Stop Iranian Nukes Now

By Walter E. Block and Oded J. K. Faran

You’ve seen the headlines about Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis (HHH), but let us be clear: in the grand strategic picture, they are mere distractions—tactical irritants at best. Iran, by contrast, is a systemic threat. A nuclear-armed Iran would be a paradigm shift, not just for Israel but for the entire global order.

Let’s not mince words. HHH will never have the bomb. They lack resources, infrastructure, and the scientific base. Iran, however, is already deep into this process. Under current conditions, will Iran reach a nuclear weapons capability in one year? Perhaps. In three years? Likely. In five? Almost inevitable.

This isn’t mere speculation.

It’s based on published enrichment rates, growing uranium stockpiles, and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports showing Iran moving ever closer to weapons-grade capability. The term “breakout time”—how long it would take Iran to produce one nuclear bomb once it decides to do so—is now estimated in weeks, not months. Think about that. Weeks!

Let it be said plainly: if Iran drops a nuclear weapon on Tel Aviv or Haifa, it will not just end thousands of lives. It will end the illusion that Israel can afford restraint indefinitely. It will be the moment when the post-Holocaust vow “never again” is proven hollow.

So, what is to be done? Strike Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. Immediately. Better yet, the strike should have already happened. The time for strategic ambiguity and backchannel diplomacy is long over. We’re way past that point.

But will such an action happen tomorrow? Unlikely. Israel remains paralyzed. True, it faces an overload of crises: 134 hostages still in Gaza. Escalation with Hezbollah on the northern front. An ongoing identity war at home, where political dysfunction and societal fracture stall any coherent grand strategy.

Cigars, judicial reform, and culture wars might well matter in peacetime. They do not at all matter when uranium is in the process of being spun into weapons by a nation such as Iran. Ask yourself: Does political squabbling matter when your country faces extinction? The peace-at-any-price crowd believes goodwill can outmatch centrifuges. They confuse optimism with analysis. Intentions with capacity.

Other nations hold nuclear arsenals. For example, China, Russia, India, Pakistan, the United States. But none of them are led by messianic regimes that call for genocide. None of them have proxies on Israel’s border launching rockets daily. None of them conduct annual Holocaust-denial conferences or sponsor terror worldwide while accelerating toward creating the bomb.

So what is Israel doing? Waiting. Hoping that Donald Trump—. will save the day. Yes, Trump has been a staunch ally. He moved the US embassy to Jerusalem. He brokered the Abraham Accords. He greenlit sovereignty over the Golan and opposed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). That matters. And it matters greatly.

But he’s not coming tomorrow. And even if he is, he won’t launch planes for Israel. Nor should Israel count on him—or any U.S. president—to handle existential threats on its behalf. American interests are not identical to Israeli ones. Never were. Never will be. You have heard of “Praise the Lord but pass the ammunition.” We say, in like manner, “Praise Donald Trump, but Israel should rely on the IDF.”

The Strategic Clock Is Ticking

Iran’s current air defense systems—Bavar-373, Khordad-15—still show vulnerabilities. Israeli recent drone and cyber operations have already demonstrated their reach. But each passing week allows Iran to harden defenses, spread its assets, and move sensitive materials further underground.

The operational window is narrowing. A strike that today might cost dozens of lives could cost thousands tomorrow. Every delay reduces precision and increases blowback.

Worse: deterrence is failing. The lack of action communicates not resolve but fear. When Israel hesitates, Tehran calculates that it can continue undisturbed. That message emboldens not just Iran but its global partners: Russia, China, North Korea.

The Moral and Legal Case for Preemptive Defense

Critics will label a strike on Iran an act of war. But international law says otherwise. Article 51 of the UN Charter recognizes a nation’s inherent right to self-defense against an imminent threat. The 1837 Caroline doctrine refines it: the threat must be “instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means.”

Iran meets all these criteria. There are repeated public threats to annihilate Israel. Concrete progress toward a nuclear warhead. Alignment with terror networks. This is not conjecture; it’s the documented policy of a regime that chants “Death to Israel” as national liturgy. How much clearer could be their intentions?

From a libertarian and ethical perspective, preemptive action aligns with the Non-Aggression Principle when it thwarts actual, not hypothetical, aggression. Libertarians need not be pacifists. They oppose initiation of force—not justified, preventive defense.

A nuclear-armed Iran would not just pose an existential threat to Israel. It would destabilize the entire Middle East, trigger a regional arms race, and render every diplomatic agreement with radical regimes meaningless.

The Cost of Delay

The head of the snake is in Tehran. Cut it now, and its tentacles—HHH—lose strength and coordination. Wait, and you face a Hydra.

Time is running out. Military planning must be bold, not bureaucratic. Political leadership must choose responsibility over reputation. Strategic vision must replace domestic paralysis.

Strike while it is still feasible. Because a single bomb can erase an entire doctrine of defense. Because one successful Iranian test will reset the balance of power for a generation.

It seems history is dangerously waiting to be repeated—unless someone stops it first. The question isn’t whether action is justified; it’s whether Israel has the courage to act. Who else but the IDF?