This may not end well

[jocular]

I certainly don't trust them to be the gatekeepers of apocalyptic weaponry..

Sure ,but everyone has to do their bit and no one can suggest that nuclear armory can (or even should ) be wished away at a stroke.

It must be the strong direction steered at every turn ,though and "whataboutery" is only useful so long as it serves this end .

There seems to be a tolerance for the use of these weapons to be tolerated in discussion where there should be a taboo on even bringing up the subject except as a last resort

Both Trump and Putin seem to be verbally incontinent in this regard .

That sort of talk should be ,on its own grounds for impeachment .

[Lomax]

Sure ,but everyone has to do their bit and no one can suggest that nuclear armory can (or even should ) be wished away at a stroke.

By all means, but the US isn't "doing its bit". Doing its bit would be putting pressure on the United Nations, which is the government whose laws have been broken by the missile test, and which cares a lot more about worldwide non-proliferation than the US does.

Ronjanec implies that Obama should have, and Hillary Clinton would not have, undertaken a more direct and unilateral involvement in this matter. I think that would not just have been hypocrisy and bullying (the continuation of a long tradition of the US-Iran relationship). It would be extremely stupid strategy. If Iran does get hold of nukes it wants to use, why would the US want to have carved itself as Iran's number one enemy?

There seems to be a tolerance for the use of these weapons to be tolerated in discussion where there should be a taboo on even bringing up the subject except as a last resort

I cannot imagine even a last resort in which I would launch nuclear weaponry. But there's no evidence Iran has nuclear weaponry. That's not what it has been caught testing.