Want To Attack Iran? Then Make A Case.

Strategic Horizons: Want to Attack Iran? Then Make a Case -- Steven Metz, World Politics Review

Talk of a U.S. attack on Iran is like a late-summer thunderstorm that rumbles ominously in the distance without ever drifting further away. Few American observers advocate an immediate attack, but a growing number hint that the question is when, not if, a strike takes place. The distance from saber-rattling to war is narrowing.

As is often the case in the prelude to war, the discussion has so far been informed more by passion than by analysis, stoked by popular distrust of the Iranian regime. As the United States found when contemplating the invasion of Iraq in 2002, such an over-heated environment makes it difficult to coolly assess alternatives. But to avoid disaster, that is exactly what we must do. The burden of proof lies with those who contend that an attack is necessary and that the strategic benefits for U.S. national security outweigh the costs. So far advocates of military action have not made their case. If they are to do so, they must first answer three central questions.

Read more ....

My Comment: I concur .... advocates for a "war of choice" against Iran have not made a convincing case that we should pursue this policy. But (unfortunately) I suspect that we will not have this debate .... that U.S. policy will be pushed by others who will be primarily motivated by their own interests .... and not ours .... and that when war does break out, we will then be drawn into a bloody conflict because of strategic treaties and national security obligations.