Treaties approved by the US Senate are respected by America. There was no Treaty with the original "deal". Obama signed it without consent of the Senate. America did not sign it. If Iran had originally agreed to eliminate nukes totally, our Senate would have agreed and the issue would have been settled forever. Think about it. If Iran has no plans for ever obtaining nukes, why didn't they sign a more comprehensive agreement? Obviously they planned to get the bomb in a few years when the current deal ends. They were willing to wait to get the original sanctions lifted. But they continue to develop when the deal ends.
So now the ball is in Iran's court. What are they going to do? Have sanctions continue to cripple their economy? And threaten who with a bomb if they make it now? Will the other signatories to the original agreement accept Iran with a bomb? After all, you didn't accept it before. Why would you accept it now? While you may not agree what America did, did you suddenly have a change of heart regarding a nuclear armed Iran? What will you do if Iran wants to weaponize their nukes?
More than ever will they strive to be come nuclear and, thus, independent of external existential threat.
It's so bloody obvious: you will not attack a guy who has the power to kill you too. Damaged economy? Those things recover, sooner or later depending on who the next external (or internal) idiot may or may not be.
The world will only survive with peace and the acceptance that nobody has a divine right to being right. When we can compromise, share out regional tasks and possibilities, then everyone has a reason for staying put and getting on with the production of whatever his region can produce to the greater good of mankind. No good all trying to manufacture washing machines or fridges, no better that than all trying to producer grain or fruits: we need to work a system that makes us all useful as our locaton allows and
interdependent, which should offer some guarantee of things staying safely stable.
