29 U.S. Scientists Praise Iran Nuclear Deal

[godlyitems]

Twenty-nine of the nation’s top scientists — including Nobel laureates, veteran makers of nuclear arms and former White House science advisers — wrote to President Obama on Saturday to praise the Iran deal, calling it innovative and stringent.

The letter, from some of the world’s most knowledgeable experts in the fields of nuclear weapons and arms control, arrives as Mr. Obama is lobbying Congress, the American public and the nation’s allies to support the agreement.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/08/08/world/document-iranletteraug2015.html?_r=0

(well worth a quick read) neatly outlines the gist of the agreement and why it is good for us and the world. The signatories are not people unknown to the scientific community. On the contrary, they are mostly physicists with a list of credentials that won't quit, like ...

The first signature on the letter is from Richard L. Garwin, a physicist who helped design the world’s first hydrogen bomb and has long advised Washington on nuclear weapons and arms control. He is among the last living physicists who helped usher in the nuclear age.

We can listen to people who are well qualified to comment on the agreement, or a raving bunch of political hacks whose only interest is to wreck Obama's presidency, and damn the damage that may result. Seems like an easy choice.

[redandblack]

Twenty-nine of the nation’s top scientists — including Nobel laureates, veteran makers of nuclear arms and former White House science advisers — wrote to President Obama on Saturday to praise the Iran deal, calling it innovative and stringent.

The letter, from some of the world’s most knowledgeable experts in the fields of nuclear weapons and arms control, arrives as Mr. Obama is lobbying Congress, the American public and the nation’s allies to support the agreement.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/08/08/world/document-iranletteraug2015.html?_r=0

(well worth a quick read) neatly outlines the gist of the agreement and why it is good for us and the world. The signatories are not people unknown to the scientific community. On the contrary, they are mostly physicists with a list of credentials that won't quit, like ...

The first signature on the letter is from Richard L. Garwin, a physicist who helped design the world’s first hydrogen bomb and has long advised Washington on nuclear weapons and arms control. He is among the last living physicists who helped usher in the nuclear age.

We can listen to people who are well qualified to comment on the agreement, or a raving bunch of political hacks whose only interest is to wreck Obama's presidency, and damn the damage that may result. Seems like an easy choice.

Sigh! Physicists generally know ZILCH about high level politics and how governments function and about why wars start and why they are engaged in as they are and so forth and so on. One might as well listen to Obama's campaign coach instead, "Okay now sir, smile and then LIE and then smile some more!"

[godlyitems]

Sigh! Physicists generally know ZILCH about high level politics and how governments function and about why wars start and why they are engaged in as they are and so forth and so on. One might as well listen to Obama's campaign coach instead, "Okay now sir, smile and then LIE and then smile some more!"

This post is primarily about the Iran nuke agreement and whether or not it is credible from a scientific standpoint, something these gentlemen are well qualified to discuss. In their judgment, it IS a decent agreement and they outline why some of the criticism is off-base (ok, just wrong). The politics of the issue should hinge on the substance of it, and whether or not it's workable. I trust you will take some time to read what they have to say.

[rio3232]

Twenty-nine of the nation’s top scientists — including Nobel laureates, veteran makers of nuclear arms and former White House science advisers — wrote to President Obama on Saturday to praise the Iran deal, calling it innovative and stringent.

The letter, from some of the world’s most knowledgeable experts in the fields of nuclear weapons and arms control, arrives as Mr. Obama is lobbying Congress, the American public and the nation’s allies to support the agreement.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/08/08/world/document-iranletteraug2015.html?_r=0

(well worth a quick read) neatly outlines the gist of the agreement and why it is good for us and the world. The signatories are not people unknown to the scientific community. On the contrary, they are mostly physicists with a list of credentials that won't quit, like ...

The first signature on the letter is from Richard L. Garwin, a physicist who helped design the world’s first hydrogen bomb and has long advised Washington on nuclear weapons and arms control. He is among the last living physicists who helped usher in the nuclear age.

We can listen to people who are well qualified to comment on the agreement, or a raving bunch of political hacks whose only interest is to wreck Obama's presidency, and damn the damage that may result. Seems like an easy choice.

Chuck Schumer is trying wreck Obama's presidency?

[redandblack]

This post is primarily about the Iran nuke agreement and whether or not it is credible from a scientific standpoint, something these gentlemen are well qualified to discuss. In their judgment, it IS a decent agreement and they outline why some of the criticism is off-base (ok, just wrong). The politics of the issue should hinge on the substance of it, and whether or not it's workable. I trust you will take some time to read what they have to say.

