On "Meet the Press" with Chuck Todd Sunday, former Secretary of State Colin Powell endorsed the Obama administration's nuclear agreement with Iran, which he called "a pretty good deal."

Powell, who endorsed candidate Barack Obama for president in 2008 despite having served for a Republican administration, went to bat for the president yet again Sunday by checking the administration's key talking points on the massively unpopular Iran deal. 

"Now, I know that there are objections to it, but here's why I think it's a good deal," said Powell. "One of the great concerns that the opposition has, that we're leaving open a lane for the Iranians to go back to creating a nuclear weapon in ten or 15 years. They're forgetting the reality that they have been on a superhighway for the last ten years to create a nuclear weapon or a nuclear weapons program, with no speed limit." 

Calling the terror-sponsoring Iranian regime's pledge to cut down on its uranium production a "remarkable reduction" which he's "amazed" they would do, Powell admitted that they might not comply with it. But he's not worried about that because "they get nothing until they show compliance" (a claim which critics would point out ignores the reality of the sanctions relief and assumes the ability of the UN to adequately inspect sites).

When pressed by Todd about Iran's expected continued support of terrorism in the region, Powell downplayed the issue and said that's not really what the deal's about. "We have to keep pushing on the bad behavior that the Iranians show constantly throughout the world," he said. "But this deal specifically had to do with the thing that was most concerning to the world, most dangerous to the world. And that was their nuclear program, which could produce a weapon in a very short period of time."

Concerning the majority of Congress disapproving of the deal, Powell said whatever Congress chose to do wouldn't matter anyway, so they might as well let the president get his way. "[ E]ven if we were to kill this deal, which is not going to happen, it's going to take effect anyway because all of these other countries that were in it with us are going to move forward, the UN is going to move forward, and a hundred nations have already agreed to this deal thinking it's a good deal," he said. 

Near the end of the discussion Powell described how he would reason with the radical Islamist Iranian regime, which has continually vowed to destroy Israel and thwart American interests in the region.

"If I was talking to the Iranians at a senior level, I would say, 'What do you think you're getting with these investment you've made in this all of these years? You think that you could actually use these without having the entire world condemn you the next day for being the only nation to have used nuclear weapons since 1945? Everybody will be against you,'" said Powell.

Below is the complete transcript of the exchange between Todd and Powell (via NBC News):

CHUCK TODD: ...let's start right with Iran. Is this a good deal?

COLIN POWELL: I think it is a good deal. I studied very carefully the outline of the deal and what's in that deal. And I've also carefully looked at the opposition to the deal. And my judgment, after balancing those two sets of information is that it's a pretty good deal.

Now, I know that there are objections to it, but here's why I think it's a good deal. One of the great concerns that the opposition has, that we're leaving open a lane for the Iranians to go back to creating a nuclear weapon in ten or 15 years. They're forgetting the reality that they have been on a superhighway for the last ten years to create a nuclear weapon or a nuclear weapons program, with no speed limit.

And in the last ten years, they have gone from 136 centrifuges up to something like 19,000 centrifuges. This agreement will bring them down to 5,000 centrifuges. All of these will be under IAEA supervision. And I think this is a good outcome. The other thing I've noticed is that they had a stockpile of something in the neighborhood of 12,000 kilograms of uranium. This deal will bring it down to 300 kilograms.

And it's a remarkable reduction. And I'm amazed that they would do this. But they have done it. And with respect to the plutonium effort, the plutonium reactor at Iraq, which is now starting to operate, it's going to be shut down, except for minor parts of it, and concrete will be poured into the reactor core vessel.

And so these are remarkable changes. And so we have stopped this highway race that they were going down. And I think that's very important. Now, will they comply with it? Will they actually do all of this? Well, they get nothing until they show compliance. And that's the important part of their arrangement.

