As for the argument that this will reinforce good behavior by Iran, that's exactly backwards. Why should Iran behave well, when they are getting such a good deal (for them) while behaving badly.
On the contrary, once firms from all over the world have poured investments into Iran and are buying Iranian oil, they will become a vested interest in favor of not doing anything to upset Iran.
You are right: I do not trust anyone involved in this deal, because they all have proven track records of being completely untrustworthy. Your argument again is completely backwards: you are saying that we should trust them in order to get a deal done, which makes no sense. No, we should only accept a deal that is trustworthy and reliable.
As for what would make a deal trustworthy, here a few factors, in order to answer your question:
1) an end to all uranium enrichment by Iran, with all enriched uranium surrendered to the United States, along with all centrifuges;
2) inspections to verify same to be conducted by the United States;
3) snap inspections, anytime, anywhere, with no warning, and no right to refuse;
4) no sanctions relief until Iran has already improved its behavior;
5) a complete end to sponsorship of terrorism by Iran;
6) diplomatic recognition of Israel by Iran and an end to anti-Israel incitement by Iran;
7) an end to Iranian intervention in the Syrian civil war, in Iraq, in Yemen, and in Lebanon.
One through four should have been the bare minimum before we'd even consider agreeing. We got none of those things from this deal; instead we just caved into Iran on every point, which is why they are very happy with this deal. You'll notice that no one in Iran is worried that this is a bad deal; none of the hardliners there have expressed any worry that Zarif got taken to the cleaners in the negotiations. Why do you think that is?
This comment was left by Oddstar7 at Politico.com - Read more of Oddstar7's comments at https://disqus.com/by/oddstar7/
Comment Category Tags