>>>>I did not hear what he said about Iran. He said he would never nuke iran? Does iran need nuking?
>>>
>>>During the democrat debates, he declared nuclear weapons would never be an option. During his trip, he stated nothing would be off the table to deal with Iran who he (now) considered a grave threat (as opposed to his earlier speech where he stated it was a tiny country like Cuba and Venezuela and no threat to the U.S.).
>>
>>Sounds like he's in the Diplomacy-to-ConventionalWeapons-response range, which sounds appropriate to me. Do you see the need for the US to use nukes in an engagement w/ Iran? We'd have to be very careful where we placed them so we dont inadvertantly close down the Hormuz, or turn some oil fields to glass.
>
>The point is not what I think, the point is that his positions are changing and not just a little.

When he said "nothing would be off the table", was he asked specifically about nukes or did he add that nukes were/were not an option? or did he just avoid being so detailed in his reply? I would expect him to avoid getting too detailed in his reply.