To the editor: Many of those hindering the president's effort to make an Iranian nuclear agreement extol the courage of the military at war. Sadly, one rarely hears similar praise and admiration for the courage of those who seek peace. ("Give the Iran nuclear deal a chance," editorial, April 3)
Extending the hand of friendship can require bravery equal to or greater than that shown in battle. There is risk in virtually everything.
Why not take a judicious chance on peace?
Jonathan Greenspan, Westlake Village
To the editor: Trust is the critical element here, and it is hardwired into the framework deal with Iran.
We are expected to trust the premier purveyor of state-sponsored terrorism to abide by the letter and spirit of the agreement. Well, sir, my quotient of trust for those who have threatened to wipe Israel from the map, denied the Holocaust, attacked a Jewish center in faraway Argentina and provided support of all sorts for the likes of Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis and Bashar Assad is in very short supply.
No matter how soporific President Obama's assurances, I still find my sleep disturbed by whirring centrifuges deep underground at Fordo.
Paul Bloustein, Cincinnati
To the editor: Critics of the Iranian nuclear framework are confusing wants with needs.
The world wants no Iranian nukes forever. The world needs no Iranian nukes for as far as we can see.
This is a very, very good deal. To borrow a saying, an agreement in hand is worth two in the bush.
Gary Linquist, Morro Bay
To the editor: Within hours of the Obama administration's announcement of the deal with Iran, that country's foreign minister, Javad Zarif, said the U.S. was lying about the agreement and that Iran had not agreed to many of the things Obama claimed.
Someone is lying. If it is Iran, does one really want to enter into a deal with a party that has no qualms about lying when the deal involves global security?
Barry Nichols, Los Angeles