AP Exclusive: Draft agreement cuts Iran's nuclear hardware

[webfact]

AP Exclusive: Draft agreement cuts Iran's nuclear hardware
By BRADLEY KLAPPER and GEORGE JAHN

LAUSANNE, Switzerland (AP) — The United States and Iran are drafting elements of a nuclear deal that commits Tehran to a 40 percent cut in the number of machines it could use to make an atomic bomb, officials told The Associated Press on Thursday. In return, the Iranians would get quick relief from some crippling economic sanctions and a partial lift of a U.N. embargo on conventional arms.

Agreement on Iran's uranium enrichment program could signal a breakthrough for a larger deal aimed at containing the Islamic Republic's nuclear activities.

The sides are racing to meet a March 31 deadline for a framework pact and a full agreement by the end of June — even as the U.S. Congress keeps up pressure on the administration to avoid any agreement leaving Iran with an avenue to become a nuclear power.

Officials said the tentative deal imposes at least a decade of new limits on the number of centrifuges Iran can operate to enrich uranium, a process that can lead to nuclear weapons-grade material. The sides are zeroing in on a cap of 6,000 centrifuges, officials said, down from the 6,500 they spoke of in recent weeks.

That's also fewer than the 10,000 such machines Tehran now runs, yet substantially more than the 500 to 1,500 that Washington originally wanted as a ceiling. Only a year ago, U.S. officials floated 4,000 as a possible compromise.

But U.S. officials insist the focus on centrifuge numbers alone misses the point. Combined with other restrictions on enrichment levels and the types of centrifuges Iran can use, Washington believes it can extend the time Tehran would need to produce a nuclear weapon to at least a year.

Right now, Iran would require only two to three months to amass enough material to make a bomb.

The pressure in Congress on the administration over Iran remained intense, with the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee saying he would move ahead with legislation giving lawmakers a say over any nuclear deal. And 360 House Republicans and Democrats — more than enough to override any presidential veto — sent a letter to Obama saying if an agreement is reached, Congress will decide on easing sanctions it has imposed.

"Congress must be convinced that its terms foreclose any pathway to a bomb, and only then will Congress be able to consider permanent sanctions relief," the lawmakers wrote.

Rep. Eliot Engel of New York, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told administration officials at a hearing Thursday that Congress cannot be marginalized and "any attempts to sidestep Congress will be resisted on both sides of the aisle."

The one-year breakout time has become a point the Obama administration is reluctant to cross in the set of highly technical talks, and that bare minimum would be maintained for 10 years as part of the draft deal. After that, the restrictions would be slowly eased. The total length of the deal would be at least 15 years, possibly 20.

As part of the agreement, punitive U.S. economic sanctions would be phased out over time. President Barack Obama has the authority to eliminate some measures immediately, and others would be suspended as Iran confirms its compliance over time. Some sanctions would be held to the later years of the deal, while a last set would require a highly skeptical U.S. Congress to change laws.

Although time periods, centrifuge caps and sanctions schedules have previously been discussed, most of the specifics divulged by the officials were new. They demanded anonymity because they weren't authorized to speak publicly on the confidential talks.

Iran insists its program is solely for peaceful energy, medical and research purposes, though many governments believe it has nuclear weapons ambitions.

It's unclear how complete the draft is. Iran's deeply buried underground enrichment plant remains a problem, officials said, with Washington demanding the facility be repurposed and Tehran insisting it be able to run hundreds of centrifuges there. Iran says it wants to use the machines for scientific research; the Americans fear they could be quickly retooled for enrichment.

A planned heavy water reactor will be re-engineered to produce much less plutonium than originally envisioned, relieving concerns that it could be an alternative pathway to a bomb.

Any March framework agreement is unlikely to constrain Iran's missile program, which the United States believes may ultimately be aimed at creating delivery systems for nuclear warheads. Diplomats say that as the talks move to a deadline, the Iranians continue to insist that missile curbs are not up for discussion.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif met for the fourth straight day Thursday.

"We are pushing some tough issues," Kerry said after a morning meeting. "But we made progress."

The talks formally remain between the Iran and six powers, but Kerry and Zarif have done most of the heavy lifting in recent months.

