I do not think it is quite the same choice, Mr. Chairman, because you will have an Iran that is economically resurgent.

I do not think there will be any hesitation by Congress to enhance sanctions against Iran, if their terrorist activities increase.

But the sanctions that we passed, in essence, got the other countries to join, because they had secondary consequences to them.

I would hope that the administration would challenge that letter that the Iranian Ambassador presumably to the U.N. signed.

Iran is called upon not to undertake that activity.

It passed 99 to zero, and then subsequently by the administration as the reason why Iran has come back to the negotiating table.

Your comment was to Wendy Sherman and David Cohen, 'So what you are really saying is that this is a very blunt instrument which risk adverse reaction as opposed to a calculated effort.'

I am concerned that the deal enshrines for Iran... an industrial scale nuclear power program complete with industrial scale enrichment.

I do not know if we are going to have any more briefings along the way, but I would commend to your attention this Defense Science Board report; it is about a year old.

Are we not making the same mistake regarding Iran and the proposed new agreement?

I do fault the President for striking a terrible deal with Iran.

the strategy that should exist, under the hope that we will get an agreement that actually could be supported and embraced as a good agreement, is a strategy that is all on the come, when it should be upfront