> I expect a major US city to have a nuke set off in it by Iran within the next 5 years.

This absolutely will not happen. Iran will make a nuke, and they will test it very publicly, and then the political math in the Middle East changes overnight. The point of a nuclear bomb for a country like Iran (or Pakistan, or North Korea) is deterrence, not attack - if Iran set off a nuke in an American city, the regime would not survive, and it’s possible the country would not.

Edit: to put that differently, the only way an Iranian bomb goes off in an American city is if an American bomb goes off in an Iranian city.

“ The point of a nuclear bomb for a country like Iran (or Pakistan, or North Korea) is deterrence”

I hope this is true, but Iran has a hard time convincing people because their theocratic elements are suicidal from a secular standpoint. Eg their religious messaging is confounding.

I think you have a typo, you wrote “Iran” instead of “the United States”.

You are lumping together three very different countries into a western mindset of deterrence.

While Pakistan is Muslim they are not the same as Iran in any way. The current rulers of Iran do not operate by western logic and would be consider a "holy death" as a direct path to heaven.

Iranian populace isn't behind that, the people themselves are reasonably secular and aren't behind that. However, the leadership is dangerous and you should not assume they would use western logic.

This is where the logic stops.

If Iran is going to behave logically with a nuke, then why is it so terrible for them to have one? If they are illogical, then why would they NOT choose to wipe out Israel and blow up a couple major US cities?

The arguments I hear about Iran are almost completely contradictory.

I really don't understand why the US didn't continue their talks with Iran. They were clearly open to joining a non-proliferation treaty at the time. They also have a religious law against developing nukes in addition to their other tentative agreements and cooperation with IAEA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Khamenei%27s_fatwa_against...

I don't expect Iran to use any nukes that they develop though. Having nukes puts a country in a special diplomatic class. Using them is almost never beneficial. The status quo risks for nuclear programs is stronger sovereignty, which would drastically shift the regional balance of power and possibly tip the scales on a broad international level.

I think Iran’s mercenaries eventually blew up the entire diplomatic strategy. It turns out they should have stop funding entities that shoot missiles at population centers so often. It was a reckless strategy that failed.

You are assuming they’re rational actors, and extremist religious ideologies are by their very nature irrational.

Exactly, they should be rational just like our secular politicians.

"As a Christian growing up in Sunday school, I was taught from the Bible, ‘Those who bless Israel will be blessed, and those who curse Israel will be cursed.’ And from my perspective, I’d rather be on the blessing side of things.”

- Ted Cruz, a U.S. senator

"There is a reason the first time I shook Netanyahu's hand, I didn't wash it until I could touch the heads of my children."

- Randy Fine, a U.S. congressman

And of course, there's the President of the United States who's known to be completely rational.

Iran has shown itself a rational actor time and time again by not escalating against continued provocation by Israel and the US, knowing that to do so would be to enter a conflict it can’t win. That’s not the behavior of an irrational actor who’s willing to fight whatever the cost, even total annihilation (which would be what happened if Iran nuked the US/Israel).

They may be religious fanatics, but they’re not idiots.

Iran funded Hamas who did October 7th. That is the original escalation that kicked all this off. The region was (relatively) quiet until then.

October 7th was a reaction to Trump’s “Abraham Accords” which benefitted Sunni countries at the expense of Iran.

And also a gigantic, gigantic escalation.

"You made a deal that disadvantages us so we're going to rape and murder a bunch of teenagers and kidnap people."

It’s not a justification, obviously. But it is a (partial) explanation. Israel wanted to keep sweeping the Palestinian issue under the rug, and Hamas and its sponsors were not going to allow that.

You claimed that Iran "time and again does not escalate against provocations by the US and Israel".

Sure, it's an explanation. Everything shitty Israel or Hamas has done since 1950 has an "explanation" of "that other group did something to me".

Iran FM saying no to negotiations on Friday was insane

https://www.yahoo.com/news/irans-foreign-minister-says-no-10...

Because the the nuke thing is a ruse; Iran's economic relationship with China is the problem for the U.S. which wants global hegemony.

I don't think this makes much sense, due to the scale of the two parties: Iran somehow figuring out how to get a nuke onto a US city would invite complete and total annihilation of Iran -- and the world would largely support it. Iran knows this.

Nukes among peers aren't there to be used. They are there to immobilize and freeze a layer of conflict.

> I expect a major US city to have a nuke set off in it by Iran within the next 5 years.

Why would Iran do something so suicidal?

Do you really think that they wouldn’t have done this by now if they could?

I had the same expectation myself but now everyone will be looking out for that type of attack.

> I expect (ok, I WORRY) a major US city to have a nuke set off in it by Iran within the next 5 years.

It's strange how this "Sum of All Fears" scenario is dismissed out of hand, or doesn't even occur, to the tankie-types on HN and reddit rooting for the Ayatollah to cross the nuclear finish line--the same Supreme Leader who, three days ago, permitted large protests in Tehran where crowds chanted "Death to America" and burned US flags.

Even weirder is that many (most?) of them are urban types who live, or aspire to live, in big cities like NYC or LA so they can enjoy the large LGBTQ communities, the ethnic restaurants, the bars serving craft IPAs, and the reduced commute times to and from protests. Hasan Piker, a prominent tankiefluencer, lives in LA, for example. So you would think they especially would have misgivings about Iran's enrichment program, even if they don't support intervention against it. And yet most of them dismiss any concern over it, or even outright state Iran should have nuclear weapons.

as a sum of all fears, you should also be worrying much more that texas will drop a nuke in LA, and so the texas government needs to be wiped off the map, all texans included.

local terror attacks are already a constant and accepted danger