If a deal is reached, officials say various layers of U.N. sanctions on Iran will be eased. That would include parts of the U.N. arms embargo that Russia and China want to ease within weeks of a full accord. Some restrictions would stay in place, however, such as on the transfer of missile technology.

After the deal expires, Iran could theoretically ramp up enrichment to whatever level or volume it wants.

Iran already can produce the equivalent of one weapon's worth of enriched uranium with the centrifuges it now runs. However, Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, spoke of eventually operating enough centrifuges to produce what 190,000 of its current models churn out.
___

Associated Press writers Deb Riechmann and Donna Cassata in Washington contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-03-20

[NeverSure]

"The pressure in Congress on the administration over Iran remained intense, with the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee saying he would move ahead with legislation giving lawmakers a say over any nuclear deal. And 360 House Republicans and Democrats — more than enough to override any presidential veto — sent a letter to Obama saying if an agreement is reached, Congress will decide on easing sanctions it has imposed."

Obama has completely defanged himself and is totally hapless in his attempts to bypass Congress. He's embarrassing himself in front of the world. Here Congress makes it clear that it will do the deciding and that it has enough votes to overcome a presidential veto.

This is Republicans and Democrats alike telling Obama that he is out of control right after Israel told him to get lost. Narcissism isn't pretty.

[Seastallion]

"The pressure in Congress on the administration over Iran remained intense, with the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee saying he would move ahead with legislation giving lawmakers a say over any nuclear deal. And 360 House Republicans and Democrats — more than enough to override any presidential veto — sent a letter to Obama saying if an agreement is reached, Congress will decide on easing sanctions it has imposed."

Obama has completely defanged himself and is totally hapless in his attempts to bypass Congress. He's embarrassing himself in front of the world. Here Congress makes it clear that it will do the deciding and that it has enough votes to overcome a presidential veto.

This is Republicans and Democrats alike telling Obama that he is out of control right after Israel told him to get lost. Narcissism isn't pretty.

You forget that it's P5+1. So what if Congress want to lick Netanyahu's behind, there's still the other 5 of the P5, who will duly ease sanctions and Iran will once again be on the road to success. Yay!

[JDGRUEN]

The link to the 360 Lawmakers story referenced by Neversure above

American Lawmakers Write Another Letter on Iran

Bipartisan letter, signed by 360 lawmakers, will remind Obama that sanctions relief on Iran requires new legislation from Congress.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/192911#.VQt5i4hNrCs

[zydeco]

"The pressure in Congress on the administration over Iran remained intense, with the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee saying he would move ahead with legislation giving lawmakers a say over any nuclear deal. And 360 House Republicans and Democrats — more than enough to override any presidential veto — sent a letter to Obama saying if an agreement is reached, Congress will decide on easing sanctions it has imposed."

Obama has completely defanged himself and is totally hapless in his attempts to bypass Congress. He's embarrassing himself in front of the world. Here Congress makes it clear that it will do the deciding and that it has enough votes to overcome a presidential veto.

This is Republicans and Democrats alike telling Obama that he is out of control right after Israel told him to get lost. Narcissism isn't pretty.

You forget that it's P5+1. So what if Congress want to lick Netanyahu's behind, there's still the other 5 of the P5, who will duly ease sanctions and Iran will once again be on the road to success. Yay!

Congressional action is easy in that case. If your business trades with Iran, you don't trade with the US. That's been done before. Sanctions and fines will cost them more than they'll ever get out of trading with the Iranians.

[RockyBeerbelly]

"The pressure in Congress on the administration over Iran remained intense, with the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee saying he would move ahead with legislation giving lawmakers a say over any nuclear deal. And 360 House Republicans and Democrats — more than enough to override any presidential veto — sent a letter to Obama saying if an agreement is reached, Congress will decide on easing sanctions it has imposed."

Obama has completely defanged himself and is totally hapless in his attempts to bypass Congress. He's embarrassing himself in front of the world. Here Congress makes it clear that it will do the deciding and that it has enough votes to overcome a presidential veto.

This is Republicans and Democrats alike telling Obama that he is out of control right after Israel told him to get lost. Narcissism isn't pretty.

You are indeed NeverSure. When it's related to elections in Israel, the US has no right to interfere, but when it comes down to Iran, you want the US congress to decide. The world is bigger than the US, and definitely bigger than the US congress. Why dont you and your Republican congress continue to work on teaching American kids about creationism, fight against same sex marriages, and criminalize abortion, and leave the real work (of solving potential threats) to the smart people of this world....

