The problem with Iran is that there is nothing we can do about it as the article below points out. Short of all out war we are not going to make the situation any better proliferation wise and almost any other option at least leaves open the opportunity for long termsolutions.
The article points to a think tank paper arguing (rightly I think) that Deterrence like that used vs. the USSR is the most realistic option but it requires constant vigilance and a very credible threat on our side. Maintaining such a credible threat is not cheap, has to be part of the grand strategy and force structure of the US. The issue is, is the current administration up to the job of planning that grand strategy? Is the US up to sustaining another deterrent axis and the costs associated, the article highlights the (largely artificial) stresses even the limited missile shield for Europe is causing with Russia.
One interesting thing about this is that all the Wests attempts to halt proliferation have in the end come to nought, the worst of the worst are going to get the nuc’s, unless we provide an almost blanket assurance that we will avenge any first use then at least one more tier of nuc powers will emerge.
It’s also of some ironic interest that it was the US’s perfection of smart weapons and limited war tactics that could be seen as driving this nuc arms race. We should remember that at one time or another we saw nucs as the cheap counter weapon to the Russian horde . These smallish countries now see nuc’s as the cheap counter to folks with deep pockets and smarter magazines.