"The world does not. The question is whether or not President Bush and the USA have the stomach for it."
"The US is pinned down in Iraq at the moment. This is no doubt the cause of the rhetoric and actions coming out of Iran. To go after Iran at this time, the US will have to get on a full war footing with a military draft. We will need many more troops. The Middle East isn't the only region with tyrants looking for opportunities to engage in mischief."
Baloney. The tactical objective in Iran is to eliminate its nuclear capability. We could do it partially by air power, but more effectively by air strikes combined with landing military personnel at each nuclear site.
We don't have to occupy the country. We don't have to rebuild the nation. Once we decapitate the mullahs, we don't even have to take out their army. Let them duke it out between the pro-democracy crowd and the the Islamic crowd.
The diplomats will have a cow. That's another benefit.
The tactical objective in Iran is to eliminate its nuclear capability. More correctly, that would the be primary objective. A secondary objective would be to ensure Iran is not the haven for transnational Islamic terrorists it has been, and still is.
We don't have to occupy the country. We don't have to rebuild the nation. Once we decapitate the mullahs, we don't even have to take out their army. Let them duke it out between the pro-democracy crowd and the the Islamic crowd.
Given the secondary objective, the above is correct if you remove the word "don't", and replace the last sentence with "We must ensure that the pro-democracy crowd wins."
If the US military/domestic situation does not allow the secondary objective to be pursued, then we may pursue the course you propose. But it will only delay the accomplishment of the secondary objective, which must still be accomplished.