TOTAL BULLSHIT: THERE CAN BE A JUST WAR

The NYT Sunday Book Review features "The Violence of Peace, America's Wars in the Age of Obama," by Yale law professor Stephen L. Carter, and reviewed by James Traub, contributing writer for the NYT Magazine and a weekly columnist for ForeignPolicy.com.

Traub writes about Carter's acceptance of a "just war," in the Augustine and Aquinas tradition. War must be a last resort; the force used must be proportional; and "whenever possible," civilians must be spared.

The concept of a just war is pure fiction and total bull. No war is ever just. The fiction arises because kings and presidents want some moral justification for what they will engage in, and their lackeys come up with pseudo-moralistic and quasi-philosophic justifications for their leader's actions.

War never spares civilians, it always targets them. See the American carpet bombing of German cities during WWII, the dropping of American nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or the drone attacks currently conducted by the CIA in the Waziristan areas of Pakistan.

War is never proportional. The larger the bomb or shell, the better. The more destructive and lethal the weapon, the sooner it is incorporated into the action.

And war is never the last resort. Consider George W. Bush's action against Iraq. Saddam wanted a compromise. Bush would not permit it.

TODAY ANNIVERSARY OF NUCLEAR BOMBING OF HIROSHIMA - A WAR CRIME WITHOUT DOUBT

For all the talk about stopping N. Korea and Iran from attaining nuclear weapons, it is important to remember that only one country ever used nuclear weapons, and that was the United States. Today is the 64th Anniversary of the dropping of an American atomic nuclear device on Hiroshima. President Harry Truman was without doubt a bloody war criminal whose order to drop the bombs directly caused the deaths of 100,000 souls in each city - Hiroshima and then in Nagasaki. Why no charges against Truman or the others who carried out his immoral and illegal nuclear crimes such as the pilot of the Enola Gay? Simple. There are never any charges of war crimes brought against the victors.

NO SANCTIONS ON PEOPLE OF NORTH KOREA, INSTEAD INVITE KIM TO WALK AROUND U.S.

Pres. Obama has urged strict sanctions against North Korea for its missile tests and its nuclear bomb production.

The BBC reports:

"Mr Obama said that he and his South Korean counterpart had agreed that a new UN resolution designed to halt North Korea's nuclear ambitions should be fully enforced.

"And he pledged to end a cycle of letting North Korea create a crisis in order to be rewarded with concessions from the international community."

But North Korea is a very poor county. Its people live in abject poverty, barely eking out existence. It needs food and charitable donations to keep its population from starving in the harsh Korean winter. So sanctions?

All sanctions do is to punish the people. As if punishing the population is going to make North Korean leaders change their policies.

No, the best thing Obama could do is to invite the North Korean leaders especially Kim Jong-il to the United States for an extended walk-around, going anywhere he pleases. I take this idea from Dana Milbank (?) or someone else at The Washington Post. At this point, I forget who was the source of this brilliant idea.

Let Kim discover American culture, freedom of speech, and freedom to go anywhere he wants. Then perhaps Obama could have a serious and productive dialogue with North Korea on ending its juvenile reliance on nuclear weapons.

BUSH ADDS TO LEGACY OF MISTAKES - OFFERS INDIA UNLIMITED NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY

The agreement to sell nuclear technology to India is another of the Bush/Cheney foreign policy disasters.

India is not a signer or party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It has not agreed to use nuclear energy only for peaceful purposes. Contrast India's refusal to join the NPT with Iran which is a member. Yet the U.S. Congress just last week went along with Bush's illogical and dangerous agreement to give India full access to nuclear technology.

Now Pakistan wants the same deal. India is its arch rival and potential lethal enemy. It makes nothing but sense for Pakistan to ask its "ally" in the "war on terror" to extend the same access as Bush has now extended India.

And what must Teheran be thinking? Bush and Cheney froth at the mouth over Iran's pursuit of nuclear power, yet so cavalierly give a non-signer to the NPT full access.

