Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

a kennedy

(29,724 posts)
Thu Aug 13, 2015, 09:40 AM Aug 2015

Al Franken: Why I support Iran deal

After careful review, I have decided that I will vote in support of the agreement the United States and our international partners reached with Iran last month.

It's not a conclusion I came to lightly. Since the deal was announced, I've consulted with nuclear and sanctions experts inside and outside government; Obama administration officials, including Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz; ambassadors from the other countries that negotiated alongside us; advocates for Israel on both sides of the issue; my constituents in Minnesota; and, of course, my colleagues in the Senate.

Many have expressed reservations about the deal, and I share some of those reservations. It isn't a perfect agreement.

But it is a strong one. This agreement is, in my opinion, the most effective, realistic way to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon anytime in the next 15 years. It does so by imposing a series of physical limits on Iran's nuclear program, especially its production of the fissile material it would require to make a bomb. The agreement's verification provisions are extremely strong: 24/7 monitoring of, and unfettered access to, Iran's nuclear sites and ongoing surveillance of Iran's nuclear supply chain.

That means: In order to make a nuclear weapon in the next 15 years, Iran would have to reconstruct every individual piece of the chain -- the mining, the milling, the production of centrifuges, and more -- separately and in secret. The regime would have to run the risk of any of these steps being detected by international inspectors or our own comprehensive intelligence efforts. It would risk losing everything it gained from the deal, and the re-imposition of sanctions.

Full article: http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/13/opinions/franken-iran-deal/index.html

13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Al Franken: Why I support Iran deal (Original Post) a kennedy Aug 2015 OP
SENATOR Al Franken underpants Aug 2015 #1
YESSSSSS lamp_shade Aug 2015 #2
I sincerely doubt there will even be enough No votes to get to even 60; peace will pass.... All hail Obama! Fred Sanders Aug 2015 #3
K & R Scurrilous Aug 2015 #4
Nice summation of the counter arguments sarisataka Aug 2015 #5
Seems a nice summation of the GOP position on everything! LanternWaste Aug 2015 #7
Indeed gratuitous Aug 2015 #11
kick Angry Dragon Aug 2015 #6
Another one, thanks Al! George II Aug 2015 #8
Al Franken XRubicon Aug 2015 #9
NOT bought and paid for as Schumer is. the_sly_pig Aug 2015 #10
Once again Jeb Bartlet Aug 2015 #12
K&R mvd Aug 2015 #13

Fred Sanders

(23,946 posts)
3. I sincerely doubt there will even be enough No votes to get to even 60; peace will pass.... All hail Obama!
Thu Aug 13, 2015, 10:47 AM
Aug 2015

sarisataka

(18,821 posts)
5. Nice summation of the counter arguments
Thu Aug 13, 2015, 12:22 PM
Aug 2015
Indeed, while critics have eagerly pointed out what they see as flaws in the deal, I have heard no persuasive arguments that there is a better alternative. All the alternatives I have heard about run the gamut from unrealistic to horrifying.
 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
7. Seems a nice summation of the GOP position on everything!
Fri Aug 14, 2015, 03:03 PM
Aug 2015

Seems a nice summation of the GOP position on everything!

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)
11. Indeed
Fri Aug 14, 2015, 07:34 PM
Aug 2015

I haven't heard too many specific counterarguments, except for more sanctions and some vague yammering about a better deal. The other counterargument is to blast Iran to kingdom come, but of course we can do that anytime we want. It's just that if we go ahead and do that, we've sort of run out of options after that. And I think too many people still remember how Afghanistan and Iraq have turned out, so getting support for the "kill 'em all" option will be rough going.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Al Franken: Why I support...