Your July 16 editorial “A good nuclear deal with Iran” failed to acknowledge that many politicians on both sides of the aisle have grave reservations. Rather than analyze the substance of this agreement, you merely resorted to attacking its dissenters and creating the strawman that the only thing offered as an alternative is war.
We believe that a more coercive negotiating stance would be more effective in closing down the Iran pathway to nuclear arms. We oppose Iran having permission to delay inspections by over three weeks, lifting sanctions and sending $150 billion that can fund their aggression in the Middle East.
We oppose allowing the greatest state sponsor of terrorism to trade in arms and build a ballistic missile program. This deal will likely instigate a new potentially disastrous arms race in the Middle East and increase the likelihood of conflict.
The agreement facilitates Iran becoming a threshold nuclear power, provides the financial means to proceed with expansionist aspirations and throws away our most effective restraints. It doesn’t chip away at the legitimacy of the regime but in fact bolsters it.
The possible benefits for us are based upon a naive hope that Iran’s regime will change its behavior now that we have acquiesced to its demands. Really, that’s it! Misconduct gets rewarded, and we anticipate this will dampen its appetite.
Triangle Voice for Israel