Deal Safeguards U.S., Israel

Critics of the proposed nuclear deal with Iran ignore history and the
influence of perceived national interests of the countries involved in
reaching this settlement.
A New York Times article on the chronology of
Iran’s nuclear ambitions points out that, “By the late 1970s, the United
States becomes worried that Iran may harbor nuclear weapon ambitions.” This
was after American and other western countries helped the Shah begin
developing its nuclear capacity — well before the Islamic Revolution. Iran
accelerated its drive for the capacity to produce a bomb under the Bush
administration and only scaled back (and increased the time needed to have
weapons-grade fuel) during the Obama-led negotiations. President Bush’s
disastrous policies in Iraq eliminated the strongest restraint on Iran when
it overthrew Saddam Hussein and let the country fall apart and enabled Iran
to become a key power in Iraq, which was its greatest former enemy.

Does
anyone really believe that Germany, France, China and Russia would keep up or
even enhance sanctions against Iran indefinitely? They only listened to
President Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton because the U.S. was committed to working
for a negotiated agreement to reduce Iran’s supply of potential fuel for an
atomic bomb.

The agreed-upon deal is likely the best possible way to
safeguard Israel and America precisely because it only focused only on
preventing Iran from being able to quickly get the fuel needed for an atomic
bomb. Such a weapon would make Iran significantly more dangerous to all than
it currently is. Nor would continued sanctions prevent Iran from supporting
Hezbollah, Assad and other terrorists if it felt it was in its interest to do
so. Half of North Korea is starving, yet it keeps building nuclear weapons
and missiles. Iran is much richer (even with sanctions) and only deals such
as this one can keep it from getting an atomic bomb.