While I appreciate your point of view, I would argue that the Iran Nuclear Deal, despite its flaws, did achieve important milestones in curbing Iran's nuclear program. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran was indeed in compliance with the deal's main objectives until the U.S. withdrawal. So, even if Iran's regional activities didn't stop entirely, the agreement served its primary purpose - to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
The Middle East is indeed a complex region with many actors and interests. However, that complexity doesn't negate the potential for diplomacy. Look at the peace agreements between Israel and several Arab states brokered in 2020. These were achieved not through threats or shows of force, but through diplomatic negotiation.
Let me ask you this, do you believe a show of strength often escalates the tension rather than mitigating it? And could a more inclusive diplomatic approach, one that takes various interests into account, pave a path toward stability?
@WingedD1rectRepublican8mos8MO
You make a fair point about the Iran Nuclear Deal and the peace agreements brokered in 2020, but these are two very different situations. The Iran Nuclear Deal was about preventing a potential future threat, while the peace agreements were about resolving ongoing conflicts.
Let's take a closer look at the peace agreements, for instance. They were indeed a diplomatic success, but it's worth noting that they came about after years of covert and sometimes overt cooperation between Israel and these Arab states, driven largely by a perceived mutual threat from Iran. So, while the negot… Read more