I've already read what genuinely credible experts have written on the subject and so why would I read what a bunch of scientists gathered up by the Obama administration have written FOR the Dem Party on the subject?

[krenare]

The people who live closest to Iran, and know them best hate this deal (Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey). This article seems to be saying that scientists 1000 miles away feel pretty good about this? This doesn't really make any sense to me. How do the scientists in a bunker in the antarctic feel? Shouldn't they be the deciding vote?

[little.cheekie]

Really.....this (supposedly) "two page letter" is proof positive of a "good for us agreement"?

Too bad liberals have never read and/or forgotten the history of any/all "agreements".
Most have been broken by the offending party and those that tried to maintain civility usually were damaged by that offender.

But, I'm sure since Obama was involved, history will change.......huh?

[Blackeye433]

29 U.S. Scientists Praise Iran Nuclear Deal and Schumer calls it out as garbage.

Obama is a treasonous POS.

[godlyitems]

Chuck Schumer is trying wreck Obama's presidency?

No, not really, but he does have his own political groups to pander to.

[godlyitems]

I've already read what genuinely credible experts have written on the subject and so why would I read what a bunch of scientists gathered up by the Obama administration have written FOR the Dem Party on the subject?

Dr. Garwin and Dr. Holt were the main organizers behind the group that wrote and signed the letter, according to two of the letter’s signatories.

These are the people who've advised Congress and presidents over the years on this issue. Their contribution to this discussion, as I noted, is to speak mostly from the science view, not necessarily the political one:

The body of the letter praises the technical features of the Iran accord and offers tacit rebuttals to recent criticisms on such issues as verification and provisions for investigating what specialists see as evidence of Iran’s past research on nuclear arms.

It also focuses on whether Iran could use the accord as diplomatic cover to pursue nuclear weapons in secret.

The deal’s plan for resolving disputes, the letter says, greatly mitigates “concerns about clandestine activities.” It hails the 24-day cap on Iranian delays to site investigations as “unprecedented,” adding that the agreement “will allow effective challenge inspection for the suspected activities of greatest concern.”

If you've found that what they've written is not correct, post the link. If you want to wig off to why the agreement didn't include return of Americans in Iran or something to do with funding radical groups outside Iran, I'll only point out that is not what it's about.

[Adamsux]

Twenty-nine of the nation’s top scientists — including Nobel laureates, veteran makers of nuclear arms and former White House science advisers — wrote to President Obama on Saturday to praise the Iran deal, calling it innovative and stringent.

The letter, from some of the world’s most knowledgeable experts in the fields of nuclear weapons and arms control, arrives as Mr. Obama is lobbying Congress, the American public and the nation’s allies to support the agreement.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/08/08/world/document-iranletteraug2015.html?_r=0

(well worth a quick read) neatly outlines the gist of the agreement and why it is good for us and the world. The signatories are not people unknown to the scientific community. On the contrary, they are mostly physicists with a list of credentials that won't quit, like ...

The first signature on the letter is from Richard L. Garwin, a physicist who helped design the world’s first hydrogen bomb and has long advised Washington on nuclear weapons and arms control. He is among the last living physicists who helped usher in the nuclear age.

We can listen to people who are well qualified to comment on the agreement, or a raving bunch of political hacks whose only interest is to wreck Obama's presidency, and damn the damage that may result. Seems like an easy choice.

Scientists now are qualified to know a good deal? And they are ultra qualified to know who we should trust? These esteemed scientists have studied the deal and think its ok that our billions will fund terrorism?

I'm sorry....but scientist worship where they know all things is a bit like a cult religion.

[rio3232]

Dr. Garwin and Dr. Holt were the main organizers behind the group that wrote and signed the letter, according to two of the letter’s signatories.

These are the people who've advised Congress and presidents over the years on this issue. Their contribution to this discussion, as I noted, is to speak mostly from the science view, not necessarily the political one:

The body of the letter praises the technical features of the Iran accord and offers tacit rebuttals to recent criticisms on such issues as verification and provisions for investigating what specialists see as evidence of Iran’s past research on nuclear arms.

It also focuses on whether Iran could use the accord as diplomatic cover to pursue nuclear weapons in secret.

The deal’s plan for resolving disputes, the letter says, greatly mitigates “concerns about clandestine activities.” It hails the 24-day cap on Iranian delays to site investigations as “unprecedented,” adding that the agreement “will allow effective challenge inspection for the suspected activities of greatest concern.”

If you've found that what they've written is not correct, post the link. If you want to wig off to why the agreement didn't include return of Americans in Iran or something to do with funding radical groups outside Iran, I'll only point out that is not what it's about.

