> The only answer I have is the one that Trump keep on repeating, about how Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. Then you don't have an answer. The Israeli m

> The only answer I have is the one that Trump keep on repeating, about how Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. Then you don't have an answer. The Israeli media played that line for close to 40 years, lamenting Iran being "mere months" away from a nuke - for decades at a time. Iran has nothing to do with American homeland security. America's involvement in Iran is purely for political and economic reasons, there is no credible threat to America in Iran any more than there is in Sudan or Yemen. > If I am the POTUS [...] I would be very concerned about what happens when the term of the agreement expires. Genuinely, why? The JCPOA is a joint plan, America's opinion only matters insofar as we can compel Iran to comply. Pulling out increases the likelihood that Iran races to build a bomb with their HEU. Bombing them, like in the Twelve-Day War and Operation Midnight Hammer, did not compel any compliance. The uranium is still a problem. > So when he says he want a permanent solution to Iran's nuclear threat, I think that is why. I think that is bogus. Iran is not a credible nuclear threat to the United States or it's citizens, so the US would only be going to war to protect Israel. In which case, we don't even need the nuke pretext and we can just admit that it's a protectionist war to defend our fragile satellite state instead of lying about ICBM threats.