Perspective:

- $9b per month increase in US oil export revenue as a result offsets probably 40% of the cost.

- Several trillion (with a 'T") of realized and yet to be realized FDI commitments from gulf states more than offsets cost by about 3x.

- A nuclear Iran carries economic costs I won't detail here to prevent a wall of text. In sum, forces other countries to go nuclear and take other actions to manage risk, and this happens in ways that could severely impact US dollar standing, US debt standing and US military spending. Its an interconnected world.

I know its unpopular to be pro-USA and pro-government on HN, but someone has to be the voice of reason - even if its at the bottom of the page.

▲

tencentshill 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>$25B in taxpayer money spent

At least $160 from every taxpayer in the US

>$9b per month increase in US oil export revenue

Goes directly to oil companies, taxed minimally if at all.

▲

7952 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

A problem with your "voice of reason" is the assumption that it will prevent nukes in Iran or the region. The US people have just offered an object lesson in why deterrent weapons are useful. How capricious they are in diplomacy. And how willing Americans are to withdraw boots on the ground in allied countries. Of course most of that won't be surprising to Iranians.

	▲	drnick1 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> The US people have just offered an object lesson in why deterrent weapons are useful. It's easy, we don't let them have nukes, period. Bombing their underground facilities was absolutely the right thing to do and can be repeated if/when they rebuild. I would go further, finish the job, and insist on complete disarmament of the country.