How to respond to Iran's nuclear threat

As every rational adult has known all along, Iran is determined to get the Bomb, and all the negotiations by the EU and/or the UN are nothing more than an amusing waste of time. It would have been far better if the West had said nothing than to give the world the impression that the lying Iranian leaders had seemingly conned western diplomats so effortlessly.

Given this, what do we do now?

Here's a way-outside-the-box idea: Bush should do a mock mea culpa, like this:

Since the "coalition of the willing" took out Iraq's army three years ago, we feel we bear some responsibility for ensuring that the balance of power in the region, between Shiite Iran and largely Sunni Iraq hasn't been--and won't be--badly changed.

Accordingly, if Iran develops the Bomb, the United States will redress the imbalance by giving Iraq up to four nuclear weapons. Of course this will also require that we help the government of Iraq set up reliable, fail-safe command and control structures and delivery systems.

Of course many details must be worked out, and obviously we will not transfer nuclear weapons if Iraq has not stabilized.

Finally, we also reserve the right to upgrade these weapons to from plain atomic to far more powerful thermonuclear ones if Iran persists in nuclear weapons programs.

Thank you, and have a nice day.

This of course would be a double-win: It would not only neutralize Iran but would also give Iraq a huge incentive to settle down.

But of course, if any Republican president were to actually take this novel approach, the ACLU would file suit to block any such move. Oh well...