xml:space="preserve">
xml:space="preserve">
Advertisement
Advertisement

Iran deal falls woefully short

"Good enough" is not an acceptable alternative when it comes to making a nuclear deal with Iran, a government that consistently urges for "death to America and Israel" ("A 'good enough' deal," July 27). There are far too many questions left in this deal for Congress to accept it at this point in time, as The Sun insists. For example, Professor Alan Kuperman, a nuclear proliferation expert at the University of Texas, believes that Iran's breakout time for a nuclear weapon is more like 3-to-4 months after the deal, not the one year that Secretary of State John Kerry proclaims. Where are the "anytime, anywhere inspections" that Ben Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser to President Barack Obama, promised back in April? Heck, Congress cannot even get details on the protocols for inspections because of IAEA secrecy. Does anyone actually believe that Iran needs access to ballistic missiles for peaceful purposes?

A more far reaching question is, why wasn't the Obama administration able to keep our allies — France, Britain and Germany — more aligned with U.S. interests in negotiating a tougher deal? The Sun suggests that billions of dollars in contracts led to the current situation. That may be true, but if it is, then don't monetary considerations call for the abandonment of most environmental safeguards as well? Should we roll back many clean air or clean water regulations for the almighty dollar?

Advertisement

Eric Rockel, Lutherville

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement