[Intockatt]

I've heard people say that the only feasible operation that would guarantee we took out their capability would involve inserting large numbers of troops quickly to secure the nuclear facilities, destroy them completely and then leave quickly. This operation would be fraught with risk, and undoubtedly it would incur high casualties, and the possibility of devastating failure would be very high, and there is a real question as to whether the military is capable of pulling it off. of course the military is capable of it. The military is very capable of fighting conventional battlefield type wars. It is long protracted insurgencies that are the weakness of a conventional military and conventional approaches to warfare. The U.S. militaris can still squash these countries like a bug, it is just occupiying them for extended periods of time and trying to get them to adopt western values that is proving to be difficult. I think however this is much of the result of civil corruption and neighboring countries (namely Iran) stoking the insurgency, preciely for the reason that they dont' want to United States to have the will to attack them and stop their nuclear weapons program.
I am glad to see the democrats have at least the sense to realize that Iran is a problem that needs to be dealt with. The inherent structure of our two party system ensures that both parties will most of the time tend towards the middle of the road on most issues. Even if we had a parlimentary system and coalition governments I think the majority would still come out in support of what needed to be done in the Middle East.