And what must Russia and China be thinking? I suggest both these nuclear powers interpret the move as a ratcheting up by the Americans of the nuclear arms race. The lesson for both Russia and China is clear - stop dismantling your nuclear arsenals; instead, fortify them!

Bush has done great damage in lives and resources with his foolish war in Iraq. But his legacy of disasters surely will include this dangerous and unwise nuclear agreement with India.

BUSH'S MISSILE "DEFENSE"SYSTEM IN POLAND CAUSES RUSSIA TO RE-BUILD ITS NUCLEAR ARSENAL

One of the predictable fall-outs from Bush's rush to set up a missile defense system in The Czech Republic and Poland came today when Russia announced it was going to beef up its nuclear deterrent system.

The BBC reports:

"The announcement comes just weeks after Russia accused the US of starting a new arms race by siting part of its missile defence shield in Poland.

""We must guarantee nuclear deterrence under various political and military conditions by 2020," Mr Medvedev told military commanders.

"He said it was necessary to build "new types of armaments" and to "achieve dominance in airspace", according to quotes carried by the Itar-Tass news agency."

So because of George Bush and his incompetent foreign policy, the whole world faces another nuclear build-up.

Can Iran be faulted if it too wants nuclear weapons as deterrents to U.S. hegemony?

U.S. INCINERATES HIROSHIMA AUGUST 6, 1945

Today, August 6th, is the 63rd anniversary of the U.S. bombing of Hiroshima that killed over 100,000 people.

I find the argument of those American militarists ludicrous and illogical who argue that dropping nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was justified becaause it brought the war to an early close and, by doing so, saved thousands of lives of U.S. soldiers.

Has anyone ever told these guys that the laws of war absolutely prevent a combatant from targeting civilians? The people whom the American nuclear devices incinerated were ordinary civilians, albeit Japanese, residents of the city of Hiroshima, men, women, children. There was no justification for the U.S. to drop a nuclear bomb on them . The only reason why Harry S. Truman was not indicted as an out-and-out war criminal for ordering the bombing and charged with crimes against humanity was that the U.S. was victorious.

Consider the Serbians Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadcic. They have been indicted for crimes against humanity on the principal charge of killing and murdering over 3,000 men and boys at Srebenica.

Contrast Truman to these thugs. They killed a few thousand by shooting. Truman killed over 100,000 by incinerating, yet he got away free and clear.

The U.S. has a lot to answer for with regard to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, not to mention Dresden and Hamburg. This is a stain that will not easily disappear.

STOP FOOLISH TALK ABOUT ATTACKING IRAN

Everytime that Bush, Cheney or one of their minions like Condoleeza Rice threatens Iran, the price of oil and gold go up. Apart from this financial effect, the far worse effect of this war mongering is that these guys might cause a nuclear war in the Middle East.

Instead of using tanks and war planes as the primary instrument of U.S. foreign policy, we need to look on other countries as friends, not "enemies." This means the Obama plan of sitting down and simply talking. No country should be threatened by U.S. bully military power. Every country, including Iran, has the right to peaceful use of nuclear power.

Even Gordon Brown, British prime minister, should back off from the threats. Today he said that Iran was pursuing development of nuclear weapons.

The BBC reports on his speech:

"Mr Brown stressed: "Iran has a clear choice to make: suspend its nuclear weapons programme and accept our offer of negotiations or face growing isolation and the collective response, not just of one nation, but of all nations round the world." "

Gordon Brown shows no proof that Iran is developing nuclear weapons or that it has a "nuclear weapons programme." To the contrary the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate last December opined that Iran had discontinued any nuclear arms development back in 2002. By saying the opposite without any proof, Gordon Brown throws gasoline into the firestorm being fanned by Bush, Cheney and Rice.

ISRAEL PREPARES FOR ATTACK AGAINST IRAN

Instead of telling Israel of its unqualified support, the United States should do everything within its power to prevent Israel from attacking Iran.

The BBC reports that Israel's defense minister has once again said that Israel is thinking of hitting Iran:

"Israel's defence minister has warned of his country's readiness to act against Iran if it feels threatened.
Ehud Barak, speaking in Tel Aviv, said Israel had "proved in the past that it won't hesitate to act when its vital security interests are at stake". "

First of all, there is no hard evidence that Iran is building, or plans to build, facilities to develop nuclear weapons.

