Iran deal risks creating another North Korea
November 24th, 2013
11:17 AM ET

Iran deal risks creating another North Korea

By Michael Rubin, Special to CNN

Editor’s note: Michael Rubin is author of Dancing with the Devil: The Perils of Engaging Rogue Regimes, forthcoming in February 2014. You can follow him @mrubin1971. The views expressed are his own.

In the early hours of Sunday morning, in Geneva, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, and foreign ministers from Russia, China, and Europe signed a deal to suspend aspects of Iranian nuclear work in exchange for some sanctions relief. “With this first step, we have created the time and the space in order to be able to pursue a comprehensive agreement…to ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon," Kerry told assembled diplomats and journalists.

President Barack Obama was triumphant. “Today, that diplomacy opened up a new path toward a world that is more secure – a future in which we can verify that Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful and that it cannot build a nuclear weapon.”

He should not be so certain. Rather than prevent Iran’s nuclear breakout, historians may mark the Geneva deal as the step that most legitimized Iran’s path to nuclear weapons capability.

Willing to deal is not synonymous with sincere desire to reach a comprehensive settlement. Key to successful reconciliation is truth, and there are many reasons to doubt Iranian intentions, none of which did the Geneva negotiators address. Iranian authorities say they seek nuclear technology to ensure domestic energy security, but as the Bipartisan Policy Center showed, Tehran could achieve that aim for a fraction of the cost and for decades, if not centuries, longer if it chose to invest instead in its pipeline and refinery infrastructure.

More from CNN: 20 questions about the deal

Neither Obama nor Kerry have demanded Tehran clarify past deception. If Iran’s nuclear program has always been peaceful as Tehran claims, then it would have had no need to hide enrichment plants and other facilities from inspectors. It is all well and good to compliment Iran on allowing inspections of key plants once discovered, but a sincere Tehran would not offer transparency only when intelligence services discover subterfuge.

Iran also walked away from previous offers – and even agreements – that would see it guaranteed reactor fuel should it agree that critical reprocessing might occur abroad.  Unfortunately, the current deal rewards Iran for its past defiance and loosens what diplomats once considered the minimum safeguards.

Fear over Iranian intentions is genuine. While Iranian officials say that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has issued a fatwa banning nuclear weapons, the collection of his fatwas on his official websites does not include it. Iranian officials and diplomats citing it have been inconsistent as to its date of issue and contents. Meanwhile, various Iranian officials have threatened to use nuclear weapons, curious statements from a regime that claims they do not seek to develop them.

Indeed, on December 14, 2001, former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the father of Iran’s post-revolutionary nuclear program, reportedly declared: “The use of an atomic bomb against Israel would totally destroy Israel, while the same against the Islamic world would only cause damage. Such a scenario is not inconceivable.” Just over three years later, Iran Emrooz quoted Ayatollah Mohammad Baqer Kharrazi, secretary general of Iranian Hezbollah, as saying, “We are able to produce atomic bombs and we will do that. We shouldn't be afraid of anyone. The U.S. is not more than a barking dog." On May 29, 2005, Hojjat ol-Islam Gholam Reza Hasani, the Supreme Leader's personal representative in the West Azerbaijan province, reportedly declared possession of nuclear weapons to be one of Iran's top goals. “An atom bomb…must be produced as well,” he said. While some academics have suggested that Iranian leaders never said they hoped to “wipe Israel off the face of the earth,” official translations and banners suggest otherwise.

Past National Intelligence Estimates have further concluded that Iran has researched and experimented with nuclear weapons components, a charge that Iranian officials have always denied. While subsequent estimates suggested that Tehran stopped such work, an Islamic Republic sincere in putting past suspicions behind it would come clean.

More from GPS: Iran deal opponents' concerns misplaced?

True, the deal signed is better than that scuttled by French officials earlier this month. Diplomats have now placed restrictions on Iranian engineers using the pause to install new centrifuges. And negotiators have addressed concern regarding the potential of Iran extracting plutonium from the Arak heavy water plant.

Does it hurt to try with the current deal? Unfortunately, still, the answer is yes.

