>I think both articles are right. There is the deal with the US ad the deal with the UN. You can dog the Obama deal all you want - he's the only one to make any deal at all since the 1970's. This is what we call "a step forward" - at least there is a starting point know whereas before there was nothing.
>
>Let's see. Obama made a deal with a country where they chant "Death to America" on a daily basis. Do you think that the Iranians are lying when they say that this is what they want?
>
>I hardly call legitimizing the largest state sponsor of terrorism a step forward.

Seeing how Iran is a legitimate country you can't hardly delegitimize it though can you? If you don't have the ability to talk to your enemies then you have zero possibility of ever having anything good come of the relationship. I think it would be advisable to be speaking with a world power that can have thousands of centrifuges spinning , and any deal you can work out to slow that progress down (even if its just for a few years or a decade) is a good thing. Of course by the time the deal nears expiration thing in the middle east could (and will) change so no deal is going to last forever anyway. Now on the other hand - doing stupid things like a Muslim ban legitimizes their reason to hate us.