Edit: Btw, as far as them not really wanting nuclear weapons. They can buy low enriched uranium for any peaceful purposes far cheaper than the billions they're spending on their nuclear program. The only reason to have an enrichment program like theirs is to make weapons-grade Uranium.
This is part false and part true.
They DO need enrichment plants to enrich uranium for their needs, considering they mine their uranium themselves.
HOWEVER, buying low-enriched uranium from elsewhere would probably make more economic sense. Brazil suggested a deal like this some years ago, but was shot down by the US, who at that time advocated a complete shutdown of the Iranian nuclear program.
At this point there is really no meaning in discussing this any more. They have had the enrichment plants up and running since 2010 and if they had wanted to, they would have HEU for dozens of bombs today. So if you are really saying that they should shut off their enrichment facilities and you are under the impression that Iran wants to make a nuclear bomb, it is already too late. They could be hiding any amount of HEU anywhere. So dismantling the enrichment facilities means nothing, which it appears the Obama administration has finally realized.
Personally I think the notion that Iran is NOT trying to build nuclear weapons is a little naïve.
Personally, I think you appear more than a little naïve. Why would you think they are building nuclear weapons? When you have no proofs, who are you listening to?
Mossad has said they do not have one. CIA has said they do not have one. Oh look, Guard Dog thinking he knows better than the Israeli and American intelligence services. Great job.
Can you get it into your head that the same guys who are saying "Iran will have nukes in the next few years" have been saying so since the early nineties? And that these were the same who fabricated "evidence" about Iraq (for which they should be hanged, drawn and quartered for treason)? The exact same people are now hawking about Iran's "nuclear weapons" with zero evidence for everything. Geez, I guess Netanyahu wasn't fooling about when he said in 2001 that the US is easily influenced. The exact same people are trying the exact same trick on you for the second time. I'd like to (not) paraphrase GWB and say that if they can fool you once, then same on them. If they fool you twice, then you're just plain ****ing retarded.
Anyways, this is rapidly approaching idiot level when you make statements such as that without proof. Next you will be saying that you are sure that god exists.
If a treaty is useless, and most folks agree it is, why bother?
Wrong. If the treaty lets international inspectors inspect Iranian sites at will, then we can be sure that no military nuclear program is initiated in the future.
As I have already said, if you believe Iran has pursued a military nuclear program from the beginning, then they could already have all the materials they need for all the nukes they will ever need. So in that case, even a complete dismantlement of the Iranian nuclear program (which the Republicans have been calling a "good deal") will not be enough to be sure.
So as you see, a treaty like the current one is the best option because it is the only way we can learn to trust each other.
Neville Chamberlain demonstrated for the whole world the value of a deal with the devil yet the same mistakes get made again and again.
Yeah, because this is totally the same thing. The "good guys" postponing a war against the "bad guys". Nuanced American foreign policy insight at it's best :D.
The mere fact that you make this comparison, implicitly saying that Iran is "the devil" which cannot be dealt with peacefully demonstrates that you have more in common with the Iranian crackpot nationalists who are saying the same thing, than with moderates on either side.
Do you realize that "Neville Chamberlain demonstrated for the whole world the value of a deal with the devil yet the same mistakes get made again and again." is exactly the same argument that is made in Iran against this treaty?