|
|
 |
|
The
views expressed
on this page are soley those of the author and do not
necessarily
represent the views of County News Online
|
 |
The White House
One veteran's
perspective on the Iran deal
I was in the first company of Marines to enter Baghdad in 2003.
As a combat veteran, I know the cost of war. It is something I still
carry with me today in the U.S. House of Representatives, where I have
the privilege of representing the people of northeast Massachusetts.
And I am reminded of it every time the questions of war and peace come
before Congress.
In September, we will face that question once more when members of
Congress consider whether or not to support the Iran nuclear agreement.
During the Iraq war, I saw the weapons and influence of the Iranian
regime, and I deeply understand the threat Iran poses to America and
our allies like Israel. That is why it is so crucial that the
international community works together to prevent Iran from obtaining a
nuclear weapon.
After careful deliberation, I believe the Iran nuclear deal does just
that. You can investigate the deal yourself here.
Let me be clear: I do not, and we should not, trust Iran to comply with
this agreement. But this deal is not based on trust. It's based on
enforceable verification measures that are comprehensive enough to be
effective. Inspections will also give us greater intelligence on Iran
than we have today.
I respect that some, including a few veterans, may disagree and feel
that there is the possibility of a "better deal" out there. To them I
say, what's the alternative?
You may hear of two: increasing our sanctions regime or pursuing a
military option. Here's why those are just not acceptable:
Increasing sanctions -- let alone maintaining them -- would only work
if the international coalition behind the sanctions holds together. But
our allies have been clear: They agreed to sanctions to force Iran to
the negotiating table to secure a deal like the one we now have. If we
walk away from that deal, we walk away alone.
The other option, taking military action against Iran, would once again
imperil the lives of Americans to achieve much less than this deal
achieves by diplomatic means. Military action would only set Iran's
nuclear program back a few years at most, reaffirm their pursuit of a
nuclear weapon, and drive the program underground.
Both these options leave us worse off than we are under the terms of
the Iran deal. The fact is there is no "better deal" that will prevent
Iran from building a bomb.
No deal is perfect, especially one negotiated among adversaries. But,
in our ongoing confrontation with a great threat to world peace, we
have found the best available option by peaceful means rather than
pursuing a worse option through war. It is for these reasons that I
support the Iran deal.
Thank you,
Seth Moulton
Member of Congress
|
|
|
|
