>>Time will tell on this one. IIRC, the feeling when the deal was reached was that Iran was a year away from having a nuke. If we pushed that back 5 or 10 or 15 years, that's a good thing.
>>
>>Iran is one of those cases with no good answers, only bad and worse. My take is that the deal is better than no deal.
>>
>
>The Iranian deal and the administration's attempts to justify it, represent some of the most blatantly dishonest political messaging I've ever seen.
>
>At the end of the Bush years and early in the Obama years, the political right voiced serious concerns about Iran and the nuclear threat. At the time, many on the political left criticized the right for spreading FUD.
>
>Fast forward.....the administration and the political left used the belief that Iran was so close to being a nuclear threat that the deal HAD to get done. So what happened in between???
>

A nuclear Iran was never a threat to the US.
Most importantly, though, the existing sanction regime had been unravelling for a long while.
Those sanctions were costing signatories billions of dollars in lost trade and the inevitable breaches were on the upswing.
It was just a matter of time till they bailed out completely.
The Kerry-Obama deal replaced the sanctions with a pretty good- not perfect- inspection regime.
Not a perfect deal, but the status-quo was untenable.