Quote Originally Posted by Entropy View Post
Finally, can we retire the "all options are on the table" nonsense? Everyone understands that all options are not on the table. We're not going to invade Iran and we're not going to nuke them. There's a whole list of things, political and military, that we're not going to do. Talking tough is a lot different than being tough....
If Iran started getting frisky around the Straits of Hormuz, would venture we might invade there to secure the coastal areas most at risk for attack origination. Really don't believe we will try to cross the Zagros Mountains...but never thought anyone would try to land a C-130 in a soccer stadium either.

The real issue is what will Israel do. They bombed a potential nuke site in Syria...and the Syrians are less radical than Iranian leaders, both secular and religious. You've probably seen Charles Krauthammer's prediction at the Air Force Association today. He's usually pretty rationale but might be outside his area of expertise here. Still, the Israelis are not known to adhere to U.S. or world opinion, so polls and diplomacy are largely irrelevant if the Saudis give them a route.

Finally, would Israel use a nuke designed to explode deep underground to make a point and take out a hardened location? Obviously, Iran gives Hezbollah all the rockets/missiles it can handle. Why wouldn't they give them or some other terrorist organization a nuke?