Make no mistake, President Bush will need to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities before leaving office. It is all but inconceivable that Iran will accept any peaceful inducements to abandon its drive for the bomb. Its rulers are religio-ideological fanatics who will not trade what they believe is their birthright to great power status for a mess of pottage. Even if things in Iraq get better, a nuclear-armed Iran will negate any progress there. Nothing will embolden terrorists and jihadists more than a nuclear-armed Iran.Muravchik, a Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, is helping to launch neoconservative's "Operation Comeback."
The global thunder against Bush when he pulls the trigger will be deafening, and it will have many echoes at home. It will be an injection of steroids for organizations such as MoveOn.org.
Indeed, do not be fooled by the apparent silence of the neocons for the past couple of years. They are mounting a full-on effort to duck responsibility for the Iraq war fiasco -- and they apparently plan to get things right in Iran.
This is why Pete Dombrowski and I want to invigorate the public debate about the prospects for such a war. Muravchik focuses on the negative implications of an Iranian bomb, but completely ignores the disastrous potential consequences of even a "limited" war against Tehran.
Coming attraction in this space: Explicit discussion of the downside of war with Iran.
Hat tip on Muravchik's article to Steve Clemons.
Visit this blog's homepage.
Filed as: Iran