
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I have to rise in opposition to H. Res. 559.
I am proud to represent San Antonio, Texas, known as Military City, USA, which is home to one of the largest concentrations of military bases in the United States.
Every year tens of thousands of young men and women pass through my city on their way to military theaters around the world. Their lives are sacred, and Congress needs to be careful about how our decisions can put them in harm's way.
While this is a nonbinding resolution, it would speak for the House of Representatives without meaningfully engaging with the broad range of tools at our disposal to prevent Iranian proliferation.
I strongly oppose Iran's pursuit of a nuclear weapon. That is why I supported President Obama's efforts to constrain Iran's nuclear program through the JCPOA and why I opposed Donald Trump's decision to release Iran from the restrictions on its nuclear program by violating and then withdrawing from the JCPOA.
Nonetheless, this resolution, in saying the United States must use ``all means necessary'' to prevent Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon goes too far.
Do we support sending U.S. forces, ground troops, into Iran to stop their nuclear program?
What about using a nuclear weapon ourselves?
That is what the language of this resolution would support or allow. This isn't just leaving all our options on the table. This resolution endorses every option.
In recent years, Congress has had important, bipartisan conversations about reclaiming our constitutional authority over the use of military force. If the Congress is going to endorse the use of force, even in a nonbinding resolution, then we need a more deliberate debate before going forward.
This resolution also commits the United States to endorse the actions of any of our partners and allies to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
Would we support Saudi Arabia or the UAE if they were to unilaterally strike Iran putting hundreds of U.S. forces stationed in the Persian Gulf at risk?
This resolution commits to unconditionally supporting their ``freedom of action.''
While I strongly oppose Iran's nuclear program, Mr. Speaker, the language we are voting on today goes too far, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source