Mitt Romney - I would Bomb Iran

Romney - "If for some reason they continue down their course of folly toward nuclear ambition, then I would take military action if that's available to us."

That comment was firmly criticized by Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards who earlier this year said basically the same thing:

"Iran must know that the world won’t back down. The recent UN resolution ordering Iran to halt the enrichment of uranium was not enough. We need meaningful political and economic sanctions. We have muddled along for far too long. To ensure that Iran never gets nuclear weapons, we need to keep ALL options on the table, Let me reiterate – ALL options must remain on the table."

I guess "all options" just sounds better than military action.

Fortunately no one will ever have to worry about Edwards being in a position to make such a decision.

Cheney's Plan for Iran Attack

According to alternet information about how the a war with Iran may start has been leaked.

"In the scenario concocted by Cheney's strategists, Washington's first step would be to convince Israel to fire missiles at Iran's uranium enrichment plant in Natanz. Tehran would retaliate with its own strike, providing the US with an excuse to attack military targets and nuclear facilities in Iran."

On the subject of the USA going to war with Iran Presidential candidate John McCain recently said war with Iran was "maybe closer to reality than we are discussing tonight."

Some feel that war with Iran is inevitable, others are not so sure. It would be somewhat easy for Bush to prove that Tehran, by supporting insurgents in Iraq, is responsible for the deaths of American soldiers. It might be harder to prove that Iran's