Iran nuclear deal leaves major questions unresolved

One major question is why has there been unprecedented inspections of Iran by the IAEA but the strongest opponent of the deal, Israel, which has hundreds of nuclear weapons, has never allowed an inspection.

President Obama deserves an extended round of applause for this far sighted courageous act-I look forward to the positive results of this cooperation.

One major question is why has there been unprecedented inspections of Iran by the IAEA but the strongest opponent of the deal, Israel, which has hundreds of nuclear weapons, has never allowed an inspection.

Probably because, as you say, Israel probably already has hundreds of nuclear weapons. That's kind of like having a damn inspector do a safety check after the damn has already been washed away.

When I was in the middle east, we found that insurgents were carrying Iranian weapons; rifles, bombs, and RPG's, some newly manufactured. Many had had their armory marks removed, but many did not. These Iranian weapons killed a great many US, British, and other soldiers, and had these weapons not been supplied, deaths on all sides of the conflict would have been much reduced.

Iran has paintings and pictures all over the country referring to the "great satan" (America) whom the Iranian religious government has vowed to overthrow, as well as propoganda against other western nations, whom they see as evil and decadent. This being the case, it is rather obvious that Iran should not be permitted to develop or possess nuclear weapons. Israel has probably possessed such weapons since the late 60's, but has never used these weapons, or sold the technology to others.

One major question is why has there been unprecedented inspections of Iran by the IAEA

ONLY to the sites the Iranians allowed. Big difference.

but the strongest opponent of the deal, Israel, which has hundreds of nuclear weapons, has never allowed an inspection.

But Israel is NOT trying to destroy Iran. Israel doesn't see a prophecy in their religion where it says there will be an apocalyptic war is on the rise and wipe out its enemies and non-believers. Big difference.

President Obama deserves an extended round of applause for this far sighted courageous act-I look forward to the positive results of this cooperation.

He deserves something alright. applause is NOT one of them...

When I was in the middle east, we found that insurgents were carrying Iranian weapons; rifles, bombs, and RPG's, some newly manufactured. Many had had their armory marks removed, but many did not. These Iranian weapons killed a great many US, British, and other soldiers, and had these weapons not been supplied, deaths on all sides of the conflict would have been much reduced.

This sounds like you are arguing from some virtuous moral position. Look carefully at the history of the US and British involvement in the middle east and can you really conclude that Iran poses any greater threat to that area's peace and security? Do you have an example of an illegal Iranian occupation of another country? Was it Iranian destabilization of the region that gave rise to IS?

This sounds like you are arguing from some virtuous moral position. Look carefully at the history of the US and British involvement in the middle east and can you really conclude that Iran poses any greater threat to that area's peace and security?

As of now for over the last 36 years starting with that crazy Khomeini, Yes, I most definitely think so, not to mention their lack of cooperation with the IAEA, meaning that they will only comply with them as long as they see fit and ONLY allow them access to sites THEY think they should see. If Iran were a really transparent country, it would grant the IAEA complete and full access to ANY and all sites of their choosing, but the Iranians won't do that, they just ask the west and other countries to TRUST IT and given their history over the last 36 years Iran has never given any kind of indication that it is not going to use its nuclear program for dubious and nefarious purposes, but a week ago the Ayatollah shouted "Death to America" a few weeks before that, they staged a war games attack on a mock US Carrier so excuse me when the majority of the US top military analysts, the Israelis, the Sunnis don't trust them, but Obama is the majestic one that the Iranians will listen to?? I'm not buying it and really no one else except Kerry and Obama and a few Democrats. Even Howard Dean You can't get a more partisan liberal like him and he even said, Obama should walk away from this deal. I never thought I would have seen the day for a guy like him to say something like that.

Do you have an example of an illegal Iranian occupation of another country? Was it Iranian destabilization of the region that gave rise to IS?

By the way, Iran by proxy is already invading and taking over Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon as a matter of fact they have their hands knee deep in those countries, so yes they did, they do. As for the rise of ISIS, Obama was told over 3 years ago by some of his top military analysts that ISIS was a growing threat that needed serious attention, since Obama didn't leave any troops in Iraq, pulled them out and didn't commit to a SOFA, he let that wound fester and here we are and even with all the beheadings and the advancement of ISIS will not put enough special forces or even a significant force of soldiers to go in and surgically take out some of their top leadership and decimate as many of them as he can, so now we have Iran going in, killing them-great, but at the same time, taking more of Iraq and flexing its muscle of influence in that region, expanding its territory and giving great concerns to its neighbors.

bass

expanding its territory

There is only one country in the Middle East that has expanded its territory in recent years, and it is definitely not Iran.

There is only one country in the Middle East that has expanded its territory in recent years, and it is definitely not Iran.

I know liberals are just either immune or benign or simply just refuse flat out to see that it Iran has by proxies indeed expanded its territories or are you saying EVERY Saudi, Egyptian and Israeli are smoking too much reefer? LMAO!

liberals are just either immune or benign

In my case, I am both immune and benign.

why has there been unprecedented inspections of Iran by the IAEA

Because Iran consistently denied they were enriching uranium beyond that which was needed for power generation (which was proven to be false).

One major question is why has there been unprecedented inspections of Iran by the IAEA but the strongest opponent of the deal, Israel, which has hundreds of nuclear weapons, has never allowed an inspection.

That's not true. Do some research.

@warispeace - Every time there is an article even remotely connected to the Middle East, you jump all over Israel with accusations and insinuations. Are you really that passionate about the Palestinian's cause or do you have another agenda?

Farmboy,

You should have read beyond the headline of the link that you included, since the story is about the defeat of a resolution to have nuclear inspections in Israel - through voting by the members of the IAEA, not about Israel itself refusing inspections.

Israel is presumed to have a large arsenal of nuclear weapons - nobody disputes this. The point that I was making is that Iran has consistently played cat and mouse with nuclear inspectors (evidenced by news stories in the International Herald Tribune between 2008 and 2011), despite signed agreements to allow them in. Former Iranian president Ahmadinejad, other government officials, and the Ayatollah's of Iran have consistently called for Israel's destruction, while Israel has never threatened any other nation, as they simply want to be left in peace. The wars it has engaged in have always been after the provocation of Arab, Persian (i.e. Hezbollah, Iran's proxy) or Palestinian attacks, kidnappings, and/or rocket fire. Israel has never threatened to use it's nuclear arsenal, which it is purported to have had since the 1960s.

By the way, I would fully support an agreement between Iran and the West that severely limits Iran's ability to develop weapon's grade uranium. Given its repeated threats of the past, I think this is reasonable. The agreement that was expected to be signed just before this one would have been just that, had Iran not backed out at the very last second. By all the accounts that I've read, the current agreement doesn't go far enough to limit Iran's nuclear enrichment capabilities.

I hope you can now better understand the point I was trying to make.

Bibi holds on to power by screaming "WMD!" and "Bring 'em on!".

Where have we heard that before??