Mark Dubowitz

I wouldn't want to have significant Russian and Chinese influence in Iran.

So better that it be a Western country that does it.

Nevertheless, provide those reactors.

They're proliferation proof.

There's no enrichment and no reprocessing.

You buy your fuel rods from abroad.

You put them in the reactors.

You power the Iranian electrical grid, which is in terrible shape because Ayatollah has spent a half a trillion dollars trying to build nuclear weapons and not trying to provide electricity for his people.

Let's help him.

Let's help his people get electricity.

But the key difference in our argument, and it's a fundamental difference.

Scott's right.

The key difference is I do not want to give this regime

enrichment or reprocessing.

Because they have shown over time, for whatever reason, whether you believe it's they intended to, or we were lying about it, or we broke them, it doesn't matter.

What they have shown over the past number of years is they have gone up from 3.67% enriched uranium

for civilian purpose, all the way up to 60%, which is 99% of what you need for weapons grade.

Since we've seen them do it before, we don't want to see them do it again.

So no enrichment, full dismantlement, full deal.

And then there's a peaceful resolution to... What I worry about is positions that are taken that undermine President Trump's negotiating leverage in Oman.