# Nuclear deal with Iran **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 14, 2015, 11:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128 "2015-07-14T11:37:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 24
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2015, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/461 "2015-07-28T23:52:01Z")
That assumes the Iranian people see much of that money. Hezbollah’s probably going to be living better than your average Iranian. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/462 "2015-07-29T00:17:45Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > That assumes the Iranian people see much of that money. Hezbollah’s probably going to be living better than your average Iranian. Why do you think that? Rhouhani’s interest has been to get the economy of Iran going again. That’s the whole reason he wanted to pursue the talks. If they get this deal, and all the $59-something billion in sanctions relief gets sent out of the country, the man in the street is going to be pissed. You think nobody is going to notice if sanctions are lifted and the economy doesn’t recover? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/463 "2015-07-29T01:09:57Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Why do you think that? Rhouhani’s interest has been to get the economy of Iran going again. That’s the whole reason he wanted to pursue the talks. If they get this deal, and all the $59-something billion in sanctions relief gets sent out of the country, the man in the street is going to be pissed. You think nobody is going to notice if sanctions are lifted and the economy doesn’t recover? This so reminds me of when I was talking to Israeli leftists during the Gaza withdrawal. “Why would they attack us? - we would not be occupying them anymore!” ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/464 "2015-07-29T01:39:36Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > This so reminds me of when I was talking to Israeli leftists during the Gaza withdrawal. “Why would they attack us? - we would not be occupying them anymore!” Tell us more ways of how Iran reminds you of the Gaza strip. Please do. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/465 "2015-07-29T02:11:59Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > This so reminds me of when I was talking to Israeli leftists during the Gaza withdrawal. “Why would they attack us? - we would not be occupying them anymore!” That’s funny. Your arguments in the other thread reminds me of those who thought weapons inspectors in Iraq were a waste of time, because Saddam was clever enough to hide anything incriminating, so war ought to be accelerated. Whose analogy is more apt? ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/466 "2015-07-29T04:52:43Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Why do you think that? Rhouhani’s interest has been to get the economy of Iran going again. That’s the whole reason he wanted to pursue the talks. If they get this deal, and all the $59-something billion in sanctions relief gets sent out of the country, the man in the street is going to be pissed. You think nobody is going to notice if sanctions are lifted and the economy doesn’t recover? Rhouhani may mean well, but he’s not the one calling the shots in Iran. As people here were happy to remind us back in Achmadinajad’s day, the President of Iran has very little real power. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/467 "2015-07-29T13:25:15Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Rhouhani may mean well, but he’s not the one calling the shots in Iran. As people here were happy to remind us back in Achmadinajad’s day, the President of Iran has very little real power. I totally agree. But it is absolutely clear that Rhouhani has been given enough rope to hang himself: even entering these negotiations was clearly his initiative, not the Supreme Leader’s, even if the Supreme Leader had to be okay with them proceeding. Rhouhani’s motivation is clearly to lift the sanctions and get Iran’s economy back on track. If the Supreme Leader is giving him a little space to run with the ball, one would expect that economic priorities would probably be toward the top of the list of what to focus on when sanctions are lifted. Now, if the deal craters or Rhouhani ends up with egg on his face for some other reason, his leash is going to be snapped and who knows what happens after that – certainly nothing good. I am not saying that Iran’s nefarious activities will see no benefit. But there are lots of zealots in the press who are basically speculating, if not predicting, that all or the vast, vast majority of the sanctions relief is going to go to Hizbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, etc. I think that’s basically McCarthyist scare tactics. ---
**Author:** ![Donald\_Rump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Donald\_Rump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donald_Rump)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/468 "2015-07-29T14:21:36Z")
Robert Farley over at the [Lawyers, Guns & Money](http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2015/07/do-iranian-nukes-matter) blog argues persuasively that nukes are a red herring in the whole debate over Iranian nukes. > [@](#): > > **Who Cares About Iranian Nukes?** > > I think it’s become exceedingly clear over the last few months that US hawks, Israeli hawks, and the various Gulf states did not, and do not, care about the Iranian nuclear program. These groups have shifted, almost effortlessly, from whining about Iran achieving nuclear capability in “18 months,” to whining about Iran achieving nuclear capability after the sunset of the current inspection provisions in ten years. This isn’t even an accurate characterization of the deal, but that’s beside the point; the threat of a nuclear Iran has never amounted to more than a side-show for the hawks. > > What the hawks want is indefinite militarized confrontation between the United States and Iran. From the perspective of Israel and Saudi Arabia, this is hardly irrational. Iran supports terrorist groups and other non-state actors that like to mess with the Saudis and the Israelis, and both the Saudis and Israelis would like to have the military capabilities of the United States at their disposal. Nor is it irrational for the Saudis and Israelis to believe that the US will come through with this kind of support; the entire GOP Presidential field (with the possible, partial exception of Rand Paul) seems committed to making it happen. > > The nuclear program provided a convenient rhetorical focal point for this argument, for the same reason that WMD provided a focal point in the case for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The idea of nuclear weapons is scary; we have an emotional commitment to freaking out about nukes well beyond any operational or strategic utility that they offer. Bleating about how Iran will have nukes in less than 18 months (a claim that Israeli, US, and Saudi hawks have been reiterating since the 1990s) is an easy way of saying “hit those people hard” without the need for any careful strategic analysis. > > **Always the Right Time** > > This is why, for hawks, it is always the right time to strike Iran. The Oren piece is useful in this regard. No conceivable deal could achieve what Oren declares that he wants, but of course the point is that he doesn’t want a deal. He, and other hawks, want the constant threat of US military action, in order to reassure our allies that we will always be prepared to bomb their enemies. There is no conceivable set of nuclear concessions that could make Michael Oren (or Doran, or Kroenig, or Lake, or Kristol, or Cotton, et al ad nausuem) pleased with this deal, because they want military confrontation based on other Iranian foreign policy behaviors. They’ve known, for quite some time, that the Iranian nuclear program actively detracts from Iran’s ability to pursue its national security goals, both in terms of sucking up resources, and in drawing international sanctions. > > But while Iran’s other behaviors are irritating, they don’t have the same resonance for the United States as the nuclear program. And for someone who really wants a semi-permanent guarantee that the United States will threaten to bomb Iran, only nukes work, even if nukes aren’t the central concern. As Fred Kaplan has noted, the really big problem for Israeli, Saudi, and US hawks is that the deal might work, that Tehran might take nukes off the table, and the Iran might reintegrate itself back into the community of nations. ---
**Author:** ![Steken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e274bd/32.png) [@Steken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steken)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/469 "2015-07-29T14:28:46Z")
Not a bad question, that: How _will_ Iran spend its new-found riches? Upgrading the country’s oil industry is apparently [priority number one](http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/25/us-iran-nuclear-funding-idUSKBN0OA0Z720150525): > [@](#): > > Infrastructure in the vital oil sector has fallen into disrepair during years of mismanagement and isolation, and the oil ministry has lobbied for huge cash injections that will be necessary to bring production back to pre-sanctions levels. > > Deputy oil minister Mansour Moazzami said in February that the oil industry needed $30 billion of investment a year in order to maintain production and develop new projects They’ll spend another fortune on [upgrading their civilian air fleet](http://globalnews.ca/news/2119020/nuclear-deal-has-companies-eyeing-iranian-opportunities-anew/): > [@](#): > > The latest agreement allows for licenses on the sale of commercial aircraft, and Transportation Minister Abbas Akhoundi has said his country is prepared to spend about $20 billion to purchase some 400 aircraft over the coming decade. That same article also mentions Iran getting ready to buy a fuck-ton of European cars. The country will also be “optimizing and modernizing” their [railroads in Tehran, Mashhad and Qom](http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940410000389); this, too, will presumably cost billions. By the way: I myself took the train from Tehran to Mashhad back in 2004 - felt like some straight-up Alfred Hitchcock / Agatha Christie shit, the kind of train Lawrence Of Arabia would blow to bits… Very “colonial” style… Except that they showed Dolph Lundgren’s “Universal Soldier” dubbed into Persian on a cruddy old VHS… Quite surreal. But anyway. As for Iran-affiliated non-state actors such as Hezbollah, [they’ll most likely receive millions rather than billions](http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/07/23/425247832/when-sanctions-lift-how-will-iran-spend-its-billions): > [@](#): > > … Those familiar with Iran’s ravaged economy say it’s unlikely Tehran will go on a foreign policy spending spree. For starters, says Anthony Cordesman at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Hamas and Hezbollah couldn’t absorb billions of dollars in cash and weaponry. > > “We’re probably talking at most about several million, over time,” he says. “You’re not going to turn the Hezbollah into a major conventional force; you’re not going to turn Hamas into a major force because you can’t get to them, you can’t supply them. So I just think we really do need to keep this in careful perspective.” Syria is already receiving “[an estimated $6 billion a year, in cash, oil and other aid.](http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-iran-intel-20150716-story.html#page=1)” That number might will increase, but even so there can be no doubt that the vast majority of Iran’s new cash will be used to improve Iran itself, and so will certainly benefit the Iranian people at large. