Perhaps the real problem is the long-standing bi-partisan delusion that we can decide whether other countries should have nuclear technology OR weapons. Jonathan Tepperman, Newsweek's former deputy managing editor of foreign affairs and current assistant managing editor, recently wrote a piece for the magazine which basically dismissed the entire concept of disarmament for anyone. (See "Why Obama Should Learn to Love the Bomb: How Nuclear Weapons Can Keep You Safe | Newsweek International | Newsweek.com.) Tepperman's essential argument was that having nukes makes their owners responsible. It puts the fear of death into their leaders. Proof: No two countries with nuclear weapons have ever gone to war against each other. The best-known example was the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 when Kennedy and Krushchev nearly went mano-a-mano with each other, then slowly backed away. Meanwhile, there have been innumerable smaller wars between non-nuke states and between those with nukes and those without. When nuclear war is not an issue, leaders -- whether elected or dictators -- seem to feel they have less to lose. So, they go to war casually, even carelessly -- like Bush took us into Iraq. Following this logic, perhaps the best strategy is to get out of Tehran's way. Recognize the right of the mullahs (who control Iranian foreign policy and, unlike Ahmadinejad, are not crazy) to have their bomb.