"So becasue the methods of delivery you cited are still very real threats, what would this suggest about the effectiveness of efforts being made to date?"
Well, since Saddam has no active nuclear program, being that he is dead and the methods of production (and the uranium produced thereby) are now in our hads, our efforts, so far have been very effective.
Now, on to Iran to finish the job.
Iran, being a state sponsor of terror, can't get much worse, if we allow it to fall into chaos.
Ergo, we can just blow means of production up and not worry about occupation.
Well, since Saddam has no active nuclear program, being that he is dead and the methods of production (and the uranium produced thereby) are now in our hads, our efforts, so far have been very effective.
That's very good news indeed.
Why is it then that we are continually told that another terror attack is not a matter of "if" but is a matter of "when?"
>>Now, on to Iran to finish the job.<<
Dream on, bro. The generals are not going to fight a two-front war while their rearguard is sitting in the middle of a bunch of Shi'ite militias with ties to Iran. Too bad we let THAT particular genie out of the bottle.
What the Paul followers fail to see is that the terrorists are psycho-mass murderers, and will bomb the piss out of us if they perceive our will is lost. We can NEVER cut and run where Islamo-terrorists are involved.