That’s a very reasonable comment!

Half the decisions made at large organizations are wrong. There’s plenty of literature on c-suite decision-failures. This means there is room for improvement

I hate it when Americans think they have more freedom than anyone else

Revisionist history! The US propped up the Shah of Iran. Go back and read about the revolution as it’s clear to me there’s much you are ignorant about.

Radicalization of Iran was caused directly by the USA— in a similar way that the USA was responsible for Osama bin Laden

And the opposite implication is to go to war, to prevent war.

Imagine being Iran for a moment. Iran requires nuclear power as they became a net-energy-importer about a decade ago. They signed onto an international treaty, only for a US President to unilaterally withdraw from said treaty.

So now Iran has 2 options: acquire nuclear weapons to deter foreign invasion & war, or attempt to acquire nuclear weapons for that act to cause a foreign invasion.

Iran is sure to be invaded by a foreign state should they not acquire nuclear weapons. North Korea and Ukraine are the best precedents

Nuclear weapons will proliferate as the plans have existed in publicly accessible locations for well over 50 years

> Especially when it is within their means to deny them?

Written like it’s a bureaucratic application review that will simply be stamped with “denied”

I’m not sure why you brought Israel up

Is that how international law, international relations, or how a civilized society handles anything?

The USA has a bigger stick, so don’t pick up a counter stick?

Your comment sounds like weak sauce for the weak-minded

First, a treaty is only good until a counterparty pulls out, of said treaty. Perhaps message DJT on TruthSocial and ask why he unilaterally pulled out of the nuclear agreement with Iran.

Why shouldn't Iran be able to defend itself against a foreign invader? Having a nuclear weapon has been demonstrated on the world stage to be a quality deterrent to foreign invasion- just ask North Korea.

You might also ask Ukraine about nuclear deterrence. They gave up their weapons after the fall of the USSR, and signed a treaty with the successor to the USSR. The successor to the USSR pulled out of the treaty decades later. Ukraine has since been invaded by the successor to the USSR.

Which nuclear capable states have been invaded by a foreign state since 1946?

Hahahha. Iran wouldn’t be the first religious state, the first terrorist state, or the first religious-terrorist state, to develop and maintain nuclear weapons.

But please, carry on with the bigoted hypocrisy

Why shouldn’t a sovereign state create nuclear weapons to deter foreign invaders?

Fox News has posted some infamous bar graphs

Counterpoint: Mutually Assured Destruction

State sovereignty. See yourself out