There is a difference, potentially, between a device and a bomb of course. I think at that point the difference was probably a few months.
I have noted before about Iran that they claim not to be developing a nuclear weapon. And maybe they aren't the IAEA never found evidence for such a program extant today. Maybe they developed the capability in 2004 and stopped work because they don't have a B-29, or anything else capable of lifting a weapon that heavy very far. (Imagine their weapon might weight 2,000 pounds, maybe an F4 could be modified to carry it a fairly short distance, or even F14.)
So, now they work on missile capability. Now, a missile is not really all that dangerous with just conventional explosives. You don't do much damage with even tens of them in reality and you certainly call attention to yourselves. Iran would need hundreds of missiles, maybe thousands, with conventional warheads to do much damage. But of course a large enough missile with an atomic warhead ....
Over a thousand V2s were launched from 200 miles away at London and killed fewer than 3,000 people.
