Of course, any deal made with Iran involves risk, but without a deal, Iran could have enough highly enriched uranium to make a bomb in 60-90 days.
Before the recent sanctions, they went from 164 centrifuges in 2003 to 19,000 today, and large quantities of uranium that could be enriched.
The deal requires Iran to reduce this stockpile by 98 percent and cut the number of centrifuges by two-thirds.
Inspections will be allowed 24/7, along with continuous monitoring of the nuclear infrastructure.
Any suspicious site can be inspected anywhere in Iran. We have all the necessary tools to discover any potential act by Iran to build a bomb and to react quickly to that change in course.
If the deal is rejected, our allies will no longer join us in imposing the sanctions that made Iran come to the negotiating table, and we will go it alone, not a practical alternative.
Iran would, of course, proceed to create nuclear arms immediately.
There are those in the Congress who would suggest a military strike on Iran’s facilities.
How reckless an alternative is that? None of our allies would help us.
We already have seen how few Middle Eastern nations have helped us up to now.
This country must certainly have learned its lesson about entering into wars that have no end, and who in his right mind would not consider what could happen in a situation where yet another country has a nuclear weapon?
We no longer want to send ground troops to all the unstable situations in the Middle East.
How could we even consider an assault on Iran, which is one of the strongest nations in that area?
Esther Confino
New Hyde Park
