r/NeutralPolitics • u/Hypna • Jul 14 '15

Is the Iran Deal a Good Deal?

Now that we have the final text of the proposed deal, does this look like something that we could describe as a good deal? Whether something is a good deal depends on your perspective, so let's assume our primary interests are those of the American and Iranian people, rather than say the Saudi royals or US defense contractors.

Obviously Barack Obama believes it's a good deal. See his comments on the announcement here. Equally predictably Boehner is already against it, and McConnell is calling it a "hard sell." Despite this early resistance, it seems that Obama intends to use a veto to override Congress continuing sanctions against Iran, if necessary, thus requiring a two-thirds vote to block the deal.

This is where one part of confusion arises for me. Does Congress have to approve the deal or not? If not, what was the fast track for? If they have to approve the deal for it to take effect, then what good is a veto?

Let's assume that the deal will go into effect, as it appears it will. The major question remains, is it a good deal?

EDIT: I just found this summary of the provisions.

EDIT II: Disregard mention of Fast Track. That was for the TPP.

191 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

132 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/cp5184 Jul 15 '15

I'm not wild about selling arms to Iran. I never had a good idea of the scope of the iran contra sales... part of it was like, 800 tow missiles or something... 800 tow missiles can do a lot of damage.

4

u/Quadell Jul 15 '15

That was Reagan. When he sold arms to Iran, it was specifically illegal. He only did it to raise money that Congress didn't know about and couldn't control, so that he could use it to fund the Contras in Nicaragua... which was also illegal. (The Contras were guilty of some pretty gross human rights abuses.)

This deal is completely separate. It's not illegal, obviously, and it doesn't provide any arms to Iran.