Secondly, even if Iran wanted nuclear weapons, why must it be deprived while Israel has in storage some 200 nuclear bombs? Israel never joined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty so why should the U.S. and other countries approve of its nuclear arsenal while at the same time saying that Iran would never be permitted to have nuclear weapons?

Thirdly, the only country in the history of the world that has ever dropped nuclear bombs on populations is the United States. The U.S. incinerated over 100 thousand in both Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Then it turns around and tries to appear virtuous and pure in describing Iran as a world threat. What hypocrisy!

STOP BUSH & CHENEY - NO ATTACK AGAINST IRAN

We need to stop this mad rush to war with Iran. ABC reported yesterday that U.S. military officials are predicting that Israel will bomb Iran within the year. This is craziness. There is no proof that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons. Every country has a right to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. The CIA and the National Intelligence Estimate reported that there is no evidence that Iran is doing otherwise.

So then, why attack Iran? That's why it is so important to elect leaders who don't try to engage in foreign diplomacy with tanks and missiles. All Bush, Cheney and Olmert know is how to kill "enemies" instead of treating other people with respect and negotiation.

Iran is a great country with a great civilization. To attack Iran would be an even more catastrophic mistake than the foolish and unjustified invasion of Iraq.

DOCTOR ATOMIC REMINDS THAT ONLY U.S. HAS USED ATOMIC WEAPONS AGAINST CITIES AND CIVILIANS

This afternoon I listened to a WFMT broadcast of Doctor Atomic, Lyric Opera of Chicago's production of the opera by John Adams and Peter Sellars.

Doctor Atomic tells the story of the development of nuclear weapons by a team of American scientists, principally Robert Oppenheimer, in the early 1940s.

The opera ends seconds before the first bomb is exploded in the Nevada deserts in the summer of 1945. Overtones of Japanese residents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki burned from the nuclear bombs sounds in the background together with electronic noise from the count-downs.

The United States likes to say that it is the home of the free and the land of democracy. Americans think that their country is exceptional, the beacon to the rest of the world.

Yet the dropping of nuclear bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are in start contrast to the American sense of "manifest destiny" and purity of purpose. No other country has used an atomic weapon against civilians or against populated cities. Each bomb took 100,000 lives, women, children, men, elderly, boys, girls.

No wonder Americans hardly remember in their collective historical consciousness what happened in 1945. No one talks about how president Harry Truman proved himself to be a war criminal, using weapons of war, in this first case of nuclear weapons, against civilians and cities. If the definition of a war crime par excellence is killing civilians indiscriminately, Truman's order to drop the bombs cannot be justified.

AWFUL DOWNSIDE OF ATTACK UPON IRAN

Imagine what would happen to the price of oil if the U.S. under George Bush launches an attack against Iran. People are complaining about the price of gasoline now being above $4.00 per gallon. They ain't seen nothing yet if Bush, Cheney or their counterpart in Israel, Ehud Olmert, sends bombs and missiles raining down upon Teheran.

Oil, now at $135 per bbl. would like go to $300, and stay there. Iran, one of the world's biggest oil producers, no doubt would disrupt its supply and cause huge dislocations in the oil market. So would all the other producers who would object to another U.S. started war against an Islamic country. Hugo Chavez of Venezuela certainly would react in sympathy with the Iranians. So would the whole world, almost, that considers George Bush and his regime an outlaw and a war monger.

And how about the world's stock markets. They would go into a steep dive, especially stocks in the U.S. and those of emerging markets.

In sum, the whole world economic order would cascade down to levels unimaginable.

An attack against Iran would make enemies of all the other Islamic countries, not withstanding that Iran is mostly Shiite whereas countries like Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia are mostly Sunni. Nevertheless, the message received by the ordinary man in the street in any Islamic country would be clear - the U.S. and by association, the entire West, wages war against Islam and its beliefs. There would bitter enmity between Americans and Iranians for the next 500 years.

