I am sure you really like to believe that, but I can't imagine what basis you have. For instance, Iran *does* nuke Israel, a first strike, ballistic missile attack. What do you actually see happening after that? There would NOT be a nuclear response, first of all. Even if we had an intuitive desire in our leadership to do so, at least two members of the UN Security Council would veto and one would probably even saber rattle that it would consider any sort of nuclear bombardment an attack given the potential downstream effects. And that is even before political pushback within the country, environmental and otherwise. So we already know we would be talking about conventional war to avoid setting off World War 3, but surely if we have learned anything in 15 years is that we lack the cultural and political will to wage a conventional war to a decisive and victorious conclusion -- after all, isn't victory an archaic term? So there really is no way to effectuate this war that pulverizes Iran. And they know it, of course. That is what an asymmetrical nuclear dynamic in the world would get us; asymmetry. Iran gets would get a relatively free reign to threaten nuclear attack at the very least as long as they keep the wheels greased with Moscow and the Chicoms. Even the scenario where Hezbollah nukes Israel for them -- so what if it can b traced back? They would just claim it was stolen. Hell they would say Mossad stole it and then lost it. And most in the political classes of the West would take the out, because calling that BS would mean having to do something about it.