What Do the Opponents of the Iran Nuclear Deal Really Want?

  

Those who argue that the U.S. should not negotiate a nuclear deal with the reformist government of Hassan Rouhani, who won the 2013 presidential elections as the candidate of Moderation and Development Party, are really arguing for war with Iran, but aren’t saying it. 

Iran voluntarily joined the United Nations Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which regulates and overseas the development of nuclear energy by member states to ensure the non-proliferation of atomic weapons, in 1968 and ratified it in 1970. After the revolution of 1979, which ended the monarchy and founded the Islamic Republic of Iran, the new government stayed in the treaty. 

The development of nuclear energy by the government of Iran is sanctioned and permitted under the terms of the treaty and is conducted under the auspices and supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of the United Nations, which monitors its activities through unannounced and intrusive inspections and 24/7 video surveillance. The U.S. intelligence community has repeatedly concluded and announced that Iran has not decided to develop the bomb. It must be noted that Israel, which openly considers Iran its biggest enemy and has repeatedly threatened to bomb it, never joined the NPT and instead acquired nuclear bombs, which are estimated to be around 300, from the West.

It is estimated that should Iran decide to develop a nuclear bomb, which according to the Department of Defense (DOD) and the CIA, it hasn’t, with its current level of expertise and technology, it could do so within months. The deal between Iran and the group of six, which includes the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China, doesn’t take away Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear bomb, permanently – to do that, you’d have to forbid all its research and development on it for ever and I haven’t heard anyone say how that’s possible – but it ensures it can’t and won’t build one for at least 10 years and extends the time to develop one, if they decide to do so after the ten years, to a year, instead of months, giving the West a one-year window of advance notice to take any measures at that time, should they decide to pursue the bomb.

Given the fact that without this deal, Iran could develop a nuclear bomb within months, even with the sanctions in place, which at least Russia and China and possibly even the Europeans won’t continue to impose without the deal, and given the decision of and repeated threats by the U.S. to destroy Iran’s nuclear capability by military force, if Iran decides to develop one, those who are against the deal, are in fact, asking for nothing but war with Iran. Without the deal, they calculate that Iran would probably continue its research and development on nuclear energy, keeping them at the doorstep of being able to make a nuclear bomb, which would provide the US the needed public fear and the pretext to attack the nation. 

But, the opponents of this deal want more than just a military attack on the sites of the nuclear research and development, which are spread throughout the country. It’s a well known fact that any such military attack would only postpone Iran’s nuclear capability by a few years – maybe 5 or 6 years – after which it would be wise for them to develop as many and as fast as they can, with much more resolve and determination and they probably would, unless the massive and thorough bombing campaign is repeated every few years. 

Given that reality as an alternative to the deal, what the opponents of the deal really want is a total and complete war with Iran, which as it did to Iraq, could destroy the country, killing much of its population and rendering it ungovernable and turning it into a breeding grounds for Islamist terrorists, among other unexpected consequences that such devastating wars usually have, in addition to the killing of so many innocent people. And who’s to tell that those Islamist terrorists who are now in battle with Iran won’t get their hands on the nuclear technology in that case?That’s the alternative that opponents of the Iran deal, including AIPAC and other Israeli lobby groups and their representatives in U.S. Congress, such as Senator Chuck Schumer, a Democrat from New York, as well as remnants of the Bush/Cheney Administration, are really advocating. 

This reality flies in the face of claims by those who, on the one hand wish and push for such devastation for Iran, and on the other hand, claim to care for the Iranian people, when they say their issue is only with the Iranian leaders and their government. It reminds me of Donald Trump, who, on the one hand, calls Mexicans rapists and murderers and then says he loves Mexicans. At least, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who seems to be in U.S. Senate only to push for war, doesn’t hide his hatred for the Iranian people, whom he calls liars. “I ran the pool room when I was a kid and I met a lot of liars, and I know the Iranians are liars,” he said. “The Iranians cheat and they lie”, he added. And while he displays such venom and racism against an entire people and wants war with them, ironically, he likens the Iranian leaders to Nazis! Go figure! 

Those Democratic Senators and representatives who oppose the deal on behalf the “Jewish state”, forgetting or confusing which country they were elected to represent, have people like Lindsey Graham, Donald Trump, Glen Beck, Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman in their company. So much for their liberalism and so much for not trivializing Nazism.

Advertisements

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: