The Bogus Iran Deal Could Learn from the SALT Treaties

The Iran nuclear agreement should be considered a treaty much as other accords governing arms control were, particularly SALT I and II in the 1970s.  Throughout the negotiations, there were many points of contention, but also agreement.  Congress, Nixon, Brezhnev, and others cooperated to resolve their differences, all within constitutional restraint. Whereas SALT culminated in a historic treaty that heralded the fall of communism in the following decade, the Iranian nuclear "agreement" was nothing more than capitulation.  Its provisions missed the point while Iran's bellicosity missed the form.  The implications of a nuclear-armed Iran are real for both the U.S. and our allies. SALT I, signed on May 26, 1972 in Moscow, had two important provisions.  These provisions could be considered quid pro quo provisions with the net result of parity between the USA and the USSR.  The first provision was designated the Treaty of...(Read Full Article)

COMMENTS ON AMERICANTHINKER