Iran solutions -- "rubble don't make trouble"

John Jay Carafano:

Iran wants nukes. Months of diplomatic efforts to dissuade the anti-American mullahs from their quest have yielded one muted and toothless United Nations resolution, and zero concessions.

Iran's intransigence, capped by this week's thumb-in-the-eye announcement that the nation has started enriching uranium, forces realists to consider alternatives to diplomacy. Common wisdom holds that there are no good military options. Here, common wisdom is right.

But just because military options are not attractive does not mean they should be ruled out. Though we are not there, the time may come when Iran's determination to play with nuclear fire makes bad options look better and better.

The military options at America's disposal range from the "merely" troubling, difficult and expensive, to the truly horrifying.

Option 1: Surgical attacks. The least unattractive option, it would be hard to pull off. Israel's quick-strike destruction of Iraq's Osirak nuclear facility 25 years ago cannot be replicated in Iran. The mullahs have dispersed, hardened and hidden nuclear installations and facilities throughout the country. Putting them out of commission would require a sustained and widespread campaign of air and missile strikes. Some locations would likely require American boots on the ground. Not an impossible task, but not quick and easy - or clean.

Option 2: Invasion. An even messier option, this would look something like the invasion of Iraq, only a bit tougher. Ultimately, Iran's military would be defeated. But U.S. military forces would be strained severely - a situation that would continue throughout an unpredictable and costly occupation. With unfinished business in Iraq and other critical commitments - such as defending South Korea, watching the Taiwan Strait, and supporting homeland security - this option hinges on America's willingness to commit to real and sustained increases in defense spending in the years ahead.

Option 3: Nuke 'em. The "rubble don't make trouble" approach is the least viable. Absent a clear, present and immediate threat of nuclear attack, Americans instinctively recoil from the thought of overthrowing even the maddest tyrant if the price tag includes millions of innocent dead.

Fortunately, additional defense-related options exist. Though they may not keep Iran from building a bomb, they can help make the neighborhood safer.

...

While a graduated approach may be tempting for some, it is the least wise. The graduated approach will put more political pressure on the US to stop, than it will Iran. It is also a signal of weakness of will. It gives the enemy time to adjust and adapt. It has been described as like a tailor who has made a coat too short, and is constantly having to go back and make it longer. It loses the maximum effect of the hard knock which disorients the enemy and makes it easier to get inside his decision cycle. In fact, the graduated approach gives the enemy an extended decision cycle. It should also be noted that Iran's capacity to make war can be reduced to rubble without resorting to nukes.