While Iran has agreed to suspend some enrichment, every concession Tehran has granted is reversible. The legitimacy of six unanimous or near unanimous U.N. Security Council Resolutions demanding Iran cease enrichment as a result of its non-compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty’s safeguards agreement can never be restored. The billions of dollars in sanctions relief Iran receives might very well pump new life into Tehran’s nuclear program. After all, when the European Union nearly tripled trade with Iran between 2000 and 2005, the Iranian government responded by spending the preponderance of its hard currency windfall on its nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

Perhaps, diplomats hope that, with some pressure relieved, Iranian officials will now negotiate sincerely during the next six months to resolve its nuclear file permanently. If so, they will be disappointed. By rewarding Iran for decades of defiance, negotiators have now set a precedent by which, whenever Tehran needs cash, it can restart enrichment and then demand billions in payment for temporary suspensions. In effect, Iran has replicated North Korea’s strategy: blackmail for cash and technology.

Second term presidents always seek legacies. President Clinton pushed hard at Camp David II to end the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Palestinian chairman Yasser Arafat walked away, and violence increased exponentially. Likewise, President George W. Bush sought a comprehensive settlement with North Korea. His administration removed North Korea from its list of terror sponsors and lifted some sanctions. In response, Pyongyang redoubled its nuclear and ballistic missile programs and accelerated terrorism against South Korea.

Unfortunately, the Iranian nuclear deal appears to fall into the same pattern. Not every country must be met halfway, and not every compromise is wise. The difference between appeasement and compromise is often determined only in historical hindsight. When historians consider the Geneva deal, they likely will categorize it as the former.

Post by:
Topics: Iran

soundoff (139 Responses)
  1. Joseph McCarthy

    This is one of the very few things that Barack Obama did right since he assumed the Presidency. Now there's going to be a lot of ignoramuses here ranting against it and go on screaming for another obscene war in the Middle East. These people have no idea about the horrors and the heartbreak of war nor do they care since they won't be in it!

    November 24, 2013 at 11:54 am | Reply
    • bobcat2u

      I couldn't agree more JM. It's always the knee jerk reaction of these computer battlefield warriors. They've gotten really good at killing those bad guys on the screen while not having to worry about getting shot at. If they could be made to face the reality just one time, I believe the mentality would change quickly. They know they are safe from war, ( at least for now ) so they think nothing of the true warriors who go out their to protect their freedoms. But when the next one does start, there's a strong possibility the draft will be reinstated. I want them to come on these boards the.
      And on this deal with Iran, I agree the benefit of the doubt should be given. We are now at the point of "Show Me" and if they are truly serious, the results will be evident. If not, it's back to square one with the screw being turned even tighter.

      November 24, 2013 at 1:03 pm | Reply
      • j. von hettlingen

        Why does Bibi Netanyahu think he knows Iran better than the rest of the world and that he's right about Iran. He's trying to make us look naïve and stupid. Let's hope he's wrong.
        He should give this deal a chance. It isn't a big deal, just an overture. More substantive talks will follow, that would lead to a more sustainable agreement. What did he mean that Israel reserved the right to defend itself?

        November 24, 2013 at 2:49 pm |
      • banasy©

        Bono wants the US to fight its proxy wars. Nothing less will do.

        November 24, 2013 at 2:52 pm |
      • banasy©

        *Bibi. DYAC.

        November 24, 2013 at 3:17 pm |
      • ✠RZ✠

        Writings on the wall. The MIC, Saudis, and Israelis want to attack Iran, but Russia and China say no dice. NATO goes along with whatever. Big sanctions, no nukes. No ones happy. So ya broker a deal, things go well for a while but than suddenly it appears that Iran has a nuke (sort of like WMDs in Iraq and chemical weapons in Syria). Then Israel goes Defcon 2 but Russia and China throw in the towel at the last second allowing you know who to conventionally blow the smithereens out of Iran, invade, and occupy. In the end, the Saudis are smiling, the MIC makes a killing, and Nethanyahoo gets to say "See, I told ya so". I really hope I'm wrong, but for some this can't happen fast enough.

        November 24, 2013 at 3:42 pm |
      • Quinton

        In fact bobcat2u, those filthy creeps who operate those monster drones need to be indicted and brought to the ICC and dealt with appropriately. This is no more than legalized mass homicide and someone sorely needs to put a stop to it!

