Pirate's Cove

Exactly what does America get out of the Iran deal? Sure, there are a few things, like not having to go to war and stopping Iran (on paper) from developing nuclear weapons for a time, which are both issues created because Iran is run by despicable people. A few companies, such as Boeing, get to sell some products to Iran. It gave Obama and Kerry something to say for a legacy. But, how does it benefit America as a nation? Had there been a true measure to ban all nuclear weapons for all time for Iran, then it would be worth it. But, anyhow, the Washington Post Editorial Board will always find a way to back Obama and America’s enemies over Israel and America

Netanyahu’s revelations aren’t enough to justify ripping up the Iran nuclear agreement

AS PRESIDENT Trump approaches his May 12 deadline for deciding whether to abrogate the Iran nuclear deal, allies are lining up to lobby him — something our attention-craving president no doubt is savoring. Last week the French and German leaders trekked to the White House to make their pro-pact cases; now, via televised address, comes Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, one of the accord’s most determined opponents. Mr. Netanyahu had something unique to offer: a trove of Iranian documents outlining work on nuclear arms, pilfered by the Mossad from a Tehran warehouse in January. What he didn’t have was a coherent case for why the deal should be scrapped.

It being based on lies is apparently not a reason. Here’s where it gets interesting

Mr. Netanyahu argued that Iran violated the deal by lying to the IAEA about its previous pursuit of a weapon. But that, too, was well known. The real purpose of the pact was to curb Tehran’s future activity, at least for a decade or so. Multiple IAEA reports and even the Trump administration have confirmed that, on that score, Iran has complied. That’s why Mr. Netanyahu’s own top national security officials support the agreement; the Israeli army’s chief of staff recently said , “Right now, the agreement, with all its flaws, is working and putting off realization of the Iranian nuclear vision by 10 to 15 years.” (snip)

Mr. Trump has been coy about his intentions, allowing suspense to build, but he seems strongly inclined to withdraw from the accord. It’s not clear he has studied the merits of doing so, or the possible consequences; on Monday he grossly misstated the terms of the deal, saying that, under it, “in seven years . . . Iran is free to go ahead and develop nuclear weapons.” (In fact, Iran is permanently banned from developing nukes.) Mr. Trump has frequently said he does not want the United States to fight more Middle East wars. If so, it would be in his interest to look beyond Mr. Netanyahu’s video appeals before making a final decision.

Which is it? There are various sunset provisions

Several of the key limitations on uranium-enrichment activities phase out between 10 and 15 years after implementation of the accord, which occurred in January 2016. For instance, starting in January 2026, Iran is free to enrich uranium using advanced centrifuges and install and operate a greater number of first-generation IR-1 centrifuges. Currently, Iran is restricted to using 5,060 IR-1 machines to enrich uranium. In January 2031, the 300-kilogram limit on Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium will expire, and Iran will be permitted to enrich uranium to levels greater than 3.67 percent uranium-235.

The expiration of these limits will shorten Iran’s potential breakout time, the time it would take to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon, to less than the current 12 months. Yet, additional barriers remain in place—some will expire subsequently, others are permanent—that are intended to prevent or deter Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons.

Some of those are demands for inspection. Well, we already know Iran is playing games with secret sites, and some sites were excluded from inspection. They couldn’t possibly be doing anything there, right? But, what about

The reason is the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). This treaty prohibits Iran and all other non-nuclear weapons states from ever developing nuclear weapons. Iran and the United States along with nearly all other nations in the world (except Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea and South Sudan) are signatories. Critics claim that the JCPOA is not a “real” treaty because Congress did not ratify it. By contrast, the NPT is indeed a real treaty, ratified by the United States Congress in 1969, having gone into effect in 1970.

Iran signed it in 1970, and, yet, they were actually doing the work to develop nuclear weapons. But, hey, they would never cheat on it again, because Obama told them not too, right? The Islamist nation of Iran is totally above board in everything, totally trustworthy.

So, since the deal was signed, Iran was given billions of dollars by Obama, they’re getting all sorts of treasury enriching cash from nations and companies since the sanctions were removed, they’ve gotten even friskier in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia is considering their own nuclear weapons program due to their concern over the sunset provisions and Iran being big, fat liars. Iran has seemingly become more entrenched in their hard lines, when we were told that the moderates would come out of the woodwork and take over. Things have essentially gotten a lot worse in the Middle East with the Iran deal in place.

There are cases to be made for and against keeping this bad deal. The WPEB is making a bad one, based on wanting Obama to keep his legacy (which will be interesting when Iran suddenly says “hey, we have nuclear weapons” in the future) and hating Israel.

Read: Washington Post Finally Finds Way To Dismiss Iran Deal Revelations »