Resolved: The Iranian Nuclear Deal is a "mistake."

Contention 1: Iran's Nuclear Weapon Capabilities, enforcment, and energy. As I have shown in my last round Iran has already increased a large amount of enrichment capibility to the point that they might already have a nuclear weapon. They can easily be another North Korea or even another Pakistan. We do not need another rogue nation with nuclear capibility, but a key issue my opponent has failed to observe is that of the Iranians already having nuclear capibility to build 12 nuclear war heads. [1] We can see that we can have easily have worked to get a better deal due to the state of the Iranian economy which I'll get into more depth in my next contention. Another key thing we could have worked towards would have been a No-Nuclear Iran. Instead we can still create a major nuclear powerhouse in the middle east that already has nuclear capability. No I'm not talking about Israel. I'm talking about Turkey. Turkey has purposed numerious times in the past to create a nuclear powerhouse which would help the Middle East with Turkey at the head. [2] This is a key thing that could have not only increased competition in the Middle East energy industry, but even could have led to a break up of OPEC, which was why a large amount of OPEC nations opposed the bill. This would have anhilated ALL of the Iranian stock-pile which outweighs my opponent's argument and provided effiecent energy to the middle east that is more envirnmental friendly then Oil. Finally, I would like to expand here on why Iran won't keep it's promise. We can see that throughout the past decade and a half that no matter what sanctions that were placed on them they continued to enrich Uranium. So even though this is what the treaty is "suppose" to do. We can see that if we observe the graph that this won't do a thing. [3]Let's look at the Snapback for a minute. I would like to first quote John Kerry on the issue. “I want to underscore: If Iran fails in a material way to live up to these commitments, then the United States, the E. U. , and even the U. N. sanctions that initially brought Iran to the table can and will snap right back into place. We have a specific provision in this agreement called ‘snapback’ for the return of those sanctions in the event of noncompliance. ”Interesting, now let's observe the text from the treaty, "1. The U. S. refers the complaint to a “Joint Commission,” comprising the six P5+1 countries – the U. S. , Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany – Iran, and the European Union (E. U. ) The Advisory Board has 15 days to provide a “non-binding opinion” on the matter. If it’s still not resolved, the Joint Commission has five more days to consider the Advisory Board’s opinion. This takes the process to at least 35 days. " Page 159Now we must see that this group includes Russia and China. Both of which are Iranian allies. All they have to do is block the "Opinion" and Iran is free to do whatever they please. There is to be nothing to stop them from going back on this treaty. Contention 2: Bettering Iran and the OptionsMy opponent neglects to tell you the larger picture. We can easily see that President Obama wanted this deal way more than Iran as there were key points that were added in that was against American interests. A key thing that could have been added into the treaty would have been the releasing of 4 American hostiages from Iran. [4] They are being illegally tortured and malnurished by Iran in their captivity. If Iran was truely open to "Turning over a new leaf" with the West or even pulling a Gadafi by suddenly turning to help the West we can see that this would have been part of the solution, but this did not occur. Another key part that could have been cut out of the deal was getting a better deal. Iran's economy was detteriorating from the sanctions (see graph bellow) that more sanctions could have easily pushed Iran to a collapse. This would have been when the Iranians would have approached the western powers and the allies could have gotten a better deal. The United States could have easily goten a better deal under this situation as the Iranians would have been more desperate. Finally, my opponent give us two options on the Iran deal, but he fails to realize that the US is able to rewrite the Deal, the Congress has the power to do this and with that in mind we are still able to get a better deal for the Iranian people who want a change in Iran and doing this and changing the deal can help Iran get to a better state. [5]Sources1. (. http://www.washingtonpost.com...) 2. (. http://www.edam.org.tr...) 3. (. http://www.economist.com...)x. ( . http://www.huffingtonpost.com...)5. ( . http://www.wsj.com...)