In your opinion, how far should the US go to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons?

Up to and including military action (36%) – "If Iran gets nukes, all bets are off on the Middle East, including the survival of Israel. This is unacceptable and Iran knows it. If they persist in their arrogant goal of developing nukes, they should be stopped by any means necessary. And that of course includes military action. Nobody wants Iran to have nukes because they know they are fully capable and likely to use them against American and Israeli interests. Iran is a terrorist nation and the middle East's largest supporter of terrorist organizations. They need to be stopped sooner rather than later."

• "It’s self serving, but most countries don’t have the maturity to handle nukes. We barely do, but Western powers have grown up with the reality instead of rhetoric. Aspiring countries should build up a common commercial integration than military strengths."

"Iran having nukes is an existential threat to several allies in the region. Israel is obviously the most prominent, but Khomeini is a religious zealot, a tyrannical despot, and frankly an unhinged man. You do not want someone like that in complete, unfettered control of nuclear weapons ANYWHERE. He's close enough to hit European allies, Middle Eastern allies, and some of our assets in Africa. If we leave him alone, Africa and Europe become very dangerous places to be."

• "Iran has proven many times that they cannot be trusted regarding their nuclear program. Israel's military doesn’t have the heavy bunker-busting weapons to truly penetrate and destroy Iran's main nuclear enrichment facilities. Only the US can do that. If Iran was to build atomic weapons, history has shown that the religious fanatics in Iran would use them against Israel. Israel would retaliate in kind. To prevent this from happening, those Iranian facilities have to be destroyed. Only the US can assure that happens."

Use all possible options outside of military action (34%) – "The nuclear sword is the biggest threat to the world, and it needs to be stopped immediately. Irans attempts to create nuclear weapons need to be nipped in the bud. I only reason I didn’t select the option of military force is that it could possibly create more of a nuclear threat than before."

• "I don't think a military invasion makes sense, the US will be pulled into another long-term war where thousands of people will lose their lives. There will be no winner!"

"In my opinion, Israel started attacking way too soon. If they were trying to negotiate I would have brought more leaders from other countries to the table to put pressure on Iran first before having Israel attack Iran. I'm still trying to understand who was involved in this decision (countries) and why they decided to escalate so quickly. I can't fully comprehend at the moment, but also realize there is probably a lot I don't know yet."

Make some efforts, but don’t push too hard (9%) – "I'm just not sure how the US should handle the Middle East situation anymore. It seems like nothing is working, and I don't want the US too involved, but something should be done."

Don’t get involved (12%) – "Many believe it’s not America’s fight and that resources and focus should go toward fixing problems at home. Involvement could also escalate tensions, draw in other global powers, and put American lives at risk—without a clear benefit to U.S. security. Staying out helps avoid making the conflict worse or fueling anti-American sentiment in the region."

Unsure/other (9%) – "Nuclear weapons are a terrifying reality of our world. Gatekeeping access to them, while sometimes desirable, seems to be in the long run impossible. Therefore, where is our energy best focused? Is it wise to passively let other companies obtain obliterating weapons? Is it unwise to make enemies while trying to limit nuclear warheads? Is developing defenses a better use of our time? There is no good answer and frankly I'm glad I don't have to make these decisions."