Quote: 

1. We don't have "international masters", but we are now part of an international community. Insisting unilaterally on the way things are going to be no longer flies.

 

The purpose of US foreign policy is to advance our national interests and maintain national security, not sacrifice the safety of our citizens on the alter of go along to get along.  


 

2. The lead Iranian negotiator was shut down and almost kicked out by Iran for his conduct.

 

That;s just plain laughable.  The idea that someone was yelling and shouting at an international delegation so loudly so often and for so long that it had to be brought up the chain is ridiculous.  The first time that happened John Kerry should have walked out of the room.  The Iranians don't respect us, they care nothing for our interests and you still didn't address the fact that while they purported to negotiate in good faith they threatened the life of a chief international inspector to hide the true nature of the inspections regime.  


 

3. My position has nothing to do with emotion. It has everything to do with the way the world works, and the world is no longer America-centric. Iran doesn't see our prisoners as hostages. If Iranian citizens were arrested in the United States and incarcerated (I'm sure it's happened), would we be inclined to release them as "hostages"? The right wing element of this nation would not be satisfied with any deal that didn't completely cripple Iran, and that wasn't going to happen.

 

I've heard that long enough.  As i have pointed out before, that is a lie.  Don't try to cover up blatant capitulation with simply trying to demonize your opposition.  I have laid out common sense preconditions that should have been met before we sat down at the table.  The idea that those were cast aside is indicative of how weak our negotiating position was.  And when the EU ponies up a large military force to enforce UN mandates or better yet starts funding the majority of the U.N. Then you can call me about a non Amerocentric world.  


 

Iran can posture all they want, but the fact that this was an international agreement makes it that much more likely that the rest of the west will support us if it's violated, up to and including the use of military force depending on how severe the infractions are.

 

Just like the last dozen international aggreements that they have violated with little to no consequences?  Quasim Soelamani illegally traveled to russia to pursue arms.  Where is the EU demanding that he be held accountable?


 

 

4. There are lots of nations that don't like the US, and several of them are already nuclear powers. Should we go to the bargaining table and insist that they disarm and dismantle their nuclear weapons stores as well? How far do you think we'd get? We no longer control who gets a bomb, period. This deal will, at the very least, slow Iran down and give us legal footing to go after them if it becomes apparent that they have a nuke.