Courting Catastrophe, Happily

Last December,  defense analyst Alex Alfirraz Scheers wrote

Turkey is the most mercurial member of the NATO alliance and often undermines alliance cohesion.

 Pointing to the threat posed by Iran, Turkey, like Saudi Arabia, has stated that it will pursue an independent nuclear capability if the Shiite country develops its own. Turkey has also expressed concerns about Israel's nuclear weapons.

'We have Israel nearby, as almost neighbours,' stated President Erdogan. 'They scare (other nations) by possessing [nuclear weapons.]'

Currently, there are roughly 50 American tactical nuclear weapons already deployed to Turkey, suggesting that a Turkish bomb is not needed for Ankara to protect its vital interest.

Unless a severe rupture were to happen between Turkey and its fellow NATO allies, such as the expulsion of Turkey from the alliance, a Turkish nuclear bomb is a low-probability prospect.

Not any more.  But let's back up. In July, President Donald Trump

approved a landmark 30-year civilian nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia, paving the way for American companies to play a big role in building the kingdom’s nuclear energy infrastructure…

The agreement has prompted strong reactions from non-proliferation experts and members of Congress. Many analysts argue that uranium enrichment and spent fuel reprocessing represent the two principal technological pathways towards producing weapons-grade nuclear material.

They warn that even a civilian enrichment capability could provide Saudi Arabia with what is known as a latent nuclear weapons capability.

Experts also caution that moving away from the IAEA Additional Protocol could weaken established global non-proliferation standards and encourage other countries to seek similar exceptions.

“Whither goes Saudi Arabia, so goes the United Arab Emirates, Turkey and Egypt. The idea that this will have a happy ending is delusional,” Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, told WSJ.

And now saying the quiet part out loud:

Trump ADMITS He Would BOW TO IRAN if They Had NUKES

Trump on Iran:
If Iran had a nuclear weapon, I would be calling the Supreme Leader.

I would be saying, "Mr. Supreme Leader, how are you, sir? Is there anything we can do for you?" pic.twitter.com/c81YwORoOd

— Ryan Rozbiani (@RyanRozbiani) September 10, 2026

 

We knew that Donald Trump is a bully and fascist, from his threats against Cuba and Greenland; the police action and control over the Venezuelan government; and his favoritism toward Russia and Saudi Arabia. In his speech Tuesday evening at the Republican Party's mid-term convention in Dallas, the President made dangerous comments about Iran- more generally, about nuclear weapons- encourage a nuclear conflagration..

The media focused on Donald's promise that every American adult (or every American adult citizen) would be given $5,000 if Republicans retake the House and Senate in November. Possibly illegal, it is a deeply unethical bribe which will never come about but is possibly illegal and is deeply  unethical and worthy of attention. It would go by the wayside, as did Trump's promises of a DOGE dividend, rebate for tariffs, and compensation for Affordable Care Act subsidies.

Even if the President were to follow through, the impact, though harmful, would not be existential.  By contrast, these words about Iran from the leader of the world's greataest superpower will live on beyond his presidency. He wouldn't be around to answer for the consequences.

If they had a nuclear weapon, I'd be calling the Supreme Leader. And I'd be saying "Mr. Supreme Leader, how are you , sirIs there anything we can do for you?"- as opposed to bombing the crap out of them.

It's understandable, albeit reprehensible, that Trump would make these comments.  He will not have to pay a political price for them, not only because they're largely being ignored but also because by the time they'd have a devastating impact, he would be deceased. However, message received- by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and other bad actors. As Ana Kasparian, taking a moment's leave from hating on Israel, accurately noted, "greatest ad for going nuclear."

Share |