Dan Huck

"Just Preemptive Total Devastation",  prior to now, had been the exclusive option of the God of Abraham. Under the terms of our new nuclear policy, not only are 2d class, non-nuclear weapon nations, not to be allowed to have enrichment capability, which they are entitled to under the terms of the NPT,  but the claim is being made by my country we will reserve the right to use a nuclear weapon against Iran and North Korea, neither of whom are at war with us

Our fear regarding Iran ostensibly is they 'may' develop the ability to create nuclear weapons, and if they do, they 'may', if they are enriching uranium even for peaceful purposes, develop the competence and have the wherewithal to actually create the weapon. The Obama Doctrine, which appears to state the US has determined it will decide on it's own, the option is on the table,  we will use a nuclear weapon first strike against Iran if we choose to.  I won't say unprovoked, because provocation can be in the eye of the beholder.

I'm sure we believe it will never come to that; I imagine every lawbreaker never thinks the worst case scenario of their evil endeavor will come to pass. However, they frequently do.

"We are doing it for a 'friend'", something like what former Mayor (of Boston) Curley once said. We want Israel, which wreaks havoc at the drop of a hat, not to feel left out in the cold, worried it might be unable to devastate Iran without suffering mutual destruction, to be assured we will do it for them, if Iran does not give in to Israeli and American ultimatums.

Is there not something indecorous and embarassing, perhaps shameful, about threatening a relatively weak  country (unarmed with nuclear weapons) with a nuclear weapon attack less than a week before an international Nuclear Security Summit we are sponsoring?