What a conundrum? On the one hand, I'm drawn to the ostrich in the sand approach. I have a strong isolationist streak in me. Iran is a problem for Israel, Sunni Arab states and Europe more than it is for the US. Let the Europeans handle this one seeing as most of them were none-too-pleased with how Iraq was handled by the US. Long before Los Angeles is within reach of President Ahmadinejad's nukes Athens, Berlin and Rome will be inside Iran's range. Europe needs to resolve this now, but the US can probably wait, at least a little while.
Unfortunately, if Ahmadinejad's public utterances are taken seriously, then not long after Iran's nukes are ready Israel will be in the gun sights. At that stage Israel will have a choice between annihilation or complete surrender. Not a happy choice, which probably means that Israel will HAVE to act before Iran's nukes are ready. How far away can that be? And, what will the consequences be? How will the Arab states react? What about Pakistan? Turkey? Indonesia? How strong are the bonds of the "Islamic world"? I guess we'd find out.
How bad would it have to get for the Israelis before they unleashed everything at their disposal? Just imagine what the reaction would be if a nuclear bomb explodes in Tehran or Riyadh or Cairo or Mecca?
So, I suppose as much as I'd like to ignore this one, it just can't be done. There seems to be little option other than preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Yet, there also seems little hope of achieving that. I don't think sanctions will have an impact. There probably isn't enough time to foster an internal rebellion to overthrow Ahmadinejad & the Mullahs. Air strikes will probably accomplish a lot, but at the expense of high civilian casualties and still we wouldn't be sure that we had knocked out their nuclear program. Invading Iran, toppling the regime and occupying the country just seems an impossibility.
And, if all of that weren't reason enough to be gloomy, we're still 72 days from the opening of the baseball season.
