Associated Press “military writer” Anne Gearan wants us to know that Obama’s no-nukes pledge is not so farfetched.

She gives this penetrating analysis of the arguments in favor of magically making all the nuclear weapons in the world vanish:

* Nuclear weapons have become more trouble than they are worth, an expensive luxury for superpowers and a threat for the rest of the world.

* The size of the U.S. and Russian arsenals inspires nuclear starter-states such as China to add to their stockpiles and give non-nuclear states a reason to join the club.

* Getting serious about eliminating nuclear weapons makes the United States more credible when it argues that states such as Iran should not be able to build their own arsenals.

What’s missing? Any acknowledgment whatsoever that non-nuclear states like Iran and Saudi Arabia might have other than altruistic goals for obtaining the world’s most powerful weapons, or that their aspirations for nukes might not be contingent on what the US does.

“An expensive luxury and a threat for the rest of the world?” That’s exactly why Iran wants nuclear weapons—to threaten the rest of the world.