[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but our future security is pretty important to all of us I would hope.

[/ QUOTE ]

ORLY? Do the people of Irans future security matter? Or the people of Iraqs? Or is that unimportant to this argument becuase we are the world police?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a US citizen. The security of US citizens takes priority over anyone else in the world. What do you think? Is an Iranians security more important than your countries citizens security?

[/ QUOTE ]

Shouldn't the Iranians have that same feeling about their security? It seems like the only way that a country can ensure that the U.S. doesn't mess with them is to acquire nuclear weapons. It seems like pursuing a nuclear weapon is a wise option if you think that we're about to attack you.

It seems highly doubtful that Iran would actually use a nuclear weapon. There is some concern that they might "lose" one or have insecure facilities though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the fear is more that the regime might hand a nuke off to a proxy, ally, or even to an anonymous terrorist cell. I agree they probably wouldn't use one themselves offensively if they could be positively identified as being the perpetrator.

Given the Iranian regime's penchant for utilizing proxy warfare (Hezbollah, and IED attacks in Iraq), there is also the concern that Iran having a nuke would make the regime feel that they can pursue their goals via proxy more aggressively and with less fear of direct reprisal. Thus Hezbollah, Syria, and any proxies operating in Iraq would be strengthened and emboldened by the mere fact that Iran would have obtained nuclear weapons.