[M. Dodge Thomas]

Or, Iran might just announce that the "The Great Satan and it's Pygmy Leaders has once against demonstrated their impotence and criminality" and that its nuclear programs were still intact - likely neither we nor anyone else outside of Iran would know if this were true or not.

As recent events in Lebanon reminded us, if your are the militarily stronger power, anything less than a convincing victory is regarded in much of the world as a defeat.

Events in Iraq have already reduced the credibility of our ground forces as a deterrent, a "failed" air attack on Iran would do the same for our air-power. Unless we are prepared to bring such an effort to a convincingly successful conclusion - something that could not be done by air-power alone, but which would likely require occupying the country and ferreting out well-hidden installations - IMO we should not start down the road of half-measuers.

[quantfive]

"Events in Iraq have already reduced the credibility of our ground forces as a deterrent, a "failed" air attack on Iran would do the same for our air-power. Unless we are prepared to bring such an effort to a convincingly successful conclusion - something that could not be done by air-power alone, but which would likely require occupying the country and ferreting out well-hidden installations - IMO we should not start down the road of half-measuers."

Agreed, if we don't attack with combined forces of air, ground troops, tanks, missles, special opps the works then we should bone up our intelligence like we did in the Cold War, secure our borders and put Iran on notice that a WMD strike on any of our allies guarantees a nuclear response from us.

[Maceman]

As recent events in Lebanon reminded us, if your are the militarily stronger power, anything less than a convincing victory is regarded in much of the world as a defeat.

The Arab Press and MSM, but the "Arab street" knows that the Lebanese people would prefer not to have any more such victories.