I presume that you did not contest any of the 11 points I submitted, largely because you believe they are irrelevant. In other words, even if the war is brought to a prompt conclusion, it does not matter because " Iran is going to eventually acquire nuclear weapons ."
10 of the 11 points, however, deal with the symptoms that have confounded the president's objective because he has consistently declined to state or recognize that the fixed goal of the war is to effect regime change.
Without regime change, I agree with you, an Islamist regime will eventually acquire nuclear weapons. With regime change, miracles can happen. Epiphanies make for rehabilitation. That is the essential message of Christianity. But it has happened in Islam more than once; witness Anwar Sadat. That is why, for example, we failed to arm dissident Iranians, because we failed to define victory properly.
So the 11 symptoms are but the product of a failure to define victory. A meaningful, permanent victory is indeed achievable with regime change - however difficult that might be to accomplish without boots on the ground.

I actually don’t agree with all of your points, but did not see it fruitful to debate individually. Your last, about Regime change is even more difficult. Who is actually in charge in Iran? No deal is ever honored by them. No attempt to negotiate is ever in good faith. This has been consistent for decades. Who gives the orders for the worldwide terrorist attacks, help and support of Bin Laden and Al Queda? I noticed a huge draw down when Soleimani was eliminated. Boots on the ground to Regime change who? I doubt that there is a snakes head to cut off, but there might be a beast to starve.