frontlines >> letters
}low to Send Letters
We prefer letters relating to JN articles. We reserve the right to edit or reject letters. Letters of 225 words or less are considered first. Longer ones will
be subject to trimming. Letter writers are limited in frequency of publication. Letters must be original and contain the name, address and title of the
writer and a day phone number. Non-electronic copies must be hand signed. Send letters to the JN: 29200 Northwestern Highway, Suite 110, Southfield,
MI 48034; fax (248) 304-8885; e-mail, letters®the jewishnews.com . We prefer email.
Pact Greatly Limits
Iran's Nuclear Ability
As a Zionist who strongly believes in
Israel as the Jewish homeland, I — like
five U.S. ambassadors to Israel — fully
support the P5+1 agreement with Iran.
The deal severely and verifiably limits
Iran's previous highly active enrichment
program.
First, Iran must give up the bulk of its
nuclear program, including 97 percent
of its enriched uranium and 14,000 of
its 20,000 centrifuges. It may keep only
its crudest, most outdated centrifuges,
knockoffs of 1970s models. Iran must
destroy or export the core of its Arak plu-
tonium plant and export all spent nuclear
fuel. It may replace the core only with a
new one that cannot produce weapons-
grade plutonium
Second, Iran may not enrich uranium
beyond 3.67 percent (reactor grade). By
comparison, uranium must be enriched to
20 percent for nuclear medicine isotopes
and 90 percent to become weapons-grade
Third, the deal's inspection regime is so
strong that nuclear weapons expert Aaron
Stein said that if Iran tried to cheat, "the
likelihood of getting caught is near 100
percent'
Inspectors will examine not only Iran's
enrichment sites, but also its centrifuge
factories (for 20 years) and all parts of its
nuclear supply chain, including uranium
mines and uranium processing mills.
That, together with the sanctions snap-
back provisions allowing only three of the
seven signatories to reinstitute sanctions,
imposes an enormous cost and deterrent
to any Iranian impulse to cheat.
1. Mark Steckloff
Farmington Hills
Rep. Levin's Support
Of Iran Pact Questioned
U.S. Rep. Sander Levin in his weekly
email, echoes the claim that the "Iran
agreement is the best way to prevent Iran
from acquiring a nuclear weapon ... It
closes off all of the paths Iran has to build-
ing such a bomb, and gives the U.S. and
the world more time to respond should
Iran break out of the agreement." [See an
opinion piece by Levin on page 33.]
I wonder why Levin agrees with that
conclusion, as many portions of the agree-
ment contradict it. For example:
• Relief from sanctions will give Iran
billions of dollars. Will they use this
money for their country's benefit or to
continue funding Hezbollah, Hamas and
other terror organizations? Iranian rulers
leading huge crowds in chanting "Death
to America" and "Death to Israel" give us
a clue.
• Iran will not only keep its current
centrifuges, but it will also be allowed to
advance the nuclear technology needed to
build weapons, which can then be deliv-
ered anywhere in the world on the ICBMs
Iran will be free to purchase or build.
• The new inspection process frees Iran
from any serious inspections. And taking
this charade even further, Iranians will be
trained to protect their nuclear facilities
from attack.
Levin says, "If Congress rejects the
agreement, Iran would be in a position
to produce enough material to produce
one nuclear weapon within as little as two
months ..." If this is true, why is the West
committed under the agreement to help
Iran develop and protect their nuclear
technology? Wouldn't that speed the pro-
cess?
Levin seems to think we can trust the
Iranians. Why? If this agreement is as
good as Levin says it is, why has John
Kerry already gone on record blam-
ing Israel if this agreement fails to get
approved by Congress?
I think Rep. Levin owes us more delib-
eration before he accepts an agreement
that favors Iran over the rest of the world.
Harry Onickel
Ferndale
Give The Iran Pact
A Chance To Work
Regarding the Iran nuclear treaty:
Delusion and reality have taken the place
of reality as reflected in letters and com-
mentary published by the J1■1 criticizing
the Iran treaty. The criticism has included
no alternatives other than the sanction
regime that has already failed to even
inhibit Iran's nuclear ambitions and
efforts.
If there is no agreement, it is wishful
thinking that somehow the U.S. and Israel
will be better off. Without at least giving
the treaty a chance to work, Iran will likely
not only continue but heighten its efforts,
leaving the burden on the U.S. or Israel to
bomb and begin another Mideast conflict.
Let's, at least, give the treaty some time to
work before we trash it.
One additional matter. The July
9 edition of IN at page 27 repeats a
David Horovitz "new survey" critical of
Democratic so-called "opinion elites." The
dubious survey is by no other than Frank
Luntz, a Fox News and Tea Party favorite,
right-wing-as-they-get Republican con-
sultant.
Luntz has no credibility whatsoever and
your presenting the article as having been
the result of unquestioned impartial poll-
ing allows a conveyer of misconception
and distortion a platform that he does not
deserve.
Stuart Sinai
West Bloomfield
How To Negotiate
A Very Bad Deal
We all have had to negotiate for some-
thing at one time: a car, a house or some-
thing in a business deal.
What kind of deal would we expect
to get if the salesperson or other busi-
nessperson started out by saying: "I hate
you, I hope you die, and I will destroy
your friends"? And then even continued
saying these negatives while negotiating.
And, from past experience, we know they
"meant it" because they sold us a bad car,
or a bad house or gave us a bad business
deal.
Could you expect to get a reasonable
deal from such a person? Would you buy
their car, buy their house, buy their busi-
ness deal?
And then, if you also realized your deal
would leave them with a large sum of
money to help destroy your friends, would
you conclude the deal?
And then, would you come home to tell
your family about such a deal, and sell it
to them as a good thing — for us and our
friends?
ai
(VOLUNTEER!
presented by
SoaringEagle
CASINO O RESORT•
Larry Freedman
Bingham Farms
Iran Pact Is Verifiable
Way To Limit Threat
No, the Iran nuclear treaty is not perfect,
but this is an imperfect world. No alterna-
tives have been presented by Israel or the
critics that offer a verifiable way to reduce
the nuclear threat, which is a serious
threat.
The major objection raised by the
opponents to the agreement is that Iran
will still remain actively hostile to Israel
and the United States and retain capabili-
ties to do public and secret harm.
A similar situation existed in the
middle of the Cold War, when the U.S.
and its allies had an equally hostile
relationship with the Soviet Union and
its allies.
Both had murderous intents toward
each other but realized that the suicidal
possibilities of the growing nuclear threat
were dangerous to both. In spite of their
hostility, they mutually agreed to limit
their nuclear weaponry. In spite of the
success of the treaty, hostilities remained
and many proxy wars ensued, but none
used nuclear weapons.
The Iran agreement promises no better
— and no worse.
Another bone of contention is that Iran
will cheat in spite of the ample verifica-
tions stipulated in the agreement. One of
the less publicized aspects of the agree-
ment is that there will be international
cooperation between Iranian scientists
and the rest of the world scientists in
Iranian facilities. (See Science magazine,
July 24, 2015).
Such international cooperative scientific
efforts toward peaceful science will make
it very difficult — almost impossible —
for cheating to occur.
Alvin M. Saperstein
Professor Emeritus of Physics
Wayne State University
Detroit
Great Event! Great People!
Great Festival Perks!
ARTS BEATS & EATS
SUNDAY SEPT 6
SUNDAY SEPT 20
SUKKAH ASSEMBLY
Help assemble and decorate
sukkahs at a JARC home
SIGN UP
TODAY!
248.488.7535
HallieEisenberg@jarc.org
www.jarc.org/volunteer
August 6 • 2015
5