I'd agree with you on some of those, Larry K. Not all, but some of them. I think North Korea, for example, has those bombs for defensive purposes, as it would be totally asinine and suicidal of them to think of attacking anyone with them first. On the other hand, it is fairly unlikely that anyone will attack them now, since they apparently have a few nukes to fire off in that scenario.

I've been to Cuba, and I think it is almost inconceivable that the Cubans would imperil themselves by being the first to fire a nuke at somebody. What would be the point? Useless and again, suicidal. If they had nukes already, though, it would certainly make other people less likely to invade them, wouldn't it?

Al Queda? You betcha! I agree with you there. Since Al Queda is not technically located anywhere specific that can easily be targeted accurately, they would be delighted to hit someone with a nuke.

India and Pakistan. Yeah, possibly...

Anyway, haven't got time to go through them all right now.

I've read a lot of stuff on the Net about Iran, and it's interesting how totally divergent the opinions are (depending on what axe the writer wants to grind). People are so prejudiced and subjective...how does one know who is telling the truth?

Some insist that Iran IS trying to make nuclear-grade Uranium. Others say that Iran is merely trying to make enriched Uranium such as is required to fuel their reactor, to generate electrical power, and they DO have a legal right to do that, do they not? And why shouldn't they?

As I am not there, am not a nuclear scientist, and do not know who is telling the final truth about it, I have no way of knowing if all this hoopla is real...or if it's just the propaganda runup to launching Bush's or Israel's next war of convenience.

I don't know. You don't know. None of us know. We just have our opinions, and our opinions are governed by our prejudices, which are in many cases extreme prejudices.

Yes, the president of Iran has said inflammatory things about wiping Israel off the map. So have any number of other Muslim personages in many countries. It's what their constituency likes to hear. So what? Does Iran actually have a capability to seriously threaten Israel? I don't think so, because Israel can obliterate them with a massive nuclear response, and they know it. Pancho does not rob the train when the train is carrying 1,000 well-armed soldiers with gatling guns and Pancho has a gang of 30 men with rifles.

What Iran can do, if it someday has a few nukes, is deter the USA and Israel from directly attacking Iran. The USA and Israel don't like being deterred, because they would rather be free to attack whom they please, whenever they please, with no real risk of serious loss in return...like shooting fish in a barrel.

Like Iraq and Serbia and Afghanistan.

I am suspicious that this is just another manufactured propaganda exercise, like the old and now discredited one about Iraq's nonexistent WMD.

If I was the Iranians, I would be almost 100% sure that I was going to be attacked shortly, and I would be desperate to get nuclear weapons ASAP just to deter that attack.

But if I was Israel, I'd probably be so paranoid by now as to feel that it was necessary to attack Iran immediately to forestall that from ever happening...

Sounds like a no-win situation to me. When you've got 2 sets of people who both think the other is insane, ungodly, treacherous, and totally murderous, how do you get them to deal fairly and honestly with one another?