Joe Lieberman

I would bet that they will not, based on everything we have seen and the agreement strengthens their hand.

The most disappointing part of it is the inspection part. It is not anywhere, anytime.

I think, particularly if this agreement announced today is not rejected by Congress and goes into effect, the willingness of the United States to provide Israel with the so-called MOP--the big bunker buster--will be part of a necessary…

I think in this instance if force had to be used against Iran it should be by the United States.

I am pessimistic about peace in our time with Iran because I don't see any fundamental change in their radical ideology and their aggressive support of terrorism.

I think much more likely is that the billions of additional dollars that the Iranian Government and economy will get will be used by the IRGC.

This agreement has more risk for the U.S. and more reward for Iran than I hoped it would.

I think that all the elements in Iran want this agreement because it is so good for them economically and it strengthens their position in the Middle East.

I actually agree with what Ambassador Burns said here, that if the agreement is rejected that Iran will not rush to build a nuclear weapon.

If we disavow this agreement P5+1 falls apart and Iran races, not walks, to accelerate its nuclear development program.

I think the result on first look--it just came about a few hours ago--is that this deal is not a good one for the U.S. or our allies and it is a very good one for Iran.

I think one of the great imperatives for the U.S. is to do whatever it can--it is going to be hard--to reassure the Muslim Arab countries, the Sunni Muslim countries, and Israel that we are still with them.

Yes, well, it sure does, in my opinion, and as others have said--General Hayden--it does something else.

Well, until we hear otherwise I think we have to say it is.

Well, so as I have said here already, Congressman, I don't think there is any basis in Iranian behavior for the last three decades to trust them.

I certainly do. That is the ultimate answer and we haven't really tried or done very much to bring that about.

I look at the ruling party, the Ayatollah, as a wolf in wolf's clothing. He has made it clear that he wants death to America.

I think ratifying this agreement will make it more likely that the radicals who are in charge of Iran will still be in charge of Iran.

I would have loved to have this be a good deal that closed the door, as we originally said we would, to Iran becoming a nuclear power.

I think if the Congress rejects this agreement I think the first step would be to try to go back to Iran and urge them to come back to the negotiations.

Let us never underestimate our power. The United States not only is a military power, we are an economic power.

I would say that I would hope that the administration would try to regather the P5+1 and basically go back to Iran.

If this agreement is rejected by Congress, nobody can predict what will happen.

It allows Iran to be a nuclear weapon state and makes it inevitable.

There is no evidence of it. Somebody said before that, and I have heard it before--Iran has two governments. I don't think so.