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/470 "2015-07-29T18:15:43Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Assuming we still have the terrorism and other sanctions in place, Iran sure gave enough of a shit about that to demand their removal. Which I’m hoping has been refused. We should all hope that the terrorism sanctions are still in place. And since Iran’s banking system is used to fund terrorism, that means Iran’s banking system should be cut off from the US banking system. It means that we should try to keep whatever we have in place but if we need to roll those back, we have to decide if whatever benefit we will get for rolling them back is greater than the harm we have been preventing with them (so how effective have those Clinton era sanctions been at stopping or even slowing down Irans’s sponsorship of terrorism?). ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/471 "2015-07-29T18:17:18Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > There’s nothing like corruption by material goods to bring a nation’s youth closer to a secular ideal. > > (Cue The Clash - _Rock the Casbah_.) Some people think that the USSR was toppled by their inability to keep up (technologically) with the US in the arms race. Some people think it was purely a matter of economic growth rates. Others say it was the fall of oil prices. I think it was the introduction of MTV. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/472 "2015-07-29T18:18:32Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Tell us more ways of how Iran reminds you of the Gaza strip. Please do. Its appeasement. You know who else was an appeaser, don’t you? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/473 "2015-07-29T18:45:30Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Its appeasement. You know who else was an appeaser, don’t you? I just saw a TV ad for $10 “endless appeasers” at TGI Fridays. Is that what you’re talking about? ---
**Author:** ![Donald\_Rump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Donald\_Rump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donald_Rump)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/474 "2015-07-29T18:47:54Z")
If there’s no tomato sauce is it appeaser or is it cheesy bread? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2015, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/475 "2015-07-29T21:02:03Z")
> [@Donald\_Rump](#): > > Robert Farley over at the [Lawyers, Guns & Money](http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2015/07/do-iranian-nukes-matter) blog argues persuasively that nukes are a red herring in the whole debate over Iranian nukes. If this is true at least it casts some of the opposition to the deal as rational, if quite dishonest. ---
**Author:** ![Donald\_Rump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Donald\_Rump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donald_Rump)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2015, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/476 "2015-07-31T13:50:08Z")
As celebrated in the [NY Post](http://nypost.com/2015/07/30/one-new-york-democrat-comes-out-against-iran-deal-wheres-chuck-schumer/), which has been [trolling](http://nypost.com/tag/chuck-schumer/) Sen. Schumer for the last couple weeks to hound him into opposing the Iran deal, Rep. Grace Meng, a Democratic Congresswoman from Queens, has said she will vote against the Iran deal. From her [statement](https://meng.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/meng-opposes-nuclear-deal-with-iran) on her website: > [@](#): > > I strongly believe the world could and should have a better deal than that set forth in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which I will therefore oppose. > > While I will continue to study the finer points of the deal, they will not be dispositive for me. I believe the inspections procedures set forth are flawed - leading nuclear experts assert that, pursuant to these procedures, inspectors would not necessarily know whether Iran is manufacturing uranium components for a nuclear weapon. This is unacceptable. Furthermore, I am deeply concerned that almost all of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure would remain intact; this leads me to believe Iran would simply resume its pursuit of a nuclear weapon at the conclusion of the deal in a decade’s time. Finally, the immediate sanctions relief provided Iran in the deal would incentivize the funding of terrorism and lessen Iran’s interest in restraining its nuclear ambitions over the long term. > > I commend President Obama and Secretary Kerry for their efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, but the deal before us now is simply too dangerous for the American people. I have every confidence a better deal can be realized. Forget about whether a better deal _could have been_ or _should have been_ negotiated by the P5+1 during the course of the talks. The only question going forward is whether a better deal than this one can be negotiated _if the current deal is scrapped_, over the protests of our negotiating partners who are perfectly happy with the deal we got. If the US pulls out of the deal, it’s beyond me how Rep. Meng thinks we’ll have any credibility left with our allies to muster a strong enough sanctions regime to bring Iran back to the table, especially as Rouhani will have been totally humiliated and the Iranian hardliners vindicated in their view that the US can’t be trusted to negotiate in good faith. Maybe–I don’t believe so, but _maybe_–a better deal could have been negotiated prior to the conclusion of talks. But the idea that some better deal can be had by going back to square one is fantasy. Unilaterally blowing up the deal would be the worst possible outcome from the perspective of US national interest and one that guarantees no deal, or a worse deal. In that situation, the US may then be faced with the choice of war or acquiescing in Iran having nukes. I can understand the political reasons that Republican congressmen and presidential candidates have for opposing the deal. Hell, I can almost forgive them for it. What I don’t understand and can’t forgive is a Democratic representative taking a stance that is so devoid of substantive merit _with no political upside to herself_. It just doesn’t make sense. I can only conclude that she’s a) stupid or b) beholden to some special interest despite representing a district that went 85%+ for Obama and probably overwhelmingly supports the deal. ---
