All depends on who gets to inspect what and where.... I don't trust Russia as a partner either I would have to ask, why would our president put us in this position:"If Washington tears up this international agreement, it tells the rest of the world that the United States is an unreliable negotiating partner — and that it will only be satisfied by war."
Because, without cooperation and compromise people, facing a tough situation generally self destruct. Look at the cold war, if the US and USSR had both agreed to limits on nuclear weapons at the onset, both countries would have not wasted trillions of dollars as they did. People who study human behavior have a name for this counter productive behavior, it's called the Prisoners Dilemma.
Ah, there you go again with some education type talk. Spending millions to show you are a bad ass is the REAL solution to every world problem.
Perceived advisories do not generally set limits on their ability to defend themselves or harm their opponents. They are not particularly rational players and besides, the standard example is of two prisoners arrested for a bank heist or some such crime... the model does not take into account the part where one prisoner is in cahoots with and will receive cover from the bank...While it may not seem rational for Russia to allow Iran the nuclear weapon, the quicker that people in the west realize that the cold war never ended, the better their longevity will be. 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend'... (the quicker people in the west realize that their politics have been heavily influenced by nazi’s, fascists and communists, the better their liberty will be... but that is another subject)
Arguably, I believe Iran has been quite rational and calculating and has taken advantage of a golden opportunity we gift wrapped for them by sending Iraq into chaos. I've never seen you really weigh in on that point. The people who brought us that war were indeed heavily influenced by cold war thinking. I'd like to hear any benefit their actions to "protect us" actually produced. Believe it or not, I am not a pacifist pussy who believes there is never a place for military engagement. I don't think world politics is truly that much different from schoolyard politics, IE everything is about power and subjugating others to your will. There is the lofty philosophical outlook of freedom and encouraging Democracy, and then there is the harsh reality that those seeking power will do everything they can to whip people in a fear frenzy to get them to agree to attack a foe we get no gain from vanquishing. I happened in Europe, and it happened here after 9/11, and there is a subset of our political field who is still milking a victim attitude and selling a belief that we can make everyone bend to our will as long as we never show weakness like that Ceaser/Pussy Obama.
The two prisoners who are both charged as accomplices have a choice, They can both confess and get a reduced sentence or each can rat on the other while claiming their own innocence, in which case they will both get the maximum sentence. It seems obvious that the first choice is advantageous to both. However in real world situations they almost always take the second choice. Draw your own conclusions.
And of course opposing view points.http://www.academia.edu/5520120/Four_Reasons_Why_the_US_-_Iran_Nuclear_Deal_is_a_Bad_Idea_for_the_Arab_World_Ali_Bakeerhttps://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2015/07/16/10-reasons-the-iran-deal-is-ludicrous/http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/20/opinion/dont-make-a-bad-deal-with-iran.html?_r=0