Everything about Iran has to be bad, apparently

Western intelligence has known it for years"

The military blogosphere -if blogs picked the story up at all - was not pleased. So far the only reactions I found considered the "news" to be horrible (if true).

Now think again. What would it mean if Iran has had operational nukes for years?

It would mean that they didn't even bother to use them for the purpose of deterrence, much less actually use them or even give them to terrorists: All the horror scenarios about Iran's behaviour as nuclear power would have been obliterated by recent history.

Yet, many people are so much conditioned to think that everything about Iran is bad that they don't really seem to think any more.

S Ortmann


  1. "What would it mean if Iran has had operational nukes for years?"

    If they only have a few then not much, starting a war with such a small amount isn't "good"
    strategy, the retaliation would be far more damaging than any damage Iran could inflict. Now if they plan to build up a larger stockpile before using we have a problem. Now if Iran has many more and has for awhile then if would seriously damage the idea that they are bent on using them as soon as they can.

  2. Do we believe american sources? remember last time.

    Would we reply with nuclear weapons? I'm not so sure, as it could very easily escalate into a muslim vs the west war.

    As they have't used these nuclear weapons either their waiting for more or their using them as a defence aid against Israel and USA