        November 24, 2013 at 3:57 pm |
      • Fed up Vet

        Really? I remember a hand full of shipmates and devil dogs that did not come back with us because of Iranian IED's and other munitions that mysteriously ended up in Afghanistan and Iraq. I'm sure the 2 that make it back on our second deployment do remember that very well every time they look down at where their Legs and arms used to be. One of them can only look down with one eye. This has been conveniently forgotten. We have a administration that can't seem to get anything right, can't roll out something as simple as a website in 2013, a POTUS that doesn't know anything or conveniently forgets or is somehow always left out of the loop.

        Iran is not to be trusted, this administration is so hungry for some positive validation they are willing to do something as idiotic as according to Kerry "the beginnings of a peace deal" At the same time Iranian leadership proclaims victory telling their people the nuclear Iran will go on. I mean really? This is a country that has weekly Death to America get together's. Their president is nothing but a glorified Mayor with no real power, the Mullahs are the true power in Iran and they haven't changed one bit.

        November 25, 2013 at 2:51 pm |
      • banasy©

        So your answer is to get more people blown up, Vet?

        Save the hyperbole.

        November 25, 2013 at 4:09 pm |
      • banasy©

        And not to put too fine a point on it, but there are plenty of "death to Islam" rhetoric going on in the US, also.

        November 25, 2013 at 4:13 pm |
      • nairobi

        America's dealings with Iran is not a knee jerk reaction. We've been trying to prevent nukes from getting into their hands for years. Iran has been lying and hiding their true intentions for quite a long time. So, if they are lying about their nuclear weapons program, maybe they are lying about their intentions to use nuclear program for peace.

        November 26, 2013 at 10:50 am |
      • nairobi

        "death to Islam" rhetoric comes from the very few people without any political power. "death to Israel" has been spoken of by the political and religious leaders of Iran. big difference.

        November 26, 2013 at 10:51 am |
  2. Ace

    I wonder, all the backstabbing and behind-the-scenes vilification and exposure of the Iranian regime... Michael, do you ever expose the double-talking, international law-breaking, nuclear-armed non-NPT Israel for what it says to the public and what it does behind closed doors? Something tells me that you do not.

    November 24, 2013 at 12:13 pm | Reply
    • ApolloSpeaks

      It's not because Israel has nukes that Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Kuwait and other Arab states are considering joining the nuclear club.

      November 25, 2013 at 10:10 am | Reply
  3. thomas1

    This would be a deal for the Iranians to lose. One misstep, and the sanctions become more severe.

    My immediate concern is how will Netanyahu play this militarily. Will he enrage the Christian and Muslim world by attacking days before Thanksgiving or Christmas–despite an agreement by the P5+1?

    The agreement headed by Secretary of State John Kerry must, ironically, torment The Israeli PM since it only became known to Kerry a few years ago of his Jewish ancestry.

    November 24, 2013 at 12:25 pm | Reply
    • bobcat2u

      You are right thomas 1, The biggest threat to this agreement is Netanyahu. The man is showing himself as a man who does not want peace. Everything that comes out of his mouth is war and suspi cion.

      November 24, 2013 at 1:10 pm | Reply
      • nairobi

        if a man makes a direct threat to you, do you ignore it? when Iran says they want to nuke Israel, i take them at their word. no reasonable person just ignores that type of rhetoric. i wouldn't

        November 26, 2013 at 10:45 am |
    • Fred

      Peace is not a word that sits well with Netanyahu. Maybe if he displayed a little commitment toward dismantling the illegal West Bank settllements then he may be taken more seriously.

      November 25, 2013 at 3:27 pm | Reply
      • banasy©

        And there you go, Fred.
        Israel breaks resolutions all the time.

        November 25, 2013 at 4:15 pm |
  4. saywhat

    'Create another N.Korea" balderdash.
    We should have gone the way of rationality years back. With Ahmedinijad's departure and the change in Iranian leadership this was the moment to seize in our own interests.The other threat to world peace Netanyahu had to be kept at a distance along with the Saudis on this. They can be told to pound sand.
    The Obama admin showed a lot of courage and thought with an eye solely on America's interest and world peace to stand up to the forces active in spreading hate, fear and paranoia to further their own agenda. let them be tormented. America comes first.