Considering he is a top D what "groups" does he pander to? He is in line to be the top D in congress....

[KriszDev]

Twenty-nine of the nation’s top scientists — including Nobel laureates, veteran makers of nuclear arms and former White House science advisers — wrote to President Obama on Saturday to praise the Iran deal, calling it innovative and stringent.

The letter, from some of the world’s most knowledgeable experts in the fields of nuclear weapons and arms control, arrives as Mr. Obama is lobbying Congress, the American public and the nation’s allies to support the agreement.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/08/08/world/document-iranletteraug2015.html?_r=0

(well worth a quick read) neatly outlines the gist of the agreement and why it is good for us and the world. The signatories are not people unknown to the scientific community. On the contrary, they are mostly physicists with a list of credentials that won't quit, like ...

The first signature on the letter is from Richard L. Garwin, a physicist who helped design the world’s first hydrogen bomb and has long advised Washington on nuclear weapons and arms control. He is among the last living physicists who helped usher in the nuclear age.

We can listen to people who are well qualified to comment on the agreement, or a raving bunch of political hacks whose only interest is to wreck Obama's presidency, and damn the damage that may result. Seems like an easy choice.

Obama is wrecking his own presidency all by himself. Excuse us for telling you "we told you so". Secondly you don't need to be a scientist to grasp the concept that allowing Iran nuclear weaponry is the exact wrong thing to do, you just need a functioning half a brain.
Lastly, please tell us how many of the 29 are currently or have received federal tax dollars from the Obama administration.

[godlyitems]

Scientists now are qualified to know a good deal? And they are ultra qualified to know who we should trust? These esteemed scientists have studied the deal and think its ok that our billions will fund terrorism?

I'm sorry....but scientist worship where they know all things is a bit like a cult religion.

Please read the links I gave you, especially the letter. It should provide you with the answers you're looking for.

[monas]

Probably the some ones that believe in global warming. Being a scientist does NOT make you politically smart.

[shevon]

Sigh! Physicists generally know ZILCH about high level politics and how governments function and about why wars start and why they are engaged in as they are and so forth and so on. One might as well listen to Obama's campaign coach instead, "Okay now sir, smile and then LIE and then smile some more!"

Yet this brilliant neurosurgeon is a right wing darling - go figure

http://1f0hrf3k9u4d4eiecjguy0r1bn5.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Ben-Carson-croip.jpg

[abasin]

Chuck Schumer is trying wreck Obama's presidency?

Schumer is a good guy but when it comes to Israel, his loyalty is to his religion, not his nationality.

[jeckman]

Please read the links I gave you, especially the letter. It should provide you with the answers you're looking for.

So many parallels to Atlas Shrugged...it's amazing. "Please read the links I gave you..." Even down to the begging to join in the failed cause, using phonies from science and academia to justify their abysmal and destructive actions. The smart always can see through this kind of smoke screen....not so much for the weak of education.

[arul.BP]

Twenty-nine of the nation’s top scientists — including Nobel laureates, veteran makers of nuclear arms and former White House science advisers — wrote to President Obama on Saturday to praise the Iran deal, calling it innovative and stringent.

The letter, from some of the world’s most knowledgeable experts in the fields of nuclear weapons and arms control, arrives as Mr. Obama is lobbying Congress, the American public and the nation’s allies to support the agreement.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/08/08/world/document-iranletteraug2015.html?_r=0

(well worth a quick read) neatly outlines the gist of the agreement and why it is good for us and the world. The signatories are not people unknown to the scientific community. On the contrary, they are mostly physicists with a list of credentials that won't quit, like ...

The first signature on the letter is from Richard L. Garwin, a physicist who helped design the world’s first hydrogen bomb and has long advised Washington on nuclear weapons and arms control. He is among the last living physicists who helped usher in the nuclear age.

We can listen to people who are well qualified to comment on the agreement, or a raving bunch of political hacks whose only interest is to wreck Obama's presidency, and damn the damage that may result. Seems like an easy choice.

It does not matter what is in the agreement, if it Makes sense, or if it actually does what it is intended to do...the deal was dead before it was even agreed upon by Obama and Iran. GOP opposition was obvious from the Get Go by the complaints before it was even dry, let alone the fact that BiBi is sticking his fingers into our political decisions and has more sway with the GOP than their own President.

We are going to go to War pretty soon.

[abasin]

Yet this brilliant neurosurgeon is a right wing darling - go figure

Not really. He was a useful tool to use while Obama was potus, to create the illusion that repubs cared about blacks, but with Obama out of the picture, his value has evaporated. I feel sad for how the cons used him and Cain and Steele for the past several years. It was disgustingly transparent what they were up to.