Pakistan and India likely have more than 75 each. Probably closer to 400 combined. But for the most part they are pointed at each other. Their conflict is localized and does not impact or impede global trade much. It’s not about them being Muslim either. I didn’t say Muslim. I said fundamentalist nutter. I fully accept I could be wrong, but I view the Pakistan/India nuclear standoff similar to the US/USSR “mutually assured destruction” doctrine. They both have them, so neither benefits from using them.
A fundamentalist death cult is totally different. Iran has shown the world what they are capable of with just conventional weapons. Iraq is not their country but they arm the Shia to attack American service members there. Yemen is not their country but they financed the Houthis to overthrow the government, the attack the Saudis, and now to attack all shipping in the Red Sea. They propped up Assad in Syria, but mainly that was a price they had to pay to get to Lebanon. Lebanon is not their country but they have infiltrated the government and heavily armed their own private destabilizing militia. They have financed Hamas in Gaza and it was a mistake for Israel to have let it get so far - 20 years of building tunnels so that Hamas can pop up, attack Israel, and then hide under the civilians.
These are the fundamentalist nutters, and they are on the run for the first time in many decades. Their tentacles reach all the way to Tehran. So, now that they are contained in most of their theaters of conflict is a good time to get some finality from it.
And it’s definitely not just about Israel. 40% of European trade goes through the Red Sea. Much of the world’s oil does too. This is about Europe, the Gulf, and Asia. None of them have the capability to even protect the waterways, let alone contain an expansionist Iran. Maybe China could, maybe, if they had the bases but would we want that? Should we care? Those are luxuries to debate. Right now is the time to make a decision. You can argue the merits of this free trade world order we are in, and it sure seems it may change a bit, but unfortunately all of these regions rely on the US for protection and there may not be much time left to make it happen.
So it’s good for Trump to let them walk away from it without conflict. Iran has really been pushed back, decades of their time money effort is up in smoke in just a year or so. They should see that they cannot win. They may be, at least a bit, behind a lot of these protests on US streets and EU cities trying to win hearts and minds but Trump is having none of it for now. He sees the moment to pressure them. When it’s over, whichever way it breaks, he may very well turn around and push Israel and the Palestinians into a deal both of them will hate, too.
Didn’t Pakistan fund and house Bin Laden? How can you get more extreme than that?
Here is the problem with your dismissal. The population total is the target and intent. Not counter force. Counter people, and you do that with ground bursts. Plutonium ground bursts, with prevailing winds from the west, blowing into India, killing the 1.5B people there, then the few million in Hong Kong (latitude looks south of the big China centers like Shanghai) and then across the Pacific to the southern US, which we would simply have to evacuate.
The nuclear thinkers have become far to content with presumptions of airbursts. Absolutely not the optimal targeting profile for Pakistan. They want ground bursts along India’s western border, blowing east.
India will retaliate, but they are Muslims. Dying just means they are martyr’ed.