It’s here at the Corner, of course. But there have been some strong essays in other places that are worth a read:

Robert Satloff looks at some troubling but integral provisions of the deal.

Fred Kagan explains why they’re cheering in Tehran. Dov Zakheim makes a similar point by looking at an Iranian account of the deal.

Dany Pletka asks whether Iran is playing the long game while Obama focuses on the next 60 days.

To get a sense of the political landscape, it’s also worth reading this hesitant endorsement of the deal by the editors of the Washington Post — likewise the comments by former Obama official Dennis Ross.

On the liberal side, my favorite so far is from Matt Yglesias of the incomparable Vox, who explains that the deal’s critics “don’t actually have any arguments about what Obama has done wrong or how a different administration would park the situation in a better place. What they have instead are a lot of talking points, MacGuffins, red herrings, and distractions that aim to divert attention from the core issue — hawks’ desire to avoid diplomacy and have a war. ”

That’s the choice folks, as Obama might say. Only the foolish and misinformed would think that “no deal is better than a bad deal.”