Doesn't MAD still apply?

[Pesky1]

Having grown up during the days where the concept of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) was held widely, I've been wondering. Trump (and Netanyahu) have launched devastating attacks on Iran and created a growing body count and world problem. The Liar in Chief has blathered that the reason was to prevent Iranian possession of nukes (on a list of reasons BTW).

Wait...question here.

Is there anyone who doubts that if Iran launched some primitive weapon, maybe against Israel, the sand around Tehran would immediately be turned to glass. And if they somehow managed to sneak one into a target city (in a shipping container say), Tehran would immediately be number one on the culprit list. Tehran could be hit after a nuclear blast somewhere even if they had not initiated it. MAD.

Well why don't we attack North Korea because of their terrorism? Oh, that's right, they have nuclear weapons. One can see how Iran might want one for protection from Israel and the U.S.

[Torchlight]

1. It's held in esteem by rational minds

While those of shallow thought dismiss it as a mere rhetorical obstacle, inconvenient to the greater pursuit of craven wealth. He doesn't care who burns or not.

That's my guess, anyway.

[Turbineguy]

2. The trump presidency has a good chance of becoming an extinction event.