This bad deal offers billions of dollars of sanction relief that will be used to fund, equip, and train terrorist groups around the world. It also severely dampens the United States ability to inspect military sites and reinstate sanctions, should Iran not comply.
Strict sanctions are what brought Iran to the negotiating table in the first place. We need to continue to increase those sanctions both crippling Iran's nuclear development and effectively shutting down their financial ties to terrorist organizations.
President Obama's deal with Iran has put strain on our ties with allies in the region. Most troubling is his complete and utter disregard of Prime Minister Netanyahu, but also other allies such as Saudi Arabia and our Gulf allies. We need to rebuild these relationships to better combat the threat of destabilization in the region.
Now that the deal that Iran wants is defeated and sanctions are reinforced, we can negotiate from a position of strength. The United States needs to offer no more concessions and stand by the principals of anytime, anywhere inspections and a phased approach to sanction relief. The US needs to better negotiate about non-nuclear items that remain critical to national priorities: Iran's sponsoring of terrorism, the captivity of US soldiers and Pastors, and grave human rights violations.
"Iran is—clearly—likely to cheat on its new commitments, just as it cheated on the old ones. A credible alternative to the bad deal that was agreed does exist."
"In reality, there are many other, better options on the spectrum between the administration's flawed deal and war in the Middle East."
"Therefore, I will vote to disapprove the agreement, not because I believe war is a viable or desirable option, nor to challenge the path of diplomacy. It is because I believe Iran will not change, and under this agreement it will be able to achieve its dual goals of eliminating sanctions while ultimately retaining its nuclear and non-nuclear power. Better to keep U.S. sanctions in place, strengthen them, enforce secondary sanctions on other nations, and pursue the hard-trodden path of diplomacy once more, difficult as it may be."
"In fact, there are far better options than this dangerous agreement. Congress will make America safer by rejecting this deal, continuing the pressure on Iran, and negotiating a better agreement."
"The alternative to this deal was never war; it was greater pressure on Iran and insistence on a better agreement."
"I would reject the outright notion that we would go to war. I do think that we need to take a step back and consider this. I want to look at the – because we are talking about regional strategy, I do believe that Iran has a regional strategy and they are a state sponsor of terrorism. I think this furthers their reign of terrorism in the region and around the globe. I think it makes them very powerful."