Recently, the U. S. entered into a Nuclear Agreement with Iran, along with five other powers–the so-called “P + 5”–China, France, Germany, Russia and U. K. The “Deal” would reduce Iran’s nuclear weapons-making capability to the point that it would be unable to make a bomb within one year. Since Iran is currently just an estimated two-to-three months away from making a bomb, a follow-through on this agreement is imperative.
Without this deal, our options, along with our allies–including Israel–would be: a military strike which, if successful, might place Iran’s nuclear program back from two-to-five years; walk-away from the deal and we know the other five powers would remove their sanctions and Iran just re-starts its nuclear bomb-making program; or we follow-through with The Deal, which has been in the process for two years. It is most definitely not a perfect deal; but considering the other two options, it is the best possible at this time.
Currently, this Nuclear Arms Deal; has become a political football, with both President Barack Obama and the Republican (Opposition) Party each having raised the intensity to the highest possible level. Adding fuel to the fire, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rallied the large American Jewish population to oppose it, as well. But aside from all the hyperbole and political grandstanding, a key point here is that most people, perhaps many of those who are doing much of the talking, don’t really understand The Deal–and the ramifications of its final outcome.
The linked primer, from the NY Times, titled: “The Iran Deal in 200 Words”, might just clue readers in with this short overview: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/15/world/middleeast/iran-deal-qa.html. Hopefully, this whole issue will be resolved soon. The U. S. Senate is expected to begin debating it next week, and Congress has less than a month left, under its 60-day window, to either accept or reject it. President Barack Obama currently appears to have the necessary Senate votes to overcome any Congressional objections.