The ratcheting up of talk of war against Iran was not helped by Barack Obama's speech to AIPAC last week. Instead of toning down his rhetoric, Obama went out of his way to say that Iran was the gravest threat, and that he, as president, would not take anything off the table - code for bombing Iran - in assuring that Iran would never acquire nuclear weapons.

I supported Obama for his assertions that he would be willing to sit down and talk with Iranian leaders including president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. I did not vote for Obama to allow him to start another Middle East war, this time with Iran. I want negotiation and diplomacy and peace, not threats and bluster and military action.

IRAN DENIES WEAPONS CHARGES SO BUSH & CHENEY & RICE DEMAND MORE SANCTIONS

The BBC reports today that Condoleeza Rice is calling for more sanctions against Iran. And this because Iran has not explained U.S. charges that it is coordinating a missile development program with a weaponization of nuclear materials.

As I indicated in a post yesterday, what can Iran do to disprove that it is developing nuclear warheads? The answer is Iran can do nothing. How do you disprove suspicions of an accuser who is riven with paranoia? The flimsy charges stem from a notebook smuggled out of Iran four years ago, showing drawings and schemas of what some American analysts claim are diagrams of weapons. But apart from this notebook of dubious provenance and ownership, there is no credible proof that the Iranian government is engaging in nuclear weapons creation or coordinating nuclear weapons with missile development.

Yet because Iran has not confessed to such a militaristic development, Bush and Cheney and Rice want to impose more economic sanctions on the people of Iran.

This is American foolishness. There is no good reason to penalize Iran on account of accusations and suspicions that lack a firm grounding in credible evidence. Instead of increasing hostility with Iran, I want the U.S. government to sit down and begin to create harmonious relations. I want to see Bush invite Ahmadinejad to Washington. I want to see the United States treat Iran as a sovereign nation worthy of respect and entitled to full diplomatic relations.

I harbor no realistic hopes that Bush will begin talks with Teheran. This is why we need Obama. Instead of solving its problems with guns and missiles and bombs, the U.S. needs a change of direction in its foreign policy. We need a Pax Obama.

U.S. WANTS FURTHER SANCTIONS ON IRAN BECAUSE OF AMERICAN SUSPICIONS

Why is Bush/Cheney/Rice seeking new sanctions against Iran? The latest report of IAEA for the most part says Iran has been forthcoming on the issues asked by the IAEA. Apparently, the one unresolved issue has to do with coordinating nuclear weapons with missile development, an area that the U.S. says it learned about from some purloined notebook that was discovered last year.

For one thing, it is not clear that the contents of the notebook show that Iran has any plans to weaponize nuclear materials. The notebook has not been linked definitively to Iran, and so Iran feels it does not have to prove something that it knows nothing about. The U.S., however, through Bush/Cheney and Rice assume that the notebook shows conclusively that Iran has a secret weapons program.

And so the U.S. on possibly faulty assumptions wants to continue to press Iran to admit what the U.S. accuses of it based on the notebook. If torture could be applied to a nation, I have no doubt that Bush/Cheney would torture Iran to force Iran to admit and confirm mere suspicions.

This type of militaristic diplomacy must end. The U.S. thinks all foreign questions can be solved with missiles and guns. When will this nightmare of an administration finally come to an end?

GATES CLAIMS IRAN'S NUCLEAR PROGRAM A THREAT

And I thought Robert Gates was moderate and intelligent. Here he is today speaking at an Arab security Conference in Bahrain accusing Iran of still wanting to build nuclear weapons and spreading terrorism throughout the Middle East. Gimme a break! If not Gates, is there no one in this Bush/Cheney administration who is not fomenting a war against Teheran?

Ann Scott Tyson reports in today's The Washington Post:

"Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates argued forcefully at a Persian Gulf security conference Saturday that U.S. intelligence indicates Iran could restart its secret nuclear weapons program "at any time" and remains a major threat to the region.

"Tough and at times sarcastic, Gates described the Iranian government as an ongoing menace to the Gulf region not only for its nuclear aspirations but also for supplying weapons to insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan, backing the armed Islamic movements Hezbollah and Hamas, and developing medium-range ballistic missiles.

