WILL IRAN TEST THEIR FIRST NUKE, OR USE IT?

It's obvious to anyone with a brain that despite Ahmadinejad's denials in the West, IRAN WANTS NUKES.

It's obvious because there is no other possible explanation for Iran's two decades of lies and deceit about their secret enrichment program - in direct violation of their responsibilities under the IAEA and NPT. (The decades of aid which Iran has received for the nuclear POWER program was predicated on them upholding the terms of the IAEA rules and the NPT.) They would not risk it for less.

It's obvious because there is no other logical reason for Iran to build an enrichment array at the cost of hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars (with the added costs of making them SECRET and as untouchable by aerial assault as possible). AFTER ALL, IRAN STILL HAS NO WORKING REACTOR WITH WHICH TO USE ENRICHED URANIUM; THE ONLY OTHER USE FOR IT IS TO MAKE NUKES.

Therefore, I think it's important to ask two questions:

1. Will Iran test their nuke(s)? And -
2. How might Iran TEST their nuke(s)?

Will they do an underground test? PROBABLY. They don't have the sophisticated computers to do a simulation, and they really REALLY need to know that they work.

And to achieve the most effective deterrent, they need to be able to prove they have nukes. (Although Israel has achieved deterrence with the merely INFERENCE.)

But I WOULD ESTIMATE that Iran will not test their first nuke until they have several others on hand --- so that they could announce that they have others right after a successful test, and thereby achieve deterrence for any retaliation.

That's why we must preemptively attack Iran BEFORE they prove to the world that they have a nuke by testing it.

The sad thing is there are many MANY on the Left - (if not ALL) - who protest that a preemptive attack is wrong because - (AS OF NOW, AND UNTIL A TEST) - there is no "iron-clad" proof that Iran wants a nuke or has a nuke, (despite the inescapably simple logic).

BY THE TIME THERE IS THE IRON-CLAD PROOF THE LEFT DEMANDS... IT... IS... TOO... LATE.

That's why I say - with regard to a preemptive attack: DAMN THE LEFT; FULL SPEED AHEAD.

The alternatives are worse. The alternatives are letting them (a) test a nuke (which they'll only do if they have multiple nukes, in which case it's too late to take them down) - or letting them (b) use them, preemptively - in which case we will have to destroy them in even harsher way than if we preempt them.

THEREFORE: The sanest thing for us to do is to preemptively neutralize their nuke assets and their military assets.

Allowing the future of the world to change according to the will of a NUCLEAR Iran is worse than whatever will happen as a result of destroying Iran's nuclear and military assets.

AND WE CANNOT DEPEND ON THE IAEA OR THE UN: THEY ARE USELESS AT BEST.

More on why we must preemptively attack Iran HERE, at POWER LINE.