{devil's advocate mode for the moment}

But why do "you" think "you" have the right to determine to what extent other nation-states are able to defend themselves?

From whence cometh our superior authority to possess nuclear-weapons such that we can morally deny that right to other nations?

EDIT: (to be clear, I understand your argument, but our moral position -- or at least my own personal moral position -- needs to be consistent, something that I can rationalize rather than just emotionally say "but I think they're dangerous and so they have less rights", because I know that the left, say, might say I'm dangerous and deny me rights .... objective criteria are key for me).

The problem here is that it was the UN who carved up the so-called "holy lands" and gave half to the Jews, who were so hated after WW2 that no one wanted them. Who know WHY they were hated, but it fed the whole auschwitz fiasco as well as much other anti-semitism. The issue was that the UN tossed out the arabs in the area and put in the jews. Now, what would you expect to happen- the arabs would want the jews OUT. That was over 60 years ago, and that hatred isnt abating.

What the UN put in place helped the Jews. If the UN allows Iran to have nuclear weapons, maybe that doesnt help them, although I really doubt Iran is going to nuke Israel and poison the whole of the middle east for many, many years like chernobyl.

Unfortunately its just not that simple. A nuclear weapon isn't something you gamble with to sate one's principals, not everything aligns neatly - nor should they. The dire finality of such a weapon in sane and responsible hands is reason enough to cringe. Placing such a weapon, helping to facilitate having such a weapon, in the hands of a vocally hostile nation calling for your own and all of western civilizations demise is, and should be, terrifying. You can't un-ring a bell. In this case, if principals fail, millions of people cannot be brought back with "sorry about that."

Why sanctions? Because sanctions are better than the alternatives.

He would get my vote in a heart beat!

I would have put that label on that area already - actually periodically for the last 6,000 years, and especially since it was carved up since the Brits and others withdrew in the 1940's

Not really, islam has a history of erasing all traces of life before their occupation. Look what they did in Afghanistan. Should islam every truly take root in the US look to all the DC monuments being brought down and each and every culturally American object being blown apart and incinerated.

Help me walk through some logic. And this is going to be a potentially unpopular question, but I want to understand how to get "from A to B".

We are all here, ostensibly, because we prefer small government that doesn't interfere with the rights of its citizens to engage in commerce, etc., etc.

How are sanctions consistent with that philosophy, and so why do we (seemingly, from the comments) lament their having been eliminated?

Is this a case where we dislike/distrust/etc. a nation-state so much that we carve out little exemptions to our philosophy so we can still have a gov't preventing commerce?

I'm not saying necessarily I want Iran to engage in commerce and grow big and strong and become a pain in our ass, but how do we reconcile our desires to not have that happen with our philosophy that says the gov't shouldn't be able to prevent it from happening?

ISIS desecration of cultural/historical sites tends to be pretty suspicious as well...

I got a call from a dentist close to my home whose aide said my broken partial was fixed and to come pick it up.
So I stared at my reply in progress and decided to leave it open for someone else to finish.
Asshole works.
So does my fixed partial. Arby onion rings can get really tough when heated up in a microwave.

We now have the Russians actively-engaged in Syria, the Chinese hinting they are sending warships and warplanes... the US is already there, led by our Clueless Leader that thought hugging a Muslim would solve the world's problems... And Israel is pretty much ready to go it alone against Iran (and they didn't sign any treaty, so they are not bound by it).

It's starting to smell like Armageddon... or the start of WWIII - which we always knew would spark in the Middle East... and our Clueless Leader would like nothing better than to grab all the guns in the US to ease the transition to Communism/Socialism or whatever he and his Chomsky / Ayers pals would like.

I've been consistent in saying for a long time, I switched pretty much entirely off fossil fuels, I'm down to about 10 gallons a week for my pickup and otherwise completely solar + an EV for my wife... but I can't yet tow the travel trailer to my hunting trips w/ an EV... But not because of some freaky global warming "we must do something now!" syndrome, rather, it's because the only way to stop the terrorists is to cut off their money supply... gut the gas & oil commodity prices, and they go back to living in tents pretty quickly... It's the only way to defeat them once and for all. It's 140 degrees in the shade there, it tends to make people pretty cooky.

"A people as a whole, Israel has the great leader it deserves.
A people as a whole, the USA has . . ."

...the asshole it deserves.

I'm just worried that in 3 years, the map of the world will have a large area marked "Uninhabitable Zone" from the eastern border of Egypt to the western border of India.

Here's a wild idea--a desperate measure, for the most desperate times imaginable.

What if Ragnar Danneskjöld, instead of contenting himself with capturing a decommissioned aircraft carrier (or whatever that ship was that he had), he had recruited a much larger mercenary force to invade and conquer Gaza, then signed a friendship treaty with the State of Israel?

A people as a whole, Israel has the great leader it deserves.
A people as a whole, the USA has . . .

That's the way to tell them about deafening silence. I saw that.

Only why does he still look as if he's begging? He should annex Judea and Samaria and have done with it. Enough fooling around.

Vladimir Putin is 10K times the leader than O. Those of us that realized he was totally incompetent during the last two elections just got called racists for our troubles. To add insult to injury, there is talk of Kerry getting the Nobel prize.....would be like giving it to Neville Chamberlain for "Giving us peace in our time"!

Appeasement didn't work then and it doesn't work now.

Love that man. I just hope that the US stands with him if he defends himself from an impending nuclear attack. It's not a given anymore.

He'll act and O will bring us down on him or stand by and do nothing. Smacks of Revelation.

When Netanyahu speaks, people must confront their contradictions. A = A.

Yep...pretty quiet there.

That's right, sir. You are going to be blown up. Now...what are you going to do about it?

I wonder if mankind will completely destroy itself in my lifetime? Could happen, I think.

True. Chilling is that history is poised to repeat itself except that this time there will be no one to stop it once it happens. At minimum, six million lives will be forfeit.

True, but I can't imagine for the life of me what the world needed to be 'told' about! If the countries of the world couldn't see that for themselves, do we really want to be forming alliances with them?

+1