""Everywhere you turn, it is the policy of Iran to foment instability and chaos, no matter the strategic value or cost in the blood of innocents," Gates said in a speech to defense leaders from 23 countries attending the Manama Dialogue, a security conference organized by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies."

Gulfnews.com adds that the audience erupted in laughter when Gates also added that he did not consider Israel's nuclear arsenal a threat to the region:

"US Defence Secretary Robert Gates defended Israel’s nuclear programme on Saturday, saying the Jewish state did not seek to destroy its neighbours or support terrorism, unlike Iran.

"Asked at the Manama Dialogue conference whether Israel's nuclear programme posed a threat to the region, Gates replied: "No, I do not."

"The statement was greeted by laughter from a room filled with government officials from Middle Eastern countries."

Now we have the dangerous spectacle of Robert Gates joining Bush, Cheney and neo-cons like John Bolton, calling Iran a grave threat. Instead of trying to make Iran and Iranians the demonized enemy, I want the government of the United States to sit down with the leaders of Iran and show some respect. Instead of threats of bombs and missiles, Americans should recognize Iran for a great and proud country that must be allowed to be part of the community of nations.

IN ZEAL TO START WW-III, BUSH & CHENEY DISMISS INTELLIGENCE ON IRAN

Bush is exasperating. The National Intelligence Estimate says Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program, yet Bush insists Iran is a threat. Talk about making up stories from whole cloth!

The BBC reports:

"Iran remains a threat to the world despite new intelligence saying the country may not be building nuclear weapons, the US president says.


"Mr Bush said the report released on Monday was a "warning signal" and his view that a nuclear Iran would be a danger "hasn't changed"."

This is another example of George Bush the Irrational. As if he is saying (as he has said on numerous instances before), "I know what is happening . . ., the facts and intelligence don't count . . ., I refuse to negotiate with myself."

By the way, Iran, as a signer to the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has every right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. Here are the words of the NPT:

"ARTICLE IV

"1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the
Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful
purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

"2. All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in. the
fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information
for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also cooperate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the
further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially
the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the
needs of the developing areas of the world."

So what is Bush talking about? Iran as a signer to the NPT has every right under Article IV to enrich uranium "for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty." Iran states that it has no desire for nuclear weapons which many of its imams have called "un-islamic." The IAEA has discovered no evidence that Iran is building nuclear weapons. And yesterday we learn that even American intelligence agencies believe Iran has no program.

Where does this leave Bush? Just as the Iraqi intelligence was "sexed up" so that Bush/Cheney could fit it around their policy of invading and occupying Iraq, so we see another instance of these rogues doing the same thing with intelligence about Iran. Bush and Cheney have been obsessed in their quest to start another militaristic conflagration, this time with Iran. I can only hope that the embarrassment of the release of this assessment from the N.I.E. will shame them into abandoning or at least tabling their reckless and irrational war-mongering.

DICK CHENEY AND GEORGE BUSH: STOP THREATENING IRAN

Matthew Barakat reports for AP that Dick Cheney is at it again - threatening Iran with dire consequences for causing trouble in the Middle East.

"The United States and other nations will not allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, Vice President Dick Cheney said Sunday.

""Our country, and the entire international community, cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its grandest ambitions," Cheney said in a speech to the Washington Institute for Near East Studies.

"He said Iran's efforts to pursue technology that would allow it to build a nuclear weapon are obvious and that "the regime continues to practice delay and deceit in an obvious effort to buy time."

"If Iran continues on its current course, Cheney said the U.S. and other nations are prepared to take action. The vice president made no specific reference to military action."

A suggestion to Dick Cheney and George Bush. Enough war-mongering against Iran. You guys are intent on starting another war in the Middle East. Haven't you done enough damage in Iraq? Iran has the right to develop nuclear power for peaceful purposes. You have no evidence Iran is working on developing a bomb. And even if it were, the U.S. has thousands of nuclear weapons and war heads. So does Russia, Israel, India, Pakistan, China, England and France. If you were serious in being against nuclear weapons, then take the initiative and renounce them for the U.S. In the meantime, stop this war posturing against Iran.