[Seastallion]

"The pressure in Congress on the administration over Iran remained intense, with the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee saying he would move ahead with legislation giving lawmakers a say over any nuclear deal. And 360 House Republicans and Democrats — more than enough to override any presidential veto — sent a letter to Obama saying if an agreement is reached, Congress will decide on easing sanctions it has imposed."

Obama has completely defanged himself and is totally hapless in his attempts to bypass Congress. He's embarrassing himself in front of the world. Here Congress makes it clear that it will do the deciding and that it has enough votes to overcome a presidential veto.

This is Republicans and Democrats alike telling Obama that he is out of control right after Israel told him to get lost. Narcissism isn't pretty.

You forget that it's P5+1. So what if Congress want to lick Netanyahu's behind, there's still the other 5 of the P5, who will duly ease sanctions and Iran will once again be on the road to success. Yay!

Congressional action is easy in that case. If your business trades with Iran, you don't trade with the US. That's been done before. Sanctions and fines will cost them more than they'll ever get out of trading with the Iranians.

Yeah, that's ok for US companies, but the rest of the world can trade as much as they want....the US isn't the be-all and end-all, ya know. It's only small players that are reliant upon US trade.

[zydeco]

"The pressure in Congress on the administration over Iran remained intense, with the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee saying he would move ahead with legislation giving lawmakers a say over any nuclear deal. And 360 House Republicans and Democrats — more than enough to override any presidential veto — sent a letter to Obama saying if an agreement is reached, Congress will decide on easing sanctions it has imposed."

Obama has completely defanged himself and is totally hapless in his attempts to bypass Congress. He's embarrassing himself in front of the world. Here Congress makes it clear that it will do the deciding and that it has enough votes to overcome a presidential veto.

This is Republicans and Democrats alike telling Obama that he is out of control right after Israel told him to get lost. Narcissism isn't pretty.

You are indeed NeverSure. When it's related to elections in Israel, the US has no right to interfere, but when it comes down to Iran, you want the US congress to decide. The world is bigger than the US, and definitely bigger than the US congress. Why dont you and your Republican congress continue to work on teaching American kids about creationism, fight against same sex marriages, and criminalize abortion, and leave the real work (of solving potential threats) to the smart people of this world....

The smart people of the world? Let's see what their solutions have been. The Soviet Union, Mao, National Socialism, European colonialism. BTW, it's easy to cock a snoot at the anti-evolutionary Creationists. But there was a time when social engineers and "smart people" came up with an odious developmental component of evolution, Social Darwinism. Wonder who did more harm, the "smart guys" and Social Darwinism or the hillbillies whose worst offense is believing that Adam and Eve got around in the garden on dinosaurs.

[zydeco]

"The pressure in Congress on the administration over Iran remained intense, with the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee saying he would move ahead with legislation giving lawmakers a say over any nuclear deal. And 360 House Republicans and Democrats — more than enough to override any presidential veto — sent a letter to Obama saying if an agreement is reached, Congress will decide on easing sanctions it has imposed."

Obama has completely defanged himself and is totally hapless in his attempts to bypass Congress. He's embarrassing himself in front of the world. Here Congress makes it clear that it will do the deciding and that it has enough votes to overcome a presidential veto.

This is Republicans and Democrats alike telling Obama that he is out of control right after Israel told him to get lost. Narcissism isn't pretty.

You forget that it's P5+1. So what if Congress want to lick Netanyahu's behind, there's still the other 5 of the P5, who will duly ease sanctions and Iran will once again be on the road to success. Yay!

Congressional action is easy in that case. If your business trades with Iran, you don't trade with the US. That's been done before. Sanctions and fines will cost them more than they'll ever get out of trading with the Iranians.

Yeah, that's ok for US companies, but the rest of the world can trade as much as they want....the US isn't the be-all and end-all, ya know. It's only small players that are reliant upon US trade.

Wrong. US trade sanctions can apply to you no matter where your country is headquartered or located. The price they pay for doing business with Iran will be that they cannot do business with the US. Only "small players" rely on US trade? Nut stuff.

