Honestly, I don’t see how we stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. Sanctions? They don’t seem to be slowing them down any. Declare war? With two other major fronts, that’s not likely.
I want a President who’s policy is this:
“Okay, we can’t stop you from getting nuclear capability. However, should there be an attack on the U.S involving nuclear material and we find that the material came from you (Iran), you will have 72-hours to evacuate Tehran. After 72 hours the bombing will begin and Tehran will be reduced to the biggest piece of glass on the planet.
Please note, we only have to prove your involvement to our own satisfaction—not yours or the UN’s. Ours.”
Is that too much to ask for?
Therein lies the problem with Ron Paul's stance on Iran. He wants to wait for Iran to attack us before doing anything about the problem of Iran going nuclear.
Need I remind you that this approach is similar to Bill Clinton treating terrorism like a "crime" (first WTC bombing in 1993; OKC, USS Cole as examples) that ultimately led to the Sept. 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks which killed more than 3,000 in New York City, Washington DC and Shanksville, PA.
There is just no way in HELL a known terrorist sponsor state like Iran, who's already declared the United States of America an enemy target, and has also vowed to "wipe Israel from the map" should ever be allowed to get nuclear capabilities, period. Anyone who doesn't have their heads completely up their backsides would recognize that.