Small Wars Journal

There Are Only Two Choices Left on Iran

Mon, 09/28/2009 - 4:47am
There Are Only Two Choices Left on Iran - Eliot A. Cohen, Wall Street Journal opinion.

Unless you are a connoisseur of small pictures of bearded, brooding fanatical clerics there is not much reason to collect Iranian currency. But I kept one bill on my desk at the State Department because of its watermark - an atom superimposed on the part of that country that harbors the Natanz nuclear site. Only the terminally innocent should have been surprised to learn that there is at least one other covert site, whose only purpose could be the production of highly enriched uranium for atom bombs.

Pressure, be it gentle or severe, will not erase that nuclear program. The choices are now what they ever were: an American or an Israeli strike, which would probably cause a substantial war, or living in a world with Iranian nuclear weapons, which may also result in war, perhaps nuclear, over a longer period of time...

More at The Wall Street Journal.

Comments

The WSJ headline is misleading - the writer suddenly discovers a third choice in the last para. How choice three works is left to the reader's imagination, however.

Did I miss the memo? When did we move into this black and white world of only having two choices on Afghanistan, Iran, or anything else? This type of thinking is not only limiting and lacking, it is dangerous.

v/r

Mike