Which seemed to be fine when those terrorists were fighting in Syria and Iraq, against IS. You can't really hide nuclear activity easily, even in 3 months - and also produce enriched Uranium to make plutonium at the same time, without developing a second hidden nuclear site, that you relocate to. Its a very complicated and expensive process to develop a nuclear warhead, even once you've gotten to the stage of building a nuclear reactor.

Then you have to develop the technology to miniaturise a warhead and develop means of delivering it. All the while managing to conceal radiation traces and employ and move the right people about etc.

I doubt any nation state could manage to develop nuclear weapons without giving themselves away.

I'm not saying though Iran couldn't, but that its almost impossible - especially with the capacity the US has in terms of satellite coverage.

Iran already has long range missiles, which it bought I think from North Korea. What it doesn't have is the capacity to build its own.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

I think they considered something like that and rejected it.

Humanity traded for war aims......Afterwards there's been a cultural brainwashing about the whole thing.

Japan could no longer threaten the US.....They decided to make that permanent.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Iran also sponsors terrorists in Palestine, Lebanon and even South America.

I'm not sure I agree with that at all. The US has not always been on top of what North Korea had been up to over the years. Weapons with uranium can more easily be hidden underground, away from weapons inspectors and satellites. That's the advantage over plutonium and what North Korea has been doing.

Edited by Penge Eagle (26 Oct 2017 9.39pm)

Iran isn't a singular being, it can't have motivations. I suppose if you look at some of the rhetoric of its leaders over time you'd assume they'd have malign intentions but that's true of many politicians. Why do we think the Iranians are different? Israel already has nuclear weapons and isn't even a signatory to the NPT or allow IAEA inspections. So they will be fine as they have the capacity to nuke anyone, not sure why this is less of a problem than Iran which does not.

I do recall seeing a documentatary about the role of the British in the removal of Mossadeq from power in Iran over its attempt to nationalise oil in the 60's I think. So it's not surprising that there is hostility within Iran towards the West, but then I'm not sure about the timings of their involvement in Syria and so on.

LOL

We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]

Althougn Bin Laden was killed on Obama's watch, and he gave the order, the hunt by the US military had been going on since 11 Sept 2001. It could have happened under anyones presidency.
Obama also promised to close Guantanamo Bay, and he didn't/couldn't.
Thankfully these restrictions on what Presidents can and can't do, are now being applied to Trump. The guy is a liability and I am thankful most of his decisions are checked by the Senate .

I was generally appalled by the lack of early intervention against IS. That could've been nipped-in-the-bud so much earlier.
Then again, the arms industry has made shed loads of Wonga. Major arms buyers like Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, etc, who never get into wars. Where do these weapons go to ? (have a guess)
and now we are using much more military force to defeat IS. Air strikes. A safe way to keep using buying more arms. (unless you are a Jordanian pilot)

And the citizens of Iraq spending years under a barbaric regime.

The whole thing stinks

"The facts have changed", Rishi Sunak