So Ed T the reason that the NATO alliance was formed originally must be cast in stone and the raison d'être can never be altered to reflect current times and changing threats? What a "special" world you must live in.

Israel not a friend of Iran?? Were it not for Israel and the USA Iran would have lost the 1980 Iran/Iraq War. A fact conveniently forgotten by most. As to what has been said or not said regarding "wiping Israel from the map", the only perception of what has been said that matters is the Israeli one - they after all are the ones specifically mentioned, so if the leadership od Iran is speaking figuratively then it is encumbent upon that leadership to convince Israel and the rest of the world that it does not intend to actually wipe Israel off the map - so far they have made no move in that direction at all and their state sponsorship of both Hamas and Hezbollah and their willingness to flood South Lebanon with thousands of medium range tactical rockets in defiance of UN Resolutions realistically can do nothing whatsoever do dispel Israeli misgivings about the situation.

I think that the IAEA has stated that Iran is not abiding by the terms and conditions of the Treaty - the main charge being that Iran has consistently acted in such a manner that IAEA inspectors cannot do their job (North Korea played the same game while it was a signatory of the nuclear NPT)

"The treaty says that "countries with nuclear weapons will move towards disarmament; countries without nuclear weapons will not acquire them; and all countries can access peaceful nuclear energy."

Some reports that I have read indicate that the USA is slated to upgrading their nukes (likely followed by China and Russia). Would this not be a violation of the treaty?"

Here we have your compartmentalisation effect again - all of the about are connected - the major nuclear powers have in fact reduced their stockpile of nuclear weapons by over 65% - Upgrading something does not automatically mean any increase in numbers, size, or capability.

"let's not forget majors who have not ratified and have obtained nukes (Pakistan and India) outside the treaty, (who are friends of the West) who also pose a threat to world peace."

Ah so whilst Pakistan was regarded as a pariah state by the US and India was closely tied to the USSR, i.e. in the time both those counries acquired their nuclear weapons - they were not a threat to world peace?? How come? And what was that you said at the beginning? - Oh yes:

"if what you see as an enemy of yours has superiour military power (and most likely likely nukes,) and you see them as a threat is it completely illogical that you would seek the same?"

So while nations with a recent history of hostile intent are acquiring nuclear weapons you wish everybody else to get rid of them?? Are you totally barking mad?

Stringsinger: "one thing for sure, they rid themselves of the Russians and they will do the same for Americans."

Well not until 2024 at least according to recently signed bilateral agreements between Afghanistan and the USA - and US businesses get the contracts to re-equip the ANSF.