Do You Think Hamas Should Have a Nuclear Weapon?

Do you think Hamas should have a nuclear weapon?
Probably not.

Made by Dall-E for the Author.

October 7th answered that question with unspeakable clarity. That was Hamas with rifles, paragliders, and kitchen-table maps. Imagine Hamas with uranium.

What about Hezbollah—the group that has turned Lebanon into a missile depot, slaughtered Israelis, massacred Syrians in support of Assad, and laundered drug money from the Middle East to Latin America? (A scheme so sprawling the FBI tried to stop it—until the Obama administration shut down the investigation to preserve its nuclear deal with Iran.) Should they have a bomb?

No? Then consider this: all these terror networks—Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis—are not independent actors. They are proxies. Puppets. And the hand that holds the strings is the Islamic Republic of Iran.

If Hamas is the rabid dog, Iran is the kennel. And Iran is chasing the bomb.

Why Trust the Mastermind When You Wouldn’t Trust the Minion?

Would you trust a signed piece of paper from Hamas promising peace and restraint? Of course not. Then why place faith in the signatures of the regime that funds, trains, and orders them? Why pretend that a treaty with the world’s largest state sponsor of terror is more reliable than a ceasefire with its hired killers?

The 2015 Iran Deal (JCPOA) was hailed as a triumph of diplomacy. It turne

d out to be a time-release capsule for disaster. Billions flowed into Iran. Its terror networks surged. Its centrifuges spun. Its leaders smiled for cameras and plotted in secret. And the West got… a promise.

Now, nearly a decade later, history repeats itself. U.S. officials are once again quietly engaged in indirect nuclear negotiations with Iran, this time via intermediaries in Oman. Even former President Trump—who once championed “maximum pressure”—has reportedly discouraged Israeli strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites, signaling a preference for renewed talks over decisive action. These talks, like their predecessors, operate on a premise that the regime in Tehran can be contained through incentives and supervision. But that premise has been tested. And it has failed.

A Problem of Conscience, Not Capability

If Israel and the United States possess the power to destroy Iran’s nuclear program—through cyber operations, airstrikes, special forces, or bunker-busters—why haven’t they used it?

Reinhold Niebuhr, that most sobering theologian of statecraft, reminds us:

“The sad duty of politics is to establish justice in a sinful world.”
And justice—real, lasting, meaningful justice—does not grow from ink and appeasement. It is built, reluctantly but resolutely, by those willing to act.

To possess the power to prevent horror, and then refuse to use it, is not restraint—it is surrender dressed as civility. It is the kind of moral posturing that comforts diplomats while burying innocents. Moral clarity without action is a lie clothed in virtue.

This is not a call for a ground invasion. Iran’s economy is crumbling. Inflation is soaring. Its population is restless and its rulers despised. A coordinated strategy of intensified sanctions, maritime blockade, cyber-disruption, and targeted strikes against its nuclear and military infrastructure could, according to analysts at United Against Nuclear Iran, Henry Jackson Society, and others, bring the regime to its knees—without a single American boot crossing the border.

Even more: the Iranian people—students, workers, women, dissidents—hate the regime. They have marched against it, burned its symbols, braved its bullets. All they need is a final shove.

We have the leverage. We have the intelligence. We have the justification. And we have the opportunity. But it will never come if we keep pretending a totalitarian theocracy can be “moderated” into civility with diplomacy and pallets of cash.

Power exists to prevent nightmares. To stop evil before it metastasizes. And when that power is real—when it’s within reach—the choice not to use it is not neutrality. It is complicity.

The Islamic Republic is not just an Iranian problem. It is a global cancer with tentacles in Gaza, Beirut, Damascus, Sanaa, Buenos Aires, and beyond. To allow it the bomb is not to gamble with diplomacy—it is to bet the future of civilization on a regime with global ambitions of religiousconquest.

Israel and the United States have the ability to destroy Iran’s nuclear program. They have the economic and technological advantage to cripple the regime. The only question left is: Do we have the will?