Posted on Jul 14, 2015
What are your thoughts on the international nuclear agreement with Iran, as announced on Tuesday, July 14, 2015?
2.71K
28
13
1
1
0
The White House and other nations announced a negotiated nuclear agreement with Iran on Tuesday, July 14, 2015.
Full text of the agreement can be reviewed at:
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/full-text-of-the-iran-nuclear-deal/1651/?hpid=z1
The White House announcement can be reviewed at:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/foreign-policy/iran-deal
Full text of the agreement can be reviewed at:
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/full-text-of-the-iran-nuclear-deal/1651/?hpid=z1
The White House announcement can be reviewed at:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/foreign-policy/iran-deal
Nuclear
Iran
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 9
2
2
0
COL Korey Jackson I've read most of it and there are a lot of "checks and balances" that have to be performed. Some key positions have been created to oversee this program by many governments, so I believe time will tell once the sanctions are released as the Iranian check each box that must be fulfilled. It is what it is and we will see what the future holds on whether or not it was the best possible deal. I can tell you sanctions only work if the entire world is involved and they weren't, so that in my opinion wasn't an effective course of action. Israel probably isn't happy, but I don't know if anything will make them happy at this point. I’m neutral on it right now until I see what happens in the months and years to come. I’m curious about your thoughts on the deal and what the temperature is from you perspective in Washington DC COL Korey Jackson?
(2)
(0)
COL Korey Jackson
COL Mikel Burroughs,
I agree with SGT Jeremiah Brookins and LCpl Mark Lefler. Overall and iInitially, it appears to be a good deal. Many of the existing technical details of the agreement are positive and unprecedented. The agreement's implementation and time will tell.
The principal agreement is based on keeping Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon capability in the near-to-mid term. This appears to do that. During this near-to-mid term, the international community can continue to work together and with Iran to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons capabilities in the long term.
I have no beef with the Iranian people. Back in the 1970's, many of the foreign students in my college courses were Iranian, and they were generally good people. Since 1979, we have seen some extremely hostile rhetoric and occasionally hostile actions from the Iranian government to Americans and our allies. Having seen both the good and the bad, I strongly believe that Iran and its people are far better off as a friend of the U.S. than as an enemy.
The internal economic sanctions, of especially the last three years, must have been at least partially effective for Iran get to this point. Iranian leadership seems to have moderated their hostile tone toward America.
Iran, like all sovereign nations and signatories of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, have a right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Iran's full compliance with this agreement should permit them to peacefully use nuclear energy for electrical power generation, research, and medical purposes while keeping them from building nuclear weapons which would threaten the U.S., its allies, and interests.
It is unfortunate that much of the initial negative responses from well-meaning Americans seem not be based on the details of the agreement itself, but along party lines or an anti-Obama administration basis. We have some good reasons for skepticism on Iranian implementation, but that will bear out in the coming months and years. Many media commentators and politicians do not understand the international political ramifications nor the fundamentals of nuclear physics and engineering underlying the agreement.
I agree with SGT Jeremiah Brookins and LCpl Mark Lefler. Overall and iInitially, it appears to be a good deal. Many of the existing technical details of the agreement are positive and unprecedented. The agreement's implementation and time will tell.
The principal agreement is based on keeping Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon capability in the near-to-mid term. This appears to do that. During this near-to-mid term, the international community can continue to work together and with Iran to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons capabilities in the long term.
I have no beef with the Iranian people. Back in the 1970's, many of the foreign students in my college courses were Iranian, and they were generally good people. Since 1979, we have seen some extremely hostile rhetoric and occasionally hostile actions from the Iranian government to Americans and our allies. Having seen both the good and the bad, I strongly believe that Iran and its people are far better off as a friend of the U.S. than as an enemy.
The internal economic sanctions, of especially the last three years, must have been at least partially effective for Iran get to this point. Iranian leadership seems to have moderated their hostile tone toward America.
Iran, like all sovereign nations and signatories of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, have a right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Iran's full compliance with this agreement should permit them to peacefully use nuclear energy for electrical power generation, research, and medical purposes while keeping them from building nuclear weapons which would threaten the U.S., its allies, and interests.
It is unfortunate that much of the initial negative responses from well-meaning Americans seem not be based on the details of the agreement itself, but along party lines or an anti-Obama administration basis. We have some good reasons for skepticism on Iranian implementation, but that will bear out in the coming months and years. Many media commentators and politicians do not understand the international political ramifications nor the fundamentals of nuclear physics and engineering underlying the agreement.
(1)
(0)
COL Mikel J. Burroughs
COL Korey Jackson Thank you for your perspective on the deal. I really appreciate the opinions on both sides of the agreement. I'm going to take a "wait and see" approach on this issue over time, since I've got a lot of it. Thanks again and PS I sent you a request to connect RP, so I can follow more of your commentary down the road. Thanks for your consideration.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
It's the best of a not great set of options. IF it functions as intended, it could be a really good deal for everyone. Time will tell.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
Agreements come down to trust. I'd really like for this agreement to work but Iran does not prove themselves trustworthy. We are told that Iran is the largest sponsor of terrorism in the world. If that is true, then that alone should make us take long pause. Second, I am reading a book called "Countdown to Zero Day" by Kim Zetter. The book is about the StuxNet virus and facts surrounding StuxNet. In the book, Zetter carefully lays out details surrounding Iran's nuclear program. If this account is accurate and it seems to be, Iran has repeatedly deceived international authorities to avoid scrutiny of their program. Finally, the anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric is not characteristic of a country that actually wants peace.
The agreement reportedly has verification provisions. However, is the international community confident that they can detect and locate any covert efforts by Iran to develop nuclear weapons? I would say that I do have some confidence in their ability to do so but this is not assured. Therefore, for our sake and that of our allies, any agreement should not be cause to relax our military readiness. This reaction is my greatest concern as we cannot gamble with national security.
The agreement reportedly has verification provisions. However, is the international community confident that they can detect and locate any covert efforts by Iran to develop nuclear weapons? I would say that I do have some confidence in their ability to do so but this is not assured. Therefore, for our sake and that of our allies, any agreement should not be cause to relax our military readiness. This reaction is my greatest concern as we cannot gamble with national security.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google