Discussion about this post

User's avatar
WigWag's avatar

Israel has a second strike capability with its nuclear capable Dolphin Class submarines. A nuclear strike on Israel would almost certainly result in a massive nuclear attack on Iran.

I think the biggest risk of an Iranian nuclear weapon is the impact it would have on other nations in the region. A nuclear armed Iran would surely inspire Saudi Arabia, Turkey and perhaps Egypt to at a least attempt to acquire their own nuclear arsenals. Pakistan will be happy to provide nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia (for a price). Turkey has the ability to develop and produce its own.

A nuclear armed Middle East, all thanks to Obama and Biden. Their horrific legacy will be cursing us for decades.

Expand full comment
IsThisTheRoomForAnArgument's avatar

Nice piece, as always.

The crux of the argument is in the piece's penultimate paragraph:

"It therefore seems unlikely that Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons would lead inevitably to war. But the regime would certainly be emboldened by its entry into the nuclear club. Its foreign policy would become more assertive, its sponsorship of regional and global terrorism more blatant. And of course, a nuclear-armed Iran would make every Middle East crisis more dangerous for the region and the world, raising the possibility that a miscalculation on one side or the other might end in catastrophe".

You could replace "Iran" in the penultimate paragraph above for "USA", "USSR", "Israel", or any actor, and could then note the consequences of "emboldened ... more assertive ... sponsorship ... crisis more dangerous ... miscalculation ... end in catastrophe", don't you think?

And couldn't you also come to the same conclusion in the final paragraph following?

"These are reasons enough to make sure that the <enter your chosen bad guy's name here> never, ever get their hands on the Bomb".

Expand full comment
12 more comments...

No posts