To: Rep. Tom O’Halleran (AZ-1), Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (AZ-1), and Sen. Martha McSally (AZ-2)
No Regional War in the Middle East
Petition summary:
We need to support the nuclear deal with Iran. The alternative is a regional war which could prove disastrous for our allies. Sanctions have only escalated Iran’s nuclear program. To provide security the deal must lead to generalized, permanent arms control. As General of the Army Omar Bradley said, “We had better soon get ourselves under control and begin making the world safe for living.”
——————————————————
The petition in full:
The United States, as part of the P5+1 (USA and our allies the UK, France, plus Germany and the EU; also Russia and China), has taken a major step toward preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. We need to support the deal with Iran.
The alternative is war. Not just an attack but a boots-on-the-ground war. Meir Dagan, head of the Mossad (Israel’s CIA), from 2002 to 2011, warned that an attack on Iran “would mean regional war, and in that case you would have given Iran the best possible reason to continue the nuclear program.” He further warned that, “The regional challenge that Israel would face would be impossible.”
Meir Dagan and other retired Israeli intelligence and military have warned against Netanyahu and other “hotheads.” The hotheads’ alarmist views require analysis and challenge. They should not be allowed to frame the debate.
Robert Gates, head of the CIA under George H.W. Bush, defense secretary under George W. Bush and Barack Obama, has said bombing Iran could prove a “catastrophe,” and that Iran’s “capacity to wage a series of terror attacks across the Middle East aimed at us and our friends, and dramatically worsen the situation in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and elsewhere is hard to overestimate.”
A military strike would delay a bomb by 3-5 years while the deal could delay it 10-20 years or more.
Would more sanctions against Iran work? Look at the evidence: After imposition of sanctions in 2006 Iran went from a few hundred centrifuges to 22,000 centrifuges. From enriching below 5 percent to enriching to 20 percent. From one model of centrifuge to eight models of centrifuges, including highly developed centrifuges. All while sanctions were in place.
[Note: The deal requires Iran to get rid of 98% of it’s low-enriched uranium stockpile. It limits Iran to 3.7% enrichment. Bomb grade is at least 90%]
There is no chance that our allies would continue sanctions as long as Iran continues to abide by the agreement.
Congress needs to work with the administration for strong implementation of the accord and action against Iran’s bad actions in the region and toward its own people (Iran’s dissidents overwhelmingly support the deal). As Iran supports Hezbollah and Hamas, we need to support Israel. We can co-operate with Iran on its good actions such as its fight against ISIL.
Is this deal enough? Certainly not. It should serve as the start of a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East. Voices in Saudi Arabia once advocated a weapons-of-mass-destruction free zone in the Middle East, even if Israel did not participate. We were wrong in not pursuing it then but we don’t have to be wrong now. We need to take the lead.
Would a weapons-of-mass-destruction free zone in the Middle East be enough? No, as conventional weapons today can be extraordinarily destructive. Nor is it enough for one region only to demilitarize.
“Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative,” said President Eisenhower in his Farewell Address to the Nation.
General Omar Bradley said "Our plight is critical, and with each effort we have made to relieve it by further scientific advance, we have succeeded only in aggravating our peril…If we are going to save ourselves from the instruments of our own intellect, we had better soon get ourselves under control and begin making the world safe for living."
We need to support the nuclear deal with Iran. The alternative is a regional war which could prove disastrous for our allies. Sanctions have only escalated Iran’s nuclear program. To provide security the deal must lead to generalized, permanent arms control. As General of the Army Omar Bradley said, “We had better soon get ourselves under control and begin making the world safe for living.”
——————————————————
The petition in full:
The United States, as part of the P5+1 (USA and our allies the UK, France, plus Germany and the EU; also Russia and China), has taken a major step toward preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. We need to support the deal with Iran.
The alternative is war. Not just an attack but a boots-on-the-ground war. Meir Dagan, head of the Mossad (Israel’s CIA), from 2002 to 2011, warned that an attack on Iran “would mean regional war, and in that case you would have given Iran the best possible reason to continue the nuclear program.” He further warned that, “The regional challenge that Israel would face would be impossible.”
Meir Dagan and other retired Israeli intelligence and military have warned against Netanyahu and other “hotheads.” The hotheads’ alarmist views require analysis and challenge. They should not be allowed to frame the debate.
Robert Gates, head of the CIA under George H.W. Bush, defense secretary under George W. Bush and Barack Obama, has said bombing Iran could prove a “catastrophe,” and that Iran’s “capacity to wage a series of terror attacks across the Middle East aimed at us and our friends, and dramatically worsen the situation in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and elsewhere is hard to overestimate.”
A military strike would delay a bomb by 3-5 years while the deal could delay it 10-20 years or more.
Would more sanctions against Iran work? Look at the evidence: After imposition of sanctions in 2006 Iran went from a few hundred centrifuges to 22,000 centrifuges. From enriching below 5 percent to enriching to 20 percent. From one model of centrifuge to eight models of centrifuges, including highly developed centrifuges. All while sanctions were in place.
[Note: The deal requires Iran to get rid of 98% of it’s low-enriched uranium stockpile. It limits Iran to 3.7% enrichment. Bomb grade is at least 90%]
There is no chance that our allies would continue sanctions as long as Iran continues to abide by the agreement.
Congress needs to work with the administration for strong implementation of the accord and action against Iran’s bad actions in the region and toward its own people (Iran’s dissidents overwhelmingly support the deal). As Iran supports Hezbollah and Hamas, we need to support Israel. We can co-operate with Iran on its good actions such as its fight against ISIL.
Is this deal enough? Certainly not. It should serve as the start of a nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East. Voices in Saudi Arabia once advocated a weapons-of-mass-destruction free zone in the Middle East, even if Israel did not participate. We were wrong in not pursuing it then but we don’t have to be wrong now. We need to take the lead.
Would a weapons-of-mass-destruction free zone in the Middle East be enough? No, as conventional weapons today can be extraordinarily destructive. Nor is it enough for one region only to demilitarize.
“Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative,” said President Eisenhower in his Farewell Address to the Nation.
General Omar Bradley said "Our plight is critical, and with each effort we have made to relieve it by further scientific advance, we have succeeded only in aggravating our peril…If we are going to save ourselves from the instruments of our own intellect, we had better soon get ourselves under control and begin making the world safe for living."
Why is this important?
I’m Jewish and I care about Israel. I’m a retired teacher and feel I owe my career to bright, motivated Iranian students I taught many years ago. I hurt to see people I care about hurting each other.