**Author:** ![Donald\_Rump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Donald\_Rump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donald_Rump)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2015, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/477 "2015-07-31T14:05:45Z")
Ok, I can see the [political calculus](http://www.jns.org/latest-articles/2014/6/3/ny-legislator-grace-meng-an-emerging-pro-jewish-voice-in-congress#.Vbt_RLWK92Y=) for her. It would be nice, though, if the [NY Post](http://nypost.com/2015/07/30/one-new-york-democrat-comes-out-against-iran-deal-wheres-chuck-schumer/) didn’t resort to absurdities like chalking up her position to wisdom, grit, or leadership. > [@](#): > > Grace Meng gets it. > > On Wednesday, she became New York’s first Democratic member of Congress to oppose the Iranian nuke deal. > > That meant bucking the leader of her own party, President Obama, whose administration crafted the agreement. > > If only Sen. Charles Schumer showed such grit. > > … > > Sorry, Chuck: The clock’s ticking. If you’re going to oppose this deal — and convince fellow Dems to join in — you need to get started now. > > Meantime, bravo to Meng. > > Maybe she’s the one who should be in the Democratic leadership. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2015, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/478 "2015-07-31T14:54:33Z")
> [@](#): > > …leading nuclear experts assert that, pursuant to these procedures, inspectors would not necessarily know whether Iran is manufacturing uranium components for a nuclear weapon… She wouldn’t be allowed to get away with this here. It wouldn’t be whether or not “Cite?” hits the page, it would be a matter of how many seconds would tick away before it happened. Are these “nuclear experts” on a par with the universally acclaimed experts who offer relentless and unfounded skepticism on the issue of climate change? Is there any acknowledgement that our Secretary of Energy, Ernest Moniz is “a professor emeritus of physics at MIT, where he served as the head of the physics department and directed the Bates Linear Accelerator Center.” Is he not some degree of an expert? Have we some reason to believe that he is in cahoots with Iran, gnawing away at our nation’s security? Or that he is some sort of scientific naif, outfoxed by Iranian nuke scientists who can do the math? Our enemies make great use of a Big Lie: that we are at war with Islam, that we seek to destroy the religion of roughly a sixth of our planet’s people. Worse, they get support from some of our very own, who would like that lie to be true. A sincere effort to make a peaceful resolution with a prominent enemy would go a long way to countering that Lie. Our fretting is like an alt-history scenario, wherein our Old West cavalry is equipped with several armored divisions, and we are desperately worried that the Cheyenne and the Sioux might gain access to a Gatling gun. _A_ Gatling gun, one. Stupid kills. Let us make every effort not to be stupid. Give peace a chance, or at the very least, a fair hearing. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2015, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/479 "2015-07-31T15:01:40Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Some people think that the USSR was toppled by their inability to keep up (technologically) with the US in the arms race. > > \ > > I think it was the introduction of MTV. MTV didn’t begin broadcasts in the former Soviet states until 1998. You could probably have received MTV Europe broadcasts via satellite in a small area of the western Soviet Union from 1987 to 1991, in the unlikely event you had the appropriate receiving equipment and decoder. > [@Donald\_Rump](#): > > Ok, I can see the [political calculus](http://www.jns.org/latest-articles/2014/6/3/ny-legislator-grace-meng-an-emerging-pro-jewish-voice-in-congress#.Vbt_RLWK92Y=) for her. > > It would be nice, though, if the [NY Post](http://nypost.com/2015/07/30/one-new-york-democrat-comes-out-against-iran-deal-wheres-chuck-schumer/) didn’t resort to absurdities like chalking up her position to wisdom, grit, or leadership. It takes wisdom, grit and leadership to register a symbolic protest vote to appears your constituents, you know. ETA: I just realized she doesn’t get a vote. So… a symbolic protest press release, I guess. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2015, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128/480 "2015-07-31T15:12:24Z")
> **[Eric Bolling Wonders Aloud If War With Iran Wouldn't Be A Good Idea](https://crooksandliars.com/2015/07/eric-bolling-wonders-aloud-if-war-iran)** > > He can be first in line to volunteer. By way of our good friends at _Crooks and Liars_, the esteemed Eric Bolling: **Eric Bolling Wonders Aloud If War With Iran Wouldn’t Be A Good Idea** Jesus Wept. And I know why. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128.md?page=23) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nuclear-deal-with-iran/725128.md?page=25)