Public needs to know Iran nuclear situation

Whatever position one takes on the Iran “agreement,” it is already becoming an issue of what exactly does it mean to the country as a whole. 

It was Disraili who exclaimed in the latter days of the British Empire that Britain had no permanent enemies and no permanent friends — only permanent “interests.” 

What exactly that meant at the time in terms of military strength, was measured in how many first line battleships and battle cruisers should Britain have against any “potential” future enemy. The formula came out as two to one. 

We are not interested in battle ships or cruisers any more. We are very much interested in any present or future acquisition of nuclear weapons by any country deemed “dangerous.”

Diplomacy has still a long way to go. The agreement is not another Munich.

There is no waving of a piece of paper from an old and dying man declaring “peace in our time.” We do, however, need to know the full extent of the nuclear development in Iran — now and in future years. Disraili was right! 

Graeme Webster

Cheney