Yes, I get your point, heric, and it's a worthy one. I feel that the main impetus for a war against Iran is coming from the USA and the UK, but undoubtedly there are other voices chiming in as well.

pdq - I am by no means convinced that the Iranians are building any nuclear weapons. Neither am I convinced that they are not. I simply don't know. If they were building any, I would consider it enormously unlikely that they would attack Israel first with those weapons and guarantee their own destruction...because I don't think they're insane. You obviously do think they're insane, and that's why we have different expectations in that regard.

I think that if Iran had 10 or 20 nukes ready right now...and the means to deliver them...that Iran, Israel, and the American fleet and everyone else around there would be a lot safer than they are now, because no one would dare start a regional war under those conditions.

You don't think so, because you think they're insane. Well, it's very convenient to imagine that your "enemy" is insane when you are yourself planning to commit a violent and insane act of unprovoked aggression against him, isn't it? It makes it "okay". What a sad line of reasoning.

Saddam wasn't insane either. He was a criminal dictator, but he wasn't insane, he was quite pragmatic. I think the Iranians are probably pragmatic too. They have to be, because they're outgunned by the USA/UK and Israel. But the USA always loves painting their next chosen "enemy" (victim) as being led by someone who is "insane", because that apparently justifies the USA launching a pre-emptive strike. I regard it as doubletalk, meant to get the American public onside. Scare your people into supporting unprovoked aggression against someone, then do it.

That was the deal in Iraq. I expect that will be the deal in Iran too.