Letter: Iran’s motives are what make it dangerous

Tuesday, Nov. 6, 2007 | 7 a.m.

In his Nov. 1 letter ("Iran less a threat than was Soviet Union") , Frank O'Neill says mutually assured destruction has kept countries that possess nuclear weapons from using them. He believes it is "inevitable" that Iran will possess nukes , but "as long as Iran's leaders are aware that Tehran and the rest of Iran would be totally destroyed (in retaliation), it is reasonable to presume they, too, would restrain themselves." He goes on to ask, " Why do we become so concerned with Iranian development of such a weapon?"

Iran is nothing like the Soviet Union, the United States or any of the other nuclear countries O'Neill listed. Iran is ruled by a terror ist -sponsoring regime that would welcome annihilation in the name of Allah. It will use the threat of nuclear attack to achieve its goals: destruction of Israel, hegemony in the Middle East, power over its Sunni rivals in Saudi Arabia and leverage against the West, principally the United States.

That Iran "doesn't have missiles to deliver one to the United States" is dangerously naive. With our porous borders, the components of a nuclear weapon can easily be smuggled into our country, assembled and detonated anywhere . What would O'Neill say to nuclear explosions in New York and Washington, with millions dead and the cities uninhabitable for decades?

Instead of contemplating these nightmare scenarios, O'Neill sees nefarious plans by Bush and Cheney to control Iran's oil.

Richard McCord, Henderson