Your Nov. 29 editorial, “Iran agreement is a sign of hope, not weakness,” urged Congress to allow time for the new deal to work.
This indicates to knowledgeable readers that you aren’t paying attention.
Steps leading up to this mistake include the reality that the Obama administration has retreated from its pressure on Iran by easing up on the financial blacklisting of those who aid Iran in eluding international sanctions. What message does this send to President Hasan Rouhani?
In addition, the feckless signers-on to this deal make no provision for the dismantling of the instruments that will lead to a nuclear weapon, nor for the destruction of the long-range missiles already built.
In other words, at any moment Rouhani can change his mind, move forward in the production of nuclear devices, losing naught but a little time. The West, on the other hand, could sustain incalculable losses instantaneously.
Iran has given no evidence that it can be trusted. For this administration to be willing to take at face value any Iranian promises is either naivete or ineptitude. Or worse.
— Frankie Schwartzwald, Grand Prairie
Perhaps your editorial on the Iran agreement would have been more persuasive had you addressed the following:
President Rouhani’s boast that he had tricked the Americans in previous negotiations; Iran’s complicity in U.S. military deaths in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan; Iran’s active support with manpower and materiel of Syrian President Assad’s murderous rampage against Syrian civilians (as well as armed rebels); Iran’s threats against and vile characterizations of Israel; Iran’s incarceration of U.S. citizens on trumped-up charges; President Obama’s actions that have revived Russia’s fortunes in the Mideast; and Iran’s abysmal record of human rights violations against the Iranian people.
Also, you stated that “with the election of a new and more ‘moderate’ president, Hasan Rouhani, President Barack Obama saw an opportunity to try to negotiate directly with the Iranians.”
Your paper has previously reported that President Obama had been negotiating with the Iranians before the election of Rouhani.
Last, it would have been appropriate, I believe, to state the objections to this “deal” by Democratic Sens. Charles Schumer of New York and Robert Menendez of New Jersey, rather than to state generally that Congress should not intervene against President Obama’s efforts.
— Jim Geels, Roanoke