Rep. Kathleen Rice (D-Garden City) has announced her opposition to the proposed agreement with Iran, stating that it's a risk she cannot support ["Split on Iran accord," News, Aug. 7].

That "risk" by the United States is supported by Russia, China, Britain and France. The opposition is headed by President Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and by the Republican Party attempting to win Democratic Jewish voters.

Netanyahu would like the United States to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. If war with Iran is what Israel desires, then Israel should attack Iran. America doesn't fear that Iran will attack us and doesn't want such a war.

Every day America avoids another war is a day fewer Americans will die in battle.

The agreement is not a panacea. It's President Barack Obama's effort to avoid war via diplomatic means. He's not Neville Chamberlain.

Eugene J. Castellano, Rockville Centre

Our president will go down in history as the man who helped produce the wealthiest terror state in the history of the world. The reported $100 billion or more that Iran will gain access to will allow the country to build intercontinental ballistic missiles that can target the United States. They also will be able to supply Hamas and Hezbollah with the newest and best weapons.

advertisement | advertise on newsday

When some in Iran say, "Death to America," we should believe them.

Samuel Richman, Melville

Regarding his editorial cartoon about Iran, "Sanctions and isolation cupboard" ["Pen & Think," Aug. 2], please, Matt Davies, escape to Iran! And take all of your liberal friends with you.

I hope you like living under its laws. I'll stay here with the good people who want to protect this great country and our freedoms.

Teresa Pescitelli, Shoreham

Sign up for The Point

Go inside New York politics.

I'm very disappointed with the position of Rep. Steve Israel (D-Huntington) on the Iran nuclear pact ["Rep. Israel to reject Iran nuke deal in House vote," News, Aug. 5]. While I agree with him that the Iran nuclear deal may not be ideal in every aspect, it's far better than abandoning our allies and all the hard work that has gone into this treaty. It is, in my opinion, the best we and our allies can negotiate.

The congressman offers no alternative and goes on to state that he has no idea what will happen if the deal fails. He further states that he has to vote what's in his heart. I'm sorry, but I expected a more insightful position.

James McManus, Oakdale

The Iranian crisis has been with us for a long time. American sanctions did not stop Iran from trying to make a nuclear weapon. According to many of our representatives, this nuclear agreement also will not stop Iran.

What next? The next step is war. We are going back to the Middle East, while maintaining a presence in Eastern Europe. We have troops in Asia, trying to discourage Chinese dominance of the South China Sea.

advertisement | advertise on newsday

We need to increase America's armed forces, but we cannot leave this burden only to the poor and superpatriotic. We need to bring back the draft. All must serve, from the college graduate to the ditch digger. And those too old to serve, like me, should pay for security through higher taxes.

Joseph J. Malone, Syosset

While Sen. Chuck Schumer's decision to vote against the Iran accord doesn't surprise me, I'm fearful of its long-term implications.

I'm thankful that New York has one senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, who will not turn her back on her party and the president, to say nothing of the young men and women in our military deployed over and over again. They will have to fight and die in another stupid war if this policy of confrontation continues.

Centuries ago, the Romans said it, and it still remains true: War is sweetest to those who do not know it.

advertisement | advertise on newsday

Stanley M. Blumberg, Port Jefferson

Newsday's headline "The Iran deal and echoes of WWII" [Aug. 6] was on the right track, but then the editorial itself veered in the wrong direction.

Instead of relating this disastrous deal with Iran to the atomic bombs that were dropped on Japan, your editorial should have raised the specter of Neville Chamberlain's ill-fated appeasement of Adolf Hitler at Munich, which precipitated World War II.

Most of us know how that capitulation to tyranny turned out. Too bad your editorial page does not.

Edmund Fountaine, Oakdale