A Quote by Tom Cotton

We should have imposed new sanctions in 2013 and maintained the strength of our negotiating position, which is what brought Iran to the table in the first place.
It was sanctions that drove Iran to the negotiating table in the first place.
Preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is one of the most important objectives of our national security policy, and I strongly advocated for and supported the economic sanctions that brought Iran to the negotiating table.
Sanctions did indeed help to bring Iran to the negotiating table. But sanctions did not stop the advance of Iran's nuclear program. Negotiations have done that, and it is in our interest not to deny ourselves the chance to achieve a long-term, comprehensive solution that would deny Iran a nuclear weapon.
You have to negotiate from positions of strength. And right now with Iran, we're not negotiating from a position of strength. The Europeans are negotiating from the position of "Please give up your nuclear weapons program, and by the way if you do we'll give you several boatloads of carrots." The Iranians are quite willing to keep on negotiating on that line for a long time.
Sanctions alone could not stop Iran's nuclear program. But they did help bring Iran to the negotiating table.
With Iran, we negotiated privately in 2012-2013 from a position of strength, not a position of weakness. The secret negotiations in Oman. This ultimately led to the Joint Plan of Action of November 2013.
If necessary, we will have to strengthen sanctions even further, but the goal of sanctions must be to bring North Korea back to the negotiating table.
Negotiating with the Taliban must be done from a position of strength. Negotiating from a position of weakness would be a disaster.
If we believe in our current penal process, then the penalties imposed by judges and juries should be the only sanctions for one's crime, not the invisible sanctions of the legislature.
Another mess I inherited, and we have imposed new sanctions on the nation of Iran who has totally taken advantage of our previous administration, and they're the world's top sponsor of terrorism, and we're not going to stop until that problem is properly solved, and it's not properly solved now.
I've repeatedly voted for sanctions against Iran. And I think all options should be on the table to prevent them from having nuclear weapons.
General [James] Mattis has said that the deal's in place. We can't unilaterally pull out of it without support from our allies because the sanctions wouldn't bite as deeply. And so he'll find other ways to push back against Iran in the various conflicts that Iran is fomenting around the [Iran] region.
We did drive them [Iran] to the negotiating table. And my successor, John Kerry, and President [Barack] Obama got a deal that put a lid on Iran's nuclear program without firing a single shot. That's diplomacy. That's coalition-building. That's working with other nations.
When it comes to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, I will take no options off the table. ... That includes all elements of American power: a political effort aimed at isolating Iran, a diplomatic effort to sustain our coalition and ensure that the Iranian program is monitored, an economic effort that imposes crippling sanctions and, yes, a military effort to be prepared for any contingency.
Iran is the only country around the negotiating table that has not been attacked by either al-Qaida or Daesh.
We still have sanctions on Iran for its violations of human rights, for its support of terrorism and for its ballistic missile program. And we will continue to enforce these sanctions vigorously. Iran's recent missile test, for example, was a violation of its international obligations.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!