Iran nuclear

Flynn, who recently consolidated national security power, sees Iran as the U.S.'s number one enemy.
While President Obama has the votes to sustain a certain veto should the bill reach his desk, deal opponents persist in sending a message that they will stop at nothing to undermine this signature foreign policy achievement.
We must not take our eyes off very real threats elsewhere in the world every time a bomb goes off in the Middle East or a couple of terrorists kill innocents on American soil. So get a grip America -- and more of a stiff upper lip.
The truth is that the rationale for the long march toward the nuclear deal, followed by a diplomatic and economic partnership with the West, cannot be found in strategic alignments or expediency of politics alone. It runs much deeper. For many Iranians, it represents a deep hope for a better future.
Today, we are at crossroads, not only in American politics but in American minds, of our view of Iran. Do we forgive the transgressions of the past and forget the chants of Death bestowed upon the Great Satan, whose citizen were marched on television blindfolded and branded spies; or do we refuse to see a population that is consistently asking for less Islam in their government and more freedoms akin to the democracy we implement here at home?
Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is right to criticize the nuclear deal between world powers and Iran. Indeed, it is not a good deal -- certainly not from an Israeli perspective. But it is Netanyahu who should be blamed for that.
If this agreement is approved, we effectively lose any hope of stopping Iran's nuclear weapons program through diplomacy. A nuclear arms race will ensue in the Middle East. More monies will flow to provide funds, arms and training to terror groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah.
Even before the negotiations started, President Obama's detractors were saying that his efforts to negotiate with Iran over its nuclear program would fail. Now that we have an actual plan to review, we can weigh the merits of that plan. I have read the plan and it is my opinion that the plan is a good plan that will work.
Just three weeks before the historic agreement between Iran and the group of six world powers, Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, issued comprehensive red lines for a possible nuclear deal. The nuclear deal reached on July 14 in Vienna clearly violates the lines almost in their entirety.
No one can claim that President Obama was not transparent in this masterful press conference. He answered every question, and even extended the press conference to answer more. It may take a sledgehammer to get the Republicans to take their fingers out of their ears.
While entering into this nuclear deal with Iran is far from perfect, it nevertheless offers a potential for optimism. First of all, it would delay Iran's nuclear program for at least 10 to 15 years, and this alone is a significant benefit.
Let's say that the U.S. Congress rejects the deals. If so, we could see a hardliner comeback in Iran, a victory for the sponsors of terrorism, an increased likelihood of Israel bombing Iran, with a retaliation that drags America into a conflict that makes Iraq look like a skirmish.
Bani-Sadr: The regime which has put Iran under control, threat and restriction no longer can be seen as anti-U.S. or anti
President Obama is pursuing a deal out of principle. It is that ambition that has driven the President's formulation and consistent pursuit of each of the four elements of the Prague Agenda. Of course, as the President himself has repeatedly emphasized, the deal must be a good one.
As the world powers negotiate with Iran, they should constantly remind themselves that the Iranian government has not come to the negotiating table to discuss the terms of its surrender. Likewise, Iranian negotiators must realize that Iran's nuclear program is seen at a threat by major powers.
As negotiations to achieve a lasting nuclear agreement between Iran and six international powers (known as the P5+1) continue for another week, it is worth remembering what the options are. Spoiler alert: There is no better deal.
A resolution to the nuclear crisis may lead to normalization of relations between Iran and the U.S. It is true that Iran seeks better relations with America to reduce threats to its survival, but the leadership harbors strong reservations about normal relations.
There is no logic in seeking a nuclear agreement with Iran while at the same time arming the very nations in the region that oppose the agreement.
Given the way our brain is wired, we believe we can divine how other people think.