In short, the stolen election and its tumultuous aftermath have dramatically highlighted the strategic and tactical flaws in Obama's game plan. With regime change off the table for the coming critical period in Iran's nuclear program, Israel's decision on using force is both easier and more urgent. Since there is no likelihood that diplomacy will start or finish in time, or even progress far enough to make any real difference, there is no point waiting for negotiations to play out. In fact, given the near certainty of Obama changing his definition of "success," negotiations represent an even more dangerous trap for Israel.
Those who oppose Iran acquiring nuclear weapons are left in the near term with only the option of targeted military force against its weapons facilities. Significantly, the uprising in Iran also makes it more likely that an effective public diplomacy campaign could be waged in the country to explain to Iranians that such an attack is directed against the regime, not against the Iranian people. This was always true, but it has become even more important to make this case emphatically, when the gulf between the Islamic revolution of 1979 and the citizens of Iran has never been clearer or wider. Military action against Iran's nuclear program and the ultimate goal of regime change can be worked together consistently.
Otherwise, be prepared for an Iran with nuclear weapons, which some, including Obama advisers, believe could be contained and deterred. That is not a hypothesis we should seek to test in the real world. The cost of error could be fatal.
Ron Kampeas at JTA, blessedly, offer some pointed comment on Bolton's idiocy.
Iran has turned upside down, no one has any real sense of how this will turn out, but John Bolton thinks we should bomb the place anyway. This is a public diplomacy campaign I'd like to see. I'm thinking the likes of Slim Pickens riding in on the misslles screaming "Pardon my bombs!"
With Iran as close as it is to a nuclear device, and with support for such a capability widespread, the most realistic likelihood of neutralizing the threat would seem to be a friendly -- or at least a not-hostile -- regime. I'm not sure how bombing helps.
I just wish Kampeas had a taller pulpit than Bolton's. OK, so Bolton is a former US rep to the UN. I don't care. Fear-mongering is fear-mongering. Enough is enough. The Washington Post editorial board ought to exercise better judgment than to publish Bolton's screeds.
For my money, the Iranian government is not nearly as much a threat to world peace as is the American Enterprise Institute.