The Obama administration's nuclear agreement with the regime in Iran is a "bad deal," argues Ambassador Ken Blackwell, a former Cincinnati mayor and U.S. ambassador to the UN human rights commission.
Regardless of what "spin" the administration tries to put on the deal, "it fails at its core objective of closing all pathways for Tehran getting the bomb," he wrote.
A top Republican from the US Congress on Saturday blasted the Iran nuclear deal as "deeply flawed" and said the agreement would make the world "less safe," AFP reported.
Congress is due to vote next month on whether to endorse the deal reached in July between the regime in Iran and six world powers -- Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States.
But Republicans are deeply opposed, saying the deal makes too many concessions to Iran and does so at the expense of the international security.
The regime in Iran appears to have built an extension to part of its Parchin military site since May, the U.N. nuclear watchdog said in a report on Thursday, as part of its inquiry into possible military dimensions of Tehran's past nuclear activity.
A resolution of the International Atomic Energy Agency's Parchin file, which includes a demand for fresh IAEA access to the site, is a symbolically important issue that could help make or break Tehran's July 14 nuclear deal with six world powers.
A group of nearly 200 retired U.S. generals and admirals sent a letter to Congress on Wednesday urging lawmakers to reject the Iran nuclear agreement, which they say threatens national security, The Washington Post reported.
The letter is the latest in a blizzard of missives petitioning Congress either to support or oppose the agreement with the regime in Iran, which would lift sanctions if Tehran pared back its nuclear program. Letters have come from ad hoc groupings of rabbis, nuclear scientists, arms-control and nonproliferation experts — and now, retired senior military officers, many of whom have worked in the White House during various administrations dating to the 1980s.
Newly revealed side deals that allow the regime in Iran to inspect one of its own nuclear sites is tantamount to letting a murderer investigate his own crime scene, said Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the U.S. Representative Office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI).
In recent days, the Associated Press reported that unrevealed side deals between the Iranian regime and the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, allow Tehran to conduct its own inspections on a critical facility thought to be involved in the creation of nuclear weapons.
The Obama administration's nuclear deal with the Iranian regime will provoke a Middle Eastern arms race, American author Anne R. Pierce wrote on Tuesday in the USA Today.
"When do peace plans make war more likely? When does respect for adversaries increase their disrespect for us? When does “non-proliferation” lead to a build-up of arms? When does compromise become capitulation? When does diplomacy for the sake of peace enable aggressors, human rights violators and sponsors of terror instead of rein them in?"
"When our priorities and our principles and our rhetoric are upside down," she wrote.
The United Nation's nuclear agency tasked with monitoring the Iranian regime's compliance with last month's nuclear deal says the work will cost nearly $10.5 million each year, with the final tab amounting to nearly $160 million over the life of the pact, according to a confidential document obtained by The Associated Press.
The document, drawn up for a special Tuesday meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), says the costs are calculated from the time the deal begins to be implemented. That will be some time after it is adopted October 18, according to the AP.
Although the U.S. administration insists that the recent Iran nuclear deal is not based on trust but on verification, the regime's supreme leader Ali Khamenei and his underlings have already rejected inspections of military sites, a critical part of the inspections regime envisioned in the comprehensive long-term deal with Tehran, Majid Sadeghpour, political director of the Organization of Iranian-American Communities (OIAC-US), wrote on Monday in The Hill.
"Tehran’s interlocutors, it appears, have made a series of unnecessary concessions in the agreement. Meanwhile, the regime has sensed that it can win even more compromises if it digs in deep enough," he wrote.
As President Obama begins his three-week push to win approval of the Iran nuclear deal, he is confronting this political reality: His strongest argument in favor of passage has also become his greatest vulnerability, The New York Times wrote on Monday.
Mr. Obama has been pressing the case that the sharp limits on how much nuclear fuel Iran can hold, how many centrifuges it can spin and what kind of technology it can acquire would make it extraordinarily difficult for Iran to race for the bomb over the next 15 years.
Live broadcast will begin at 2pm European time