    November 24, 2013 at 1:07 pm | Reply
    • bobcat2u

      Good afternoon saywhat my friend
      The scare mongering was also my first thought. Why are they so afraid to give a benefit of the doubt ? I mean, it's not like we have opened them up for business as usual. If Iran is truly serious, it will be evident in short order. The biggest threat, as you have said, is Netanyahu. I would not put it past him just flat out attack Iran now.

      November 24, 2013 at 1:16 pm | Reply
      • nairobi

        you think America will toughen up our stance against Iran if we catch Iran being untruthful? we've caught Iran being untruthful many times. and instead of toughening up on Iran, we've become more softer.

        November 26, 2013 at 10:55 am |
    • ann

      What change? Ayatollah was in charge with Amadinijad, and still is with Rhouhani. Rhouhani was already famous for his boasting about deceiving nuclear weapons inspector in the past. He is the last person who should have been trusted, despite the liberal media whitewashing Rhouhani's "charm offensive." Rhouhani is not a moderate by any stretch of the imagination. The rate of Iranian dissidents being hanged since Rhouhani took office is greater than during Amadinijad's rule. The sanctions were working and Ayatollah knew that if they relativistic Obama would grab the chance at the PR, and Iran would get a reprieve and be able to continue to develop their nuclear weapons in secret once they have shored up their economy so their own people don't finally throw them out.

      There isn't any mature person who believes Iran's nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. This agreement is a collective "look the other way" with the most extreme cynicism.

      Obama supporters who think that those of us who are opposed to this deal are war mongers are sadly mistaken. Most of us believe that lifting sanctions at this precise time threw away 7 years of difficult coalitions building and exerting pressure on Iran to DISMANTLE there program – the pipeline to make the bombs; and not just turning off the spigot which can easily be switched back on as the Ayatollah demands.

      Indeed, watch as Obama and the rest of the West is held hostage by this new arrangement.

      November 25, 2013 at 11:06 pm | Reply
  5. chrissy

    So very true @ Joseph! And i am so sick and tired of hearing WHAT Netanyahusanidiot wants!!! When did he become in charge of the US anyway? And all the warmongering congressional leaders that were against this, let their feet be the 1st and only ones on the ground if a war happens!! And hellooo @ bobcat and @ saywhat!

    November 24, 2013 at 1:20 pm | Reply
    • bobcat2u

      The sergeant-major growled at the young soldier: “I didn’t see you at camouflage training this morning.”

      “Thank you very much, sir.”

      November 24, 2013 at 2:13 pm | Reply
      • banasy©


        November 24, 2013 at 7:11 pm |
  6. bobcat2u

    Hellooo chrissy

    This "could" turn out to be a very good move. Time will tell. But it is essential we let it play out. The ramifications of a peaceful Iran are immense. Netanyahu and our glorious warmonger lawmakers, who's pockets are heavy with Israeli cash, are the biggest threat to peace right now.

    November 24, 2013 at 1:47 pm | Reply
  7. chrissy

    Haven't THEY been our biggest threat all along? Seriously, they need to be prosecuted for crimes against our country! Treason totally!

    November 24, 2013 at 2:34 pm | Reply
  8. banasy©

    I am hopeful.
    Diplomacy beats war every time.

    November 24, 2013 at 2:36 pm | Reply
  9. 100 % Innocent Eth

    Christian AAmericans(Who established America for all of US), loves peace.
    But, Jewish from anywhere loves War, causes trouble, hardly pushed Christian-Americans to go to war and die.

    Does Jewish care for Christians in America and beyond?!?

    My answer is, absolutely NO!!

    Your answers are, ......

    November 24, 2013 at 2:37 pm | Reply
    • banasy©

      You conflate all Jews with Netanyahu?

      November 24, 2013 at 2:49 pm | Reply
    • bobcat2u

      The majority of Jewish people are just like the rest of us. While most crave peace and unity, others are blinded by the difference in people and their cultures and desire to eliminate those differences. There are warmongers amongst all the peoples of this earth.

      November 24, 2013 at 3:54 pm | Reply
    • ann

      You are a bigot.

      Jews, Israelis and even your reviled Netanyahu are more filled with justice, love and peace than your prejudiced racist mind could comprehend.

      November 25, 2013 at 11:09 pm | Reply
  10. rightospeak

    Another biased , propaganda article ! Maybe an Arab should write a more balanced one.

