8 ms·
They were attacked because they did not yet have a nuke. Countries with nukes are usually not pushed around much. From what I see, Iran absolutely needs one to
by srean 8mo ago
They were attacked because they did not yet have a nuke. Countries with nukes are usually not pushed around much.
From what I see, Iran absolutely needs one to be left alone.
As for terrorism you should be looking at Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.
- ivell 8mo agoIndia attacked Pakistan regardless of nuke. It is not a given that nuke brings security.
- srean 8mo agoIt doesn't guarantee of course, but one does not face external existential threats. India will not dare to overrun Pakistan nor does it want to. (Few crackpots from both those countries aside)
- roncesvalles 8mo agoPakistan effectively doesn't have nukes. Pakistan's nukes are kept in a de-mated state and it takes hours if not days to get them ready for launch. They're too close to terrorist groups in the Middle East (geographically and otherwise) to have nukes that are a button-press away. This gives them enough deterrence against a total invasion (because of the "what if" factor) but not against random airstrikes.