CHUCK TODD: Well, the other criticism of this deal has to do with behavior changes. Why didn't we ask for-- it wasn't enough to just try to slow them down on their nuclear front or stop their ability to get a nuclear weapon. It is, should we also put in this deal having them stop the funding of Hamas, stop the funding of Hezbollah, stop the backing of Assad and Syria? What do you say to that criticism?

COLIN POWELL: I think all of those are important objectives. And they should not be set aside because of this deal. We have to keep pushing on the bad behavior that the Iranians show constantly throughout the world. But this deal specifically had to do with the thing that was most concerning to the world, most dangerous to the world. And that was their nuclear program, which could produce a weapon in a very short period of time.

That has been thrown into a detour. It isn't going to happen. And in ten or 15 years, we don't know what the future will hold. But it's not clear that in ten or 15 years from now, they will want to start it up again, or the material that has been under IAEA supervision for the ten or 15-year period will be available or suitable for such an increase. And so that's pretty good. The real issue I think that came down to the opposition is how do you verify?

And I'm reminded of what my former boss Ronald Reagan used to say when he talked to the Soviets, "Trust but verify." With respect to the Iranians, it's don't trust, never trust, and always verify. And I think a very vigorous verification regime has been put in place, with the IAEA and other international organizations.

And especially listening to Secretary of Energy Moniz, he really knows his stuff. He really knows his stuff. He's a nuclear physicist. And he and the intelligence community are confident that they can verify what is happening inside of Iran.

CHUCK TODD: We can chuck some of the opposition here in the United States politics, and that's fine. But there are allies in the Gulf and of course Israel are most opposed to this deal as well. And they in some ways have been generating the opposition here in the United States when it comes to this deal.

COLIN POWELL: Yeah I understand that.

CHUCK TODD: What do you say to their concerns, to the folks in Saudi Arabia and Israel?

COLIN POWELL: I think the this deal, which by the way, King Salman of Saudi Arabia did give his approval to this week when he was here with the president, but I think they will find over time, if it unfolds the way it is designed to unfold, they will see that they have been made more secure by derailing this Iranian nuclear program.

And we also have to keep in mind that we are in this with a number of other countries. All of the ones that have worked with us, China, Russia, Germany, France, Britain, they have already agreed to it. The British foreign secretary was already in Iran last week with a trade delegation. And so even if we were to kill this deal, which is not going to happen, it's going to take effect anyway because all of these other countries that were in it with us are going to move forward, the UN is going to move forward, and a hundred nations have already agreed to this deal thinking it's a good deal. And they're all going to be moving forward. We're going to be standing in the sidelines.

CHUCK TODD: You were involved in an administration that negotiated a nuclear deal that tried to stop North Korea from getting a nuclear weapon. That didn't work. Why would this deal not look like the North Korean deal in five years?

COLIN POWELL: Well, the North Korean deal was flawed from the 1994 original agreement, all the way through. And after a while, my view of North Korea was, you know, they really can never use a nuclear weapon without committing suicide. I think the same thing is true with Iran. You know, if I was with the Iranians, just like I said to the North Koreans on a number of occasions, "You do realize that any use, or anybody thinking they're going to use one of these, you are committing suicide because your capital and your society will be destroyed the next day."

If I was talking to the Iranians at a senior level, I would say, "What do you think you're getting with these investment you've made in this all of these years? You think that you could actually use these without having the entire world condemn you the next day for being the only nation to have used nuclear weapons since 1945? Everybody will be against you.

"Secondly, you won't accomplish any strategic purpose. You will have killed tens of thousands of people, destroyed part of the city, and the next day, you will see repercussions in terms of what will be done to you. And so this is something that is a waste of your money, a waste of your time, and I think that you ought to enter this deal with the full intention of complying with the outline of the deal, with what's required of you to do, and cooperate fully with the inspectors."

Now, people will say, "No, can't trust them." I don't trust them. I say we have a deal, let's see how they implement the deal. They don't implement it, bail out. None of our options are going. None of our options are going. But this is something we ought to pursue and try to make it happen under the terms under which the deal was reached.

Video via NBC News.