29 top scientists including Sig Hecker, Sid Drell, Richard Garwin and others praise the Iran nuclear deal.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/08/08/world/document-iranletteraug2015.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/world/29-us-scientists-praise-iran-nuclear-deal-in-letter-to-obama.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days
-
LGBT intolerance problem at Sandia? I was just checking glassdoor.com and noticed several comments suggesting intolerance to LGBT at Sandia...
-
So did you SSVSP and why? Give details.
-
“Raise a concern, get blackballed then lose your job and benefits…” “…instead of raising your concerns just leverage on your skills and go t...
13 comments:
There are errors in this letter and it should be withdrawn. For example, the 24 day inspection notice agreed to with Iran is actually very weak. Under the IAEA Additional Protocol signed by the vast majority of all non-nuclear weapon states (at least 48 of the 62 states with nuclear activities), complementary access to suspect sites is generally required within 24 hours. This is routinely implemented across the globe. Giving Iran up 24 DAYS to grant inspection access is tantamount to giving Iran a "get out of jail free" card. The 24 day notice provides Iran with an assurance that they will have the time needed to reconfigure and clean up weapon activities. 24 days is more than sufficient to disguise activities at smaller weapons laboratories.
The monitoring regime on the Fordow plant is not unusually intrusive or effective - other enrichment facilities around the world are subjected to independent inspections involving nuclear measurements, continuous monitoring, and sampling for destructive analysis.
The biggest problem with the agreement is the removal of restrictions on installing advanced centrifuges starting after year 10. This will lead to break-out times measured in days by year 15.
The statement "This is an innovative agreement, with much more stringent constraints than any previously negotiated non-proliferation framework" is true with respect to the limitations on Iran's nuclear activities (over the short time frame of the agreement), but it is completely false with respect to the constraints imposed by the inspection framework.
The US population faces choices similar to those faced by Britain in1938 when Chamberlain brought home the Munich accord with the Nazis.
The decision cost Britain her another generation of dead and her empire.
Khamenei himself in his new released book on how to destroy Isreal provides the formula for how to defeat radical Shia Islam.
Cold War.
Bravo to Kerry and the team for negotiating the best terms that a heartfelt path to peace offers. Now we must consider our options.
Compared to the uncertainty and benefits provided by this accord another path is vastly superior.
The alternative path of strangling a radical hostile state while being prepared to destroy real evidence of a emergent threat suits current US sentiment and US and Allies intersests better than this accord.
Iran wins and America looses.
What's the big deal. It's not like they want to nuke us or something, right?
Read this web posting by David Stockman
and you will discover the Iran deal was
a good deal for everyone......
http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/all-praise-to-the-iranian-nuclear-framework-it-finally-exposes-the-war-partys-big-lie/
All Praise To The Iranian Nuclear Framework—
–It Finally Exposes The War Party’s Big Lie
by David Stockman - April 7, 2015
Wow ! Today we learn that the IAEA has cut a deal with Iran to allow the Iranians to inspect their own top secret facilities and report back to the IAEA. This has to be a joke isn't it !
Dem's need to reject this deal in congress. Kerry, Moniz and Obama are fools.
A nuclear bomb (take your pick fission or fusion) armed Iran will result in a nuclear exchange with Israel, sooner or later. And the US will be dragged in to destroy the Russian S-300 radar system that the Russians will install in Iran, paid for by the $100B signing bonus.
Iran isn't the problem. North Korea is the problem. The Bush administration did nothing to prevent the development of nuclear weapons by North Korea. They have them now and they are developing the delivery system for them.
The Bush administration did nothing to prevent the development of nuclear weapons by North Korea.
August 20, 2015 at 9:47 AM
NK developed nuclear weapons during the Clinton administration. They tested them during the Bush administration.
And deployed them under Obama's attentive eye?
August 21 at 9:47
I think the point is, a conservative...the ultimate chicken little, Bush, did nothing to stop North Korea. Apparently, you agree Bush did nothing. In fact, you have inadvertently lumped your boy with Clinton and Obama. Oops.
Where is the outcry from the conservative contingent? Obama tries to do something, anything, to curb Iran's nuclear weapons program and the Cons rant and rave.
You can't have it both ways. Bush is no better, in fact, worse than Obama. That is a fact that cons just can't seem to get their hands around.
At the time, Churchill was viewed as "no better than", indeed worse than Chamberlan. History is a cruel, relentless bitch and won't cater to politically correct notions or spineless, inept politicians. People will die as a result of this deal.
It's a good accord unless Iran decides to skirt the intent of the "deal" or outright cheat. It doesn't help that death to Israel and America is Iran's rally cry for their masses. Trump had it right initially. He stated that the "deal" was done and congresses vote would not stop it since the UN has accepted it along with the IAEA's side deals. But Trump added that (since he is fussy about contracts), he would read every line, analyze every point, and hold Iran to even the smallest detail, and when found out of compliance he would punish them with additional sanctions, assuming he's president in 2016.
Post a Comment