3 Comments
User's avatar
тна Return to thread
severn's avatar

Ah but they don't have them yet. And I didn't say anything about invading. The point I was going for was for a possible calibrated response -- we're talking Iran. That there could be a case to made about a calibrated response because "nukes" (in development). I mean I'm not making that case, I'm just saying I can see some perhaps making it.

Expand full comment
Kathleen Weber's avatar

Yep. Maybe someone is making that case, but I fail to see how attacking Iran will make them less likely to develop nukes. I think it would make them want to speed up their program. The only way we can prevent the development of Iranian nukes is either to bribe Iran (unlikely) or take out the nuclear facility by infiltration or cyberattack. Or assassinate key personnel.

Expand full comment
severn's avatar

well wanting to and being able to are two different things. also i note there seems to have been a mid-east coalition against the attack. perhaps these same countries are not that interested in iran attaining well.. anything, either.

Expand full comment