This past week, President Barack Obama visited Israel for the first time in his presidency. During the trip, he made comments confirming the United States’ commitment to ensuring Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. Obama’s threats of war should concern Americans.

During the visit, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, “My view is that in order to stop Iran’s nuclear programs peacefully, diplomacy and sanctions must be augmented by a clear and credible threat of military action.” He thanked Obama “once again for always making clear that Israel must be able to defend itself by itself against any threat.”

While Israel may feel threatened by Iran, the threat Iran poses directly to the United States is unclear. The topic of Iran’s nuclear program has come up regularly in presidential debates and news stories on U.S. foreign policy. Many U.S. leaders assume Iran is attempting to or will secure a nuclear weapon. The reality is different.

Intelligence suggests a nuclear weapon will not be ready for at least one year. Iran insists its program is for civilian purposes. The United States and others are skeptical about its claims. In a video message to the people of Iran last Monday, Obama said the Iranian government has been “unable to convince the international community that their nuclear activities are solely for peaceful purposes. That’s why the world is united in its resolve to address this issue and why Iran is now so isolated.”

Obama has unintentionally accepted the role for the United States as the country that decides what other nations can have nuclear weapons. He has done this by threatening countries like North Korea and Iran. Recently, the United States has decided to increase its missile defense capabilities on the West Coast.

Throughout Obama’s visit, he stressed the need for peaceful diplomacy in resolving the conflict between Israel and Iran. “We prefer to resolve this diplomatically, and there’s still time to do so,” Obama said. But no options are off of the table.

In Iraq, President George W. Bush left “all options on the table.” He was eager to offer a military solution to the fictional problem of Saddam Hussein possessing weapons of mass destruction. In a speech directly before the invasion of Iraq, Bush said, “The Iraqi regime has used diplomacy as a ploy to gain time and advantage.” He said Iraq could aid terrorists, meaning there would be a threat to the United States.

When the United States entered Vietnam to supposedly contain communism, there was not a direct threat posed to the United States. President Lyndon Johnson made the case for involvement and said, “A threat to any nation in that region is a threat to all, and a threat to us.”

Iran’s nuclear program – whether for civilian purposes or military purposes – has not been proven to be problem for the United States. Another war is not needed to keep us safe and the threat of war need not be brought up. Without proper evidence, Iran’s nuclear program lacks a direct threat.

The United States has already started to provoke Iran. Last year, the U.S.-backed Stuxnet virus was sent to Iran’s nuclear centrifuges, disrupting its nuclear program, according to The New York Times. Had Iran sent a virus to disrupt infrastructure in the United States, the United States would undoubtedly retaliate. The United States has also flown drones into Iranian airspace, further provoking the country.

Obama and other legislators are leading the American people gently toward further conflict. Casual suggestions that the United States is prepared to engage Iran are just the first step. The threat of war should not be thrown around, lest history repeats itself.

Harmen Rockler is a senior newspaper and online journalism and political science major. His column appears weekly. He can be reached at horockle@syr.edu or followed on Twitter at @LeftofBoston.

Published on March 26, 2013 at 2:00 am