I ought to point out here that in my earlier post, I was not suggesting that I think that a nuclear-armed Iran would necessarily threaten us. Indeed, as Steve Sailer points out, Iran is not known for starting wars.
My point, in any case, was simply that Mark Steyn's proposals did not seem to match his rhetoric about what a problem Iran's nuclear problem was.
This means either that he simply doesn't have a plan; or more likely, that he doesn't really believe that Iran is that big a threat, but is trying to paint it as a bogeyman in order to wqve the old bloody shirt and stir up his readers for eventual war; that is, he is trying to incite the U.S. to take the next step down the path of conflict with Iran, so as to eventually put us in a place where we have to remove their curent government.
That is all.