The good thing is that it appears to have many, or all, of the elements that make it a good agreement. I've already hears both pros and cons on this, but perhaps the best one was where a commentator on CNN asked a simple question of those who might be totally opposed to this - what alternative do you have? Of course, while I just heard Speaker Boehner uttering that they will carefully review all of the details, he said he doubted it was a good deal.
"We have a deal. It's a deal worse than even we imagined possible. It's a deal that gives the Iranian regime $140b in return for ... effectively nothing: no dismantlement of Iran's nuclear program, no anytime/anywhere inspections, no curbs on Iran's ballistic missile program, no maintenance of the arms embargo, no halt to Iran's sponsorship of terror."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/very-good-deal-iran_990662.htmlCan you explain what we got out of it? Have they promised to stop funding terrorism? Have they withdrawn their cries to wipe Israel off the face of the earth? Have they promised to stop chanting death to America?
As has been repeated, no deal is better than a bad deal and this is a bad deal.
Two parties got what they wanted, Iran is richer and can continue down it's path to a nuclear weapon and Obama can claim his legacy and then hand it off to someone else.
Oil prices are dropping on news of the deal.
So now the Repubs will promise their Base that they'll "stop the deal"....
which means they'll be promising ALL of us.....they'll help raise oil prices.
Go for it
So which is it, you want lower oil prices and more oil usage or higher oil prices and less oil usage? We could have lower oil prices without giving Iran the clear path to a nuclear weapon, why do you support the latter?