place with iran. what they are doing, whatever the president decides today, would be the first of seven states that signed the agreement to be in violation of the agreement. it s incredible that iran has shown more credibility and more consistency with international law than the white house is showing and it will have several very negative follow-on effects. first, an unnecessary fight with our best allies in europe. secondly, the loss of visibility of inspection capability for the international community in iran. third, the possibility that iran goes back to exactly the behavior that we stopped in its tracks four years ago. and finally, the white house will create a crisis, not one that you ll see tomorrow but a slow motion crisis that significantly increases the risk of the u.s. making another disastrous military intervention
for turning for really reaching a deal that is then enforceable. david kay, does that make sense logistically? 30 days? i think reaching a deal in 30 days i think ought to be the minimum. but testing the deal. we simply don t have enough qualified inspectors to really you can test with a probably the number we have. and we haven t even discussed the issue of who are the inspectors? are the syrians going to accept americans and french and brits and germans and russians as the inspectors? are they going to want this nonexistent neutral inspection capability? at the heart of this, david, don t you think, leaving aside some of the logistics, what are the russians intentions here? as andrew was saying, you can make the case this is a win/win for putin. he gets assad stays in power, in fact, he has to provide access. he s the conduit for all this. and the weapons get taken away. the russians have always worried
that is then enforceable. david kay, does that make sense logistically? 30 days? i think reaching a deal in 30 days i think ought to be the minimum. but testing the deal. we simply don t have enough qualified inspectors to really you can test with a probably the number we have. and we haven t even discussed the issue of who are the inspectors? are the syrians going to accept americans and french and brits and germans and russians as the inspectors? are they going to want this nonexistent neutral inspection capability? at the heart of this, david, don t you think, leaving aside some of the logistics, what are the russians intentions here? as andrew was saying, you can make the case this is a win/win for putin. assad stays in paumplt he has to provide access.
for what? for really reaching a deal that is then enforceable. david kay, does that make sense logistically? 30 days? i think reaching a deal in 30 days i think ought to be the minimum. but testing the deal. we simply don t have enough qualified inspectors to really you can test with a probably the number we have. and we haven t even discussed the issue of who are the inspectors? are the syrians going to accept americans and french and brits and germans and russians as the inspectors? are they going to want this nonexistent neutral inspection capability? at the heart of this, david, don t you think, leaving aside some of the logistics, what are the russians intentions here? as andrew was saying, you can make the case this is a win/win for putin. assad stays in power. he has to provide access. he s the conduit for all this.