Edited March 20, 2015 by zydeco

[RockyBeerbelly]

Yeah, that's ok for US companies, but the rest of the world can trade as much as they want....the US isn't the be-all and end-all, ya know. It's only small players that are reliant upon US trade.

Wrong. US trade sanctions can apply to you no matter where your country is headquartered or located. The price they pay for doing business with Iran will be that they cannot do business with the US. Only "small players" rely on US trade? Nut stuff.

Wrong. Royal Dutch Shell for instance is still doing business with Iran (http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2015/01/06/shell-still-buying-iran-crude/) and Shell US is one of the largest companies in the US...

[Credo]

Not true. Some companies are too big to follow the law.

[Seastallion]

You forget that it's P5+1. So what if Congress want to lick Netanyahu's behind, there's still the other 5 of the P5, who will duly ease sanctions and Iran will once again be on the road to success. Yay!

Congressional action is easy in that case. If your business trades with Iran, you don't trade with the US. That's been done before. Sanctions and fines will cost them more than they'll ever get out of trading with the Iranians.

Yeah, that's ok for US companies, but the rest of the world can trade as much as they want....the US isn't the be-all and end-all, ya know. It's only small players that are reliant upon US trade.

Wrong. US trade sanctions can apply to you no matter where your country is headquartered or located. The price they pay for doing business with Iran will be that they cannot do business with the US. Only "small players" rely on US trade? Nut stuff.

Keeping in mind the word "rely", can you name a few big players who rely on US trade?

[zydeco]

Congressional action is easy in that case. If your business trades with Iran, you don't trade with the US. That's been done before. Sanctions and fines will cost them more than they'll ever get out of trading with the Iranians.

Yeah, that's ok for US companies, but the rest of the world can trade as much as they want....the US isn't the be-all and end-all, ya know. It's only small players that are reliant upon US trade.

Wrong. US trade sanctions can apply to you no matter where your country is headquartered or located. The price they pay for doing business with Iran will be that they cannot do business with the US. Only "small players" rely on US trade? Nut stuff.

Keeping in mind the word "rely", can you name a few big players who rely on US trade?

China. Without the US, China closes shop. And "rely" means dependent on. And here is a British bank that pretty quickly figured out just how dependent it was on being on the good side of US sanctions. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/paying-the-price-for-sanctions-the-customers-with-iranian-links-being-ditched-by-british-banks-9679692.html

[NeverSure]

The topic is about a "draft agreement." This is the "agreement" process where Obama has gone around Congress, and Congress just shut it down.

A veto-proof majority of bipartisan congressmen just wrote a letter to Iran telling Iran the they would make the decisions, embarrassing Obama on the world state and shutting down his end-run around Congress. No, this isn't the recent Republican letter. This is a new and big one that shuts it down.

Make all the noise you want. Obama is going nowhere with his "negotiations".

Edited March 20, 2015 by NeverSure

[chuckd]

Yeah, that's ok for US companies, but the rest of the world can trade as much as they want....the US isn't the be-all and end-all, ya know. It's only small players that are reliant upon US trade.

Wrong. US trade sanctions can apply to you no matter where your country is headquartered or located. The price they pay for doing business with Iran will be that they cannot do business with the US. Only "small players" rely on US trade? Nut stuff.

Wrong. Royal Dutch Shell for instance is still doing business with Iran (http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2015/01/06/shell-still-buying-iran-crude/) and Shell US is one of the largest companies in the US...

Your article links to Royal Dutch Shell purchasing oil for use in Japan.

You seem to be unaware that Japan is one of the many nations to which the Obama administration has issued waivers on the sanctions?

Other nations include India, S. Korea, Turkey, China (at times) along with some 9 European countries.

Royal Dutch Shell is doing nothing in violation of the sanctions. They are merely servicing the nation of Japan, which has been granted waivers against the Iranian oil sanctions by the Obama administration.

Try again.

[up-country_sinclair]

The topic is about a "draft agreement." This is the "agreement" process where Obama has gone around Congress, and Congress just shut it down.

A veto-proof majority of bipartisan congressmen just wrote a letter to Iran telling Iran the they would make the decisions, embarrassing Obama on the world state and shutting down his end-run around Congress. No, this isn't the recent Republican letter. This is a new and big one that shuts it down.

Make all the noise you want. Obama is going nowhere with his "negotiations".

