When I was negotiating labor contracts there were issues that were too sticky, too involved and sometimes too far in the future that we agreed to vague solutions; so vague or complex that if you asked people on the opposite sides about the deal, you would receive different interpretations.
No matter; the deal was signed, both sides could claim victory and we moved on … at least until the questionable issues became relevant. And they always did; sometimes leading to formal grievances, arbitration and invariably hard feelings all around.
Now consider the Administration and Iranian interpretations of the recent nuclear deal. The ink hasn’t even been put to paper and the differences in what was agreed to are apparent. This is not a good sign.
Plus at best it appears Iran has agreed to not do something the world doesn’t want it to do only for a limited period of time … and then what?
Only time will tell of course, but there is more cause for serious caution and concern than there is for jubilation… and there is substantial risk. If that risk is realized, it will be too late.
I wonder if the President listened to Bill Clinton’s comments following the nuclear deal with North Korea?
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 
Just as all other critics of a “deal” that has not yet been detailed and agreed upon, you proffer no alternative. Do you disagree with attempting diplomacy before war? Are you among all of the Teapublicans who will subvert any accomplishment that would credit President Obama with a signature foreign policy achievement? Do you agree with the bought, paid-for and owned right wing war mongers in Congress who want only war because their sponsors and financial supporters (the military industrial complex) make huge profits when our nation is a t war? Do you, like idiot Senator Tom Cotton (and 46 others), really believe that you are more knowledgeable of foreign policy and international arms control than the foreign policy experts from all of the great nations that participated in these negotiations? To second guess the expertise of international leaders from very powerful world nations is ludicrous! Stay with your areas of expertise, please.
LikeLike
I think you miss the point and the seriousness of getting this right. This must be viewed in the larger context of Iran’s behavior over the years and in the reaction of the other parties involved or who have something at stake. Frankly, I don’t trust the judgement of this administration, especially when it comes to foreign policy. They are naive and short-term focused. I believe they are more interested in the publicity of getting a deal during his term than in its substance. I think the record of decision making with regard to the Middle-East speaks for itself.
Certainly anyone in their right mind would not seek war over negotiations, but we better make sure the results of negotiations are real and permanent and in the long run not worse than military action.
Do you seriously believe Iran will follow up on every commitment? What will happen after the ten year (or whatever) period? How will Saudi Arabia react?
LikeLike
Answer my question, Mr. Quinn: Do you, like idiot Senator Tom Cotton (and 46 others), really believe that you are more knowledgeable of foreign policy and international arms control than the foreign policy experts from all of the great nations that participated in these negotiations? To second guess the expertise of international leaders from very powerful world nations is ludicrous! Russia, China, Great Britain, France, et al.? You pose a lot of questions with no knowledge of an agreement that has yet to be written. You are presuming to be more knowledgeable and better informed of classified information than the foreign policy experts of many of this world’s greatest nations. Your position on this issue is ridiculous!
LikeLike
Apparently you have not read much about what has been released on this or heard the conflicting interpretations from the people who were in on the talks. Let’s hope your faith in this administration is justified.
LikeLike
Apparently your ego trip that anoints you more knowledgeable of foreign policy and international arms control than the foreign policy experts from all of the great nations that participated in these negotiations gives you a warm feeling? To second guess the expertise of international leaders from very powerful world nations is ludicrous! Russia, China, Great Britain, France, et al.? You are presuming to be more knowledgeable and better informed of classified information than the foreign policy experts of many of this world’s greatest nations. Let’s hope that you will come to understand that there are a great many world leaders who are more knowledgeable than you are by far regarding issues and are privy to more classified information than you will ever be. And, your right wings are obvious when you imply that anything less than success in this multi-nation international endeavor is a failure of the administrative branch of only the United States. That is another ridiculous statement to make. I read your stuff and you are better than that.
LikeLike
Try reading this from “experts” Mr Wilson or do neither of these men know what they are talking about or perhaps do you only consider one point of view?
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-iran-deal-and-its-consequences-1428447582
LikeLike