Cheney calls Iran "a terror-supporting state." Yet there is no evidence that Iran is supporting terrorists or terroristic acts. Nevertheless, Cheney and Bush never cease to accuse Iran of supporting terrorism. But it is the United States that has supported "terrorism," when it supports those regimes that throw people in prison for merely criticizing government leaders. Look at Egypt and Jordan. Furthermore, it is the U.S. that believes in torture and degradation of its prisoners, as in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.

So, Cheney and Bush - leave Iran alone, take care of your own abuses and abusive practices.

BUSH REFUSES TO DEFINE TORTURE, THREATENS WWIII AGAINST IRAN

Bush called another press conference today. He gives reporters only an hour or two notice. Why does he not give them more time? Because he does not want reporters prepared to ask him the tough questions.

Dan Froomkin reports in his White House Watch on washingtonpost.com that Bush was asked for a definition of torture.

"Newsweek's Richard Wolffe asked Bush exactly the question I would have asked:
"QUESTION: Thank you, sir. A simple question.
"BUSH: Yes?
"QUESTION: What's your definition of --
"BUSH: It may require a simple answer.
"(LAUGHTER)
"QUESTION: What's your definition of the word torture?
"BUSH: Of what?
"QUESTION: The word torture, what's your definition?
"BUSH: That's defined in U.S. law, and we don't torture.
"QUESTION: Can you give me your version of it, sir?
"BUSH: No. Whatever the law says."
Bush has consistently refused to say what he means when he says "we don't torture," rendering the phrase essentially meaningless. Saying "whatever the law says" doesn't clear things up at all. It just means that if we do it, his lawyers have found a way not to call it torture."


Also Bush continues to threaten Iran. Now he threatens World War III. Again Dan Froomkin reports:

"For the first time in public, Bush warned of the risk of "World War III" if Iran gets nuclear weapons.

"I believe that the Iranian -- if Iran had a nuclear weapon, it would be a dangerous threat to world peace. It would -- this is -- we got a leader in Iran who has announced that he wants to destroy Israel. So I told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from having knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon. And I take this very -- I take the threat of Iran with a nuclear weapon very seriously."

Bush seems intent in attacking Iran before he leaves office. Tell me Mr. Bush, where has an Iranian leader announced that he wants to destroy Israel? Secondly, even if Mr. Ahmadinejad had said rather that Israel (meaning its government) should not exist, why are mere words of the Iranian leader sufficient to start a war against Iran and rain bombs and missiles down upon the Iranians? The Iranians have not started wars against their neighbors or invaded other countries. Only the U.S. has done both of these on multiple occasions within the past 50 years. Think of Panama, Granada, Korea, VietNam, Iraq.

PUTIN FINDS NO EVIDENCE IRAN PLANS NUCLEAR WEAPONS

Russian president Vladimir Putin says Russia sees no evidence that Iran is planning to build nuclear weapons. Putin may be an autocrat but here he is speaking the truth. There is no creditable evidence that Iran is building a nuclear bomb. Reports the BBC:

"Moscow has no information that Iran is trying to build a nuclear bomb, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said. But he said the Kremlin shared the West's concern that Tehran's nuclear programme should be "transparent". "

The rush of the neo-cons into war with Iran must be stopped. Bush and Cheney will make up any evidence they can however specious and flimsy to justify an Iranian attack. Consider this story on words of Glenn Beck, the personality on CNN Headline News, as reported by Think Progress.org and Digg.com. Beck uses Law & Order to fabricate some specious reason to bolster a strike.

"Iran has long been the puppet master in the Middle East. You don’t have to take my word for it. Just watch any episode of Law & Order. Use the thinking, you know, that helps them solve all the tough cases. Iran has the means, the motive, and the opportunity to try and destroy our American way of life by controlling the Middle East."

So thanks to Putin for speaking the truth. There is no evidence to claim Iran is making a nuclear bomb.