Can they? No, not by themselves. I've read various assessments of the amount and type of air power it would take to effectively strike at Iran's nuclear facilities and it is just a bridge too far for IDF. However, with a little help it becomes doable. Challenging, risky, but doable. Who could/would they look to for that help? Traditionally, well, us. But it is virtually unthinkable that our terrorist supporting, not-so-closeted muslim in chief would authorize such a military operation. The wild card in the region? Saudi Arabia. They don't want a nuclear armed Iran any more than Israel does. Several reasons behind that. Saudi air bases and refueling would help Israel immensely. Add in flying some support missions (ones that don't require tight coordination with main strike packages 'cause they just haven't exercised/rehearsed together) and it not only becomes doable but an emphatic political statement too.
Should they? Sadly, yes, I believe they should. The US certainly will not do it. H*ll, bammy, Kerry, and cohorts are helping the Iranians. As terrible as it is to contemplate, the lives that will be lost, damage done, risks taken, etc. The potential (scratch that, make that likely) risks and damage that would be done by a nuclear armed Iran outweigh the likely losses of removing that threat.
Can they? No, not by themselves. I've read various assessments of the amount and type of air power it would take to effectively strike at Iran's nuclear facilities and it is just a bridge too far for IDF.I believe that Israel has enough nukes to destroy Iran. Bibi's problem is that he has said that Iran presents an existential threat. If that's true, then he has no choice but to use every weapon in his arsenal to destroy Iran. Of course, if he doesn't believe that Iran presents an existential threat, then he won't. Who knows what he really thinks? Has he painted himself into a corner? If he does nothing, how will history judge him and his statements?