VIENNA — Iran and a group of six nations led by the United States reached a historic accord on Tuesday to significantly limit Tehran’s nuclear ability for more than a decade in return for lifting international oil and financial sanctions.
-New York Times, July 14, 2015
This deal is being lauded by many. For the next several years, Iran is going to take a step back with their nuclear ability. In the short term, Iran is supposed to reduce centrifuges down to 5,000. But Pakistan developed nukes with 3,000 centrifuges.
To think that this isn’t going to pave the way for Iran to develop nuclear weapons, based on the provisions of the agreement, is absurd.
Where is the outrage over this? Donald Trump does not have a legitimate chance of becoming the president, and we have time for his comments. Legislatures have time to talk about flags and what they represent, but we make a deal with an Iranian regime in spite of the evils which they are endorsing and engaging in RIGHT NOW. People want to restrict gun access for law abiding citizens while not restricting nuclear weapons access to terror states. We have time to celebrate bakers getting fined tens of thousands of dollars and yet there’s no outrage over this deal with Iran, a fascist country that persecutes homosexuals, treats women as second class citizens, sponsors terrorism, and threatens America and our allies. I’m sick and tired of people refusing to be consistent on values. Regardless of what you think of justice, spending, and various social programs, making this deal with Iran is not good for America.
As David Horowitz has pointed out:
Iran will have the discretion to block international inspectors from military installations and will be given 14 days’ notice for any request to visit any site. But there are several layers of bureaucracy that will elongate any period of inspection beyond the 14 days, and that is assuming the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) will pursue an inspections regime in any meaningful way. Iran’s objections to inspections at military sites can be overturned by an international commission, something that will never occur. Also, the inspectors can only come from countries with diplomatic relations with Iran. Hence, no American inspectors.
I blame the republicans for continually being weak in standing up to Obama. We can talk about Mitch McConnell saying he wanted Obama to be a one term president, but talk is cheap. They have continually been spineless against Obama. And they were on allowing this situation to happen, going back to this past spring where the congress basically divested itself of its legitimate power and enabled the president to do what he’s currently doing.
The people in their government aren’t like American politicians. They don’t say one thing when they really mean something else. They will acknowledge their opposition to America and Israel.
There are other world powers like Russia and China who have agreed to this deal. But absent from the negotiations were other countries in the region who oppose this. Unfortunately, the Middle East has had a long history of violence. However the answer is not making it easier for these countries to develop nuclear weapons. The countries who are most threatened and who are closest in proximity do not support this agreement.
And we have made this deal with a country that does not currently have nuclear weapons to essentially tie our own hands about doing anything to prevent that from happening. Sure the talking points will celebrate what the president has done. But they’ve largely created a situation where the only way Iran won’t ultimately become a nuclear power is if Iran’s hierarchy is honorable to not develop nuclear warheads. They are a state that has largely been a benefactor of terrorist activities (not to mention what their leaders have said). Why in the world would we be so foolish to think that they won’t disregard this agreement? History shows us that their government cannot be trusted.
Iran Deal Ensures a Less Safe America – Conservative Review
Deal Reached on Iran Nuclear Program; Limits on Fuel Would Lessen With Time – New York Times