This post is just one factual misrepresentation after another.

First of all, Congress hasn't "shut down" anything. In fact the US Senate just granted the president a few more weeks to continue with the negotiations.

Secondly, as of this moment there is not a "veto proof majority" in the Senate. There might be next month, but there isn't now.

Thirdly, this is not "the big one that shuts it down". Nothing is "shut down".

Finally, the negotiations are going somewhere: they're moving forward.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/senate-grants-obama-weeks-long-reprieve-on-iran-bill-116250.html?hp=l1_3

Great post, though!

Edited March 20, 2015 by up-country_sinclair

[Scott]

Off-topic post removed.

[RockyBeerbelly]

Yeah, that's ok for US companies, but the rest of the world can trade as much as they want....the US isn't the be-all and end-all, ya know. It's only small players that are reliant upon US trade.

Wrong. US trade sanctions can apply to you no matter where your country is headquartered or located. The price they pay for doing business with Iran will be that they cannot do business with the US. Only "small players" rely on US trade? Nut stuff.

Wrong. Royal Dutch Shell for instance is still doing business with Iran (http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2015/01/06/shell-still-buying-iran-crude/) and Shell US is one of the largest companies in the US...

Your article links to Royal Dutch Shell purchasing oil for use in Japan.

You seem to be unaware that Japan is one of the many nations to which the Obama administration has issued waivers on the sanctions?

Other nations include India, S. Korea, Turkey, China (at times) along with some 9 European countries.

Royal Dutch Shell is doing nothing in violation of the sanctions. They are merely servicing the nation of Japan, which has been granted waivers against the Iranian oil sanctions by the Obama administration.

Try again.

Try again? Read my post!

I never said Shell was violating sanctions, just argued that the posting of zydeco "US trade sanctions can apply to you no matter where your country is headquartered or located." is not correct, you just confirmed my argument.....

[Seastallion]

Yeah, that's ok for US companies, but the rest of the world can trade as much as they want....the US isn't the be-all and end-all, ya know. It's only small players that are reliant upon US trade.

Wrong. US trade sanctions can apply to you no matter where your country is headquartered or located. The price they pay for doing business with Iran will be that they cannot do business with the US. Only "small players" rely on US trade? Nut stuff.

Keeping in mind the word "rely", can you name a few big players who rely on US trade?

China. Without the US, China closes shop. And "rely" means dependent on. And here is a British bank that pretty quickly figured out just how dependent it was on being on the good side of US sanctions. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/paying-the-price-for-sanctions-the-customers-with-iranian-links-being-ditched-by-british-banks-9679692.html

China. Do you really believe that without US trade China closes shop? I don't......but nevertheless....any others?

Keeping in mind the trade off...loss of US trade vs gain of Iran trade and oil purchases.

Figure in the Iranian borse.

[zydeco]

Wrong. US trade sanctions can apply to you no matter where your country is headquartered or located. The price they pay for doing business with Iran will be that they cannot do business with the US. Only "small players" rely on US trade? Nut stuff.

Keeping in mind the word "rely", can you name a few big players who rely on US trade?

China. Without the US, China closes shop. And "rely" means dependent on. And here is a British bank that pretty quickly figured out just how dependent it was on being on the good side of US sanctions. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/paying-the-price-for-sanctions-the-customers-with-iranian-links-being-ditched-by-british-banks-9679692.html

China. Do you really believe that without US trade China closes shop? I don't......but nevertheless....any others?

Keeping in mind the trade off...loss of US trade vs gain of Iran trade and oil purchases.

Figure in the Iranian borse.

Without the US market, China would collapse overnight--taking with them a lot of subsidiary producrers, such as Thailand. They are already on course for a crash of enormous magnitude. The only thing China has to control the US is debt--pieces of paper. Were the two nations to enter into a conflict, those pieces of paper become worthless and China is left holding the bag.

[Scott]

Off-topic post and reply removed. This topic really isn't about China. I appreciate the connection, but it is a little too tenuous to be discussed here.

[up-country_sinclair]

President Obama speaks directly to the Iranian people about the negotiations in his Nowruz message:

[Linky]

Can someone please explain why congress has its knickers in a twist trying to stop something they have no details on and know nothing about.

Talk about putting the cart before the horse.