    November 24, 2013 at 3:52 pm | Reply
  11. chrissy

    Lol @ j von, Netanyahusanidiot is just a manipulator! And peace is NOT part of his agenda at all.

    November 24, 2013 at 4:05 pm | Reply
    • j. von hettlingen

      True! The author is a prisoner of his own pessimism and fear.

      November 25, 2013 at 3:16 pm | Reply
  12. chrissy

    Lol @ banasy, i bet bono is glad you made that correction.

    November 24, 2013 at 4:06 pm | Reply
    • banasy©

      I respect Bono greatly, Chrissy.

      November 24, 2013 at 7:15 pm | Reply
  13. rightospeak

    If one mentions North Korea, one needs to know who created North Korea. Both Koreas should have been united long ago for the sake of Korean people, but unfortunately someone is making money on their misery. That is not mentioned, just the bogeyman idea. Oh, if we only had a non -monopolistic media the truth would come out !

    November 24, 2013 at 4:20 pm | Reply
    • Joseph McCarthy

      In fact rightospeak, the Russians should have been given the right to occupy all of Korea right after WW2 just as the U.S. occupied the whole of J apan. This move alone would have prevented the Korean War(1950-1953) from breaking out! Why can't people see that, I wonder?

      November 25, 2013 at 8:59 am | Reply
      • WERTWERT32452345

        I see your point, Joseph. How right you are! Unfortunately, most people here are just too ignorant to agree with you!

        November 26, 2013 at 9:57 am |
  14. rightospeak

    The whole discussion on Iran is a farce-you have to be very brainwashed not to see the contradictions.

    November 24, 2013 at 4:23 pm | Reply
  15. chrissy

    Lol me too @ banasy, he was my brothers friend.

    November 24, 2013 at 7:47 pm | Reply
    • banasy©

      Whoa. Cool!

      November 24, 2013 at 9:02 pm | Reply
  16. Amit-Atlanta-USA

    Hearty Congrats to the author for publishing this factual account of why Iran can't be trusted. It's indeed surprising to see such an adverse opinion on Iran (or for that matter any Muslim country) on CNN-Fareed Zakaria-GPS. Incidentally, Mr. Zakaria himself is a COVERT ISLAMIST defending all things Islamic, and an OVERT supporter of the Iranian Nuclear program given the barrage of opinions he wrote here on CNN-FZ-GPS castizing America for being intolerant of Iran (even a NUCLEAR IRAN).

    Having said that a simple fact remains that no country has gone ahead with a spirited Missile program (IRBMs, ICBMs) w/o a covert program for developing nuclear weapons.....a point the author has not brought up!

    November 24, 2013 at 8:16 pm | Reply
    • rightospeak

      You seem to be the author's amit and you probably work for CNN and always try to attack Zakaria from my observation. You always try to show that you are smarter than he is , that you know more .Why does the management of CNN allow this Armpit -Atlanta comments to stay and other people's comments are removed ? Is there a connection between the management at CNN and Amit ? That is the question.

      November 28, 2013 at 10:30 am | Reply
  17. chrissy

    Lol @ banasy im assuming that last post was to me. One day ill tell you that story. And also just how awesome bono was to my brother up to the day he died! You will have even more respect for him than you presently do! And hes living proof that rockers are caring!

    November 24, 2013 at 9:59 pm | Reply
  18. thomas1

    If Benny wants to start lobbing missiles, who's going to stop him? Perhaps he hasn't received assurances the US will follow his lead? Reports of 60-70 warheads: he doesn't seem meek or reserved with that firepower. Is he anticipating AIPAC as his Washington savior?

    November 24, 2013 at 10:52 pm | Reply
  19. Joey Isotta-Fraschini©

    I agree with all who supported the deal in the comment's above.
    My translation of criticism of this diplomatic effort is, "I really want you to stick it to Iran! Go ahead, America, and show them that Israel is the boss!"

    November 25, 2013 at 5:53 am | Reply
    • rongoodman

      'Let's you and him fight".

      November 25, 2013 at 8:54 am | Reply
  20. Luther

    No, not North Korea – they don't have anything in common. NATO countries will also not allow any military collaborations between USA – S.Korea, because South Korean secret intelligence networks cannot be trusted, because they often showed their anti-western activities. That why we in EU want greater FRANCE, ITALY and GREAT BRITAIN leadership for the NATO.

