President Obama last week trumpeted that he was able to find 36 retired flag officers who supported his agreement to "give diplomacy a chance." The media explained away this paltry number of signers by saying that "retired brass avoid firm positions on Iranian nuke deal."

Yesterday, August 25, a letter (text and signatories below) was delivered to the Republican and Democratic Senate and House leadership, signed by 190 (update: 214) retired United States generals and admirals, who called upon the Congress to reject the "defective" Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the Iran deal) because it "would threaten the national security and vital interests of the United States[.]"

We proved the lie to that excuse. Four to five volunteers from around the country in less than a week got 190 generals and admirals to sign a letter that urges Congress to reject the JCPOA because "this agreement will enable Iran to become far more dangerous, render the Mideast still more unstable and introduce new threats to American interests as well as our allies."

The flag officers called the removing of sanctions and the releasing of billions of dollars to the regime "unconscionable." They point out in the letter that even the Obama administration acknowledges that some portion of the funds will be used to support terrorism and that "these actions will be made all the more deadly since the JCPOA will lift international embargoes on Iran's access to advanced conventional weapons and ballistic missile technology." Just signing the deal has given Russia the green light to sell advanced missile weapons to Iran, as announced in the last few weeks.

The generals and admirals contradict the president's assertion that the agreement will "cut off every pathway" for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. Just as Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been saying, the generals and admirals conclude that "it actually provides Iran with a legitimate path" to acquiring nuclear weapons just "by abiding by the deal."

This letter is incredibly important. It states clearly that "in [the signatories'] judgment as former senior military officers," this agreement will not have the effect of preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

It is impossible to ignore the outpouring of military opposition to this deal by such a large group of former generals and admirals. And the opposition is not limited to these 190. The names keep pouring in, asking, as Lt. Gen. Hubert Smith wrote, "for the opportunity to participate in this most important action[.] ... I am very much opposed to the proposed Iran Nuclear Deal and wish to sign the letter."

In covering the letter, Carol Morello of the Washington Post goes out of her way to early on throw some negative light on the group:

… the signatories include retired generals and flag officers from every branch of service, including a handful who were involved in some public controversies during their careers. One is William G. “Jerry” Boykin, the former undersecretary of defense for intelligence under President George W. Bush and currently executive vice president of the Family Research Council. He had a history of making controversial speeches, including one in which he characterized U.S. military operations against Islamist extremist organizations as a Christian fight against Satan. It also was signed by John Poindexter and Richard Secord, who were involved in the Iran Contra affair in the Reagan administration, in which arms were sold to Iran to fund the Contras in Nicaragua.

Morello does not mention how incredible it was that a few people, mostly a woman named Marsha Halteman from New Orleans, in one week could get 190 flag officers to sign a public letter stating that "the JCPOA would threaten the national security and vital interests of the United States and, therefore, should be disapproved by the Congress."

Here is the text of the letter, with the signatories below: