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 It may keep only its crudest, most outdated centrifuges, knockoffs of 1970s models.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