    November 25, 2013 at 5:57 am | Reply
  21. Bulos Qoqish

    Of course, the article writer disingenuously omits mentioning the elephant in the living-room side of this issue, namely, "what is the alternative to negotiating a settlement that both Iran and its Western tormentors are willing to live with"?

    The answer, of course - and it's amazing how often the neo-cons, Likudniks, settler advocates and Republicans are allowed by the U.S. mainstream media, to get away without acknowledging it - is, "Israel and America launching an illegal, devastating, unprovoked, criminal war of aggression against Iran in the form of a bombing campaign that would slaughter thousands of completely innocent Iranian civilians, enrage all of Iran (including its opposition, which would collapse and be forced to support the mullahs, in the wave of nationalist outrage that would inevitably follow this kind of treacherous Western aggression) and - last but certainly not least - make it virtually guaranteed that Iran WOULD develop a deliverable nuclear weapon at some point in the future, if only to deter another such criminal attack".

    It bewilders me how the neo-cons and Likudniks are allowed, by "news" sources like CNN, to endlessly rant and rave about "Obama's 'appeasement' of Iran", etc., without being forced to clearly acknowledge what their wonderful alternative is. Come ON, CNN, do your JOB - make both sides speak honestly to the issue, rather than just printing these kinds of cheap shots verbatim and falsely giving readers the impression that there's some magic solution to the Iran nuclear issue that Obama refuses to use, "just because he's a 'weakling'".

    November 25, 2013 at 9:45 am | Reply
    • rightospeak

      CNN can not do any objective reporting , Bulos , because they are a part of monopolistic media run by corporations that profit from wars.

      November 28, 2013 at 10:37 am | Reply
  22. Charles

    I"If Iran’s nuclear program has always been peaceful as Tehran claims, then it would have had no need to hide enrichment plants and other facilities from inspectors." – Brazil doesn't allow inspection of its facilities either. Should we simply assume that they have nefarious goals as well?

    November 25, 2013 at 10:30 am | Reply
  23. Zulqarnain

    One sided and stupid!

    November 25, 2013 at 11:40 am | Reply
  24. Hoss

    It is all about regional hegemony by Israelis not Nuclear Iran. After all, militarily Israel can more than handle Iran. All Netanyahu is accomplishing with his ugly tantrum is threatening the survival of US-Israel relationship.

    November 25, 2013 at 1:14 pm | Reply
  25. whatever

    israel has nukes. pakistan has nukes. n korea has nukes. so why not iran? pakistan and n korea are worse than iran. iran is also a relatively poor isolated country not china or soviet in cold war era. we deal with saudis who arguably as bad or worse than iran.

    November 25, 2013 at 1:18 pm | Reply
  26. chrissy

    @ Fed up vet, are you ok with how our congressional children have run this country into the ground i wonder? Because the way i see it the biggest threat to the US at this time is the very people appointed to run it! And by that im talking Congress, the biggest traitors this country has EVER had!

    November 25, 2013 at 3:03 pm | Reply
    • Quinton

      Thank you, chrissy. I couldn't have said it better! What's wrong with ignorant people like Fed up Vet, anyway? Are they really that kill crazy? Judging by his posts, one would think that he never finished grade school or he's that psychopathic. Either way, he's wrong, wrong and wrong!

      November 25, 2013 at 5:39 pm | Reply
  27. Jack 2

    This author has a clue. We should never trust Iran and judge them by their most recent actions.

    November 25, 2013 at 3:15 pm | Reply
  28. NOman

    North korea must be detroyed. North korea always threaten Sourth korea with their nuclear bomb and ballistic missile.
    Idespite of that, In south korea, all anti-government protesters are connected with north korea. So they must be eliminated too. Don't believe that protesters, they are all north korea's 'Useful Idiots'.

    November 25, 2013 at 3:32 pm | Reply
  29. chrissy

    @ NOman, no country should be destroyed! There are good and bad individuals in EVERY country on this planet! Our job is to turn the bad INTO good!

    November 25, 2013 at 4:03 pm | Reply
1 2 3

Post a comment


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.