The Question Of Bombing Iran Really Is Not A Question Of Who Should Do It

Jeffrey Goldberg's article that Iran will be stopped before it reaches The Point Of No Return still leaves unanswered who is actually going to be the one to bomb Iran.

Goldberg's article has been widely discussed, but according to Jonathan Tobin, Speculation About Israel Attacking Iran Misses the Point:

It is unhelpful because, as Shimon Peres seems to be telling Goldberg in the conclusion to his essay, dealing with Iran is America’s responsibility, not Israel’s.
The consequences of an Iranian bomb are enormous for Israel, but they are no less scary for the United States. A nuclear Iran would destabilize the Middle East, start a chain-reaction of nuclear proliferation among other countries in the region, and empower Islamist terrorists. If America stands by and meekly attempts to contain Tehran once it has the bomb, it won’t be just international law that won’t mean a thing, as Christopher Hitchens has pointed out. America’s credibility as a great power will be shredded. Putting the onus on Israel to act to save the day also has the unfortunate side effect of lessening the pressure on Obama to face his responsibilities.

The fact remains that a nuclear Iran is going to empower terrorists--terrorists who we already have seen are not limiting their attacks to the Middle East and Europe but who have successfully attacked the US and continue to attempt to harm her.

Any 'realist' who claims that a nuclear Iran is no big deal and is neither a threat nor a concern for the US is simply not being realistic.

Which means the burden of making the decision to attack Iran falls squarely in the lap of Obama--and unlike the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq and Iran, taking out Iran's nuclear facilities has a natural timetable.

Technorati Tag: Iran and Obama.