Only a person of very limited intellect, or a person so blinded by rage or hatred for Obama would be warning or threatening anything without actually knowing what the agreement could be.

As soon as Obama was into negotiations someone let the dogs out.

Jeez he could have come in and said that Iran has agreed to give up all nuclear aspirations, will have democracy and Netanyahu will be the knew Shah and still Congress would have a hissy fit.

[up-country_sinclair]

Can someone please explain why congress has its knickers in a twist

Five Letters: AIPAC

[Rancid]

Both Mossad and the CIA don't regard Iran as a nuclear threat, neither organisation has a reputation as doves.

As such this is all politics being led by the defacto US leader Netanyahu. There are powerful factions that want war, if not Russia then Iran will suffice.

[Steely Dan]

The original position was a cap of around 1500 centrifuges. With 6000 I suspect the so called breakout time to enriching enough material for a bomb would be 2-3 months and not the year the clueless Obama administration would have us believe. The following article has a chronological list of statements about the Iranian nuclear developments. To conclude he is a compulsive liar is inescapable.

http://pamelageller.com/2015/03/iran-endorses-nuclear-emp-attack-on-united-states-while-obama-clings-clinging-to-preposterous-argument.html/

[ggold]

"The pressure in Congress on the administration over Iran remained intense, with the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee saying he would move ahead with legislation giving lawmakers a say over any nuclear deal. And 360 House Republicans and Democrats — more than enough to override any presidential veto — sent a letter to Obama saying if an agreement is reached, Congress will decide on easing sanctions it has imposed."

Obama has completely defanged himself and is totally hapless in his attempts to bypass Congress. He's embarrassing himself in front of the world. Here Congress makes it clear that it will do the deciding and that it has enough votes to overcome a presidential veto.

This is Republicans and Democrats alike telling Obama that he is out of control right after Israel told him to get lost. Narcissism isn't pretty.

You forget that it's P5+1. So what if Congress want to lick Netanyahu's behind, there's still the other 5 of the P5, who will duly ease sanctions and Iran will once again be on the road to success. Yay!

You think? actually its the other 4+1

Of which none have even voiced any hint of going against the American lead on these talks. why would they fall over themselves to lift the sanctions against US wishes, if anything they are more likely to protest if it is to easy for the Iranians. France for one would not be happy if Iran get the bomb.

You really should try to keep your rhetoric based on reality rather than fiction!

[ggold]

Yeah, that's ok for US companies, but the rest of the world can trade as much as they want....the US isn't the be-all and end-all, ya know. It's only small players that are reliant upon US trade.

Wrong. US trade sanctions can apply to you no matter where your country is headquartered or located. The price they pay for doing business with Iran will be that they cannot do business with the US. Only "small players" rely on US trade? Nut stuff.

Wrong. Royal Dutch Shell for instance is still doing business with Iran (http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2015/01/06/shell-still-buying-iran-crude/) and Shell US is one of the largest companies in the US...

Yes but they are buying within the limits set out in the sanctions for buying oil from Iran they are not breaking any sanctions by doing this. So you are wrong!

From your link:- Japanese refiners have been making decisions about how much Iranian crude to buy after consulting with the government on how much they are allowed under Western sanctions on Iran.

[Seastallion]

Another view...mods please delete if language is inappropriate, and my apologies.

[chuckd]

Both Mossad and the CIA don't regard Iran as a nuclear threat, neither organisation has a reputation as doves.

As such this is all politics being led by the defacto US leader Netanyahu. There are powerful factions that want war, if not Russia then Iran will suffice.

...and yet, coming out today is this lone dissenting voice:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

David Petraeus: Iran more of a threat than ISIL

By NICK GASS 3/20/15 7:52 AM EDT

Former CIA Director Gen. David Petraeus says the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant is not the biggest threat facing the United States in Iraq.

“In fact, I would argue that the foremost threat to Iraq’s long-term stability and the broader regional equilibrium is not the Islamic State; rather, it is Shiite militias, many backed by — and some guided by — Iran,” Petraeus said in written comments to The Washington Post’s Beirut bureau chief, Liz Sly.

The Iranian regime “is ultimately part of the problem, not the solution” to the region’s issues, Petraeus said.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/petraeus-iraq-iran-islamic-state-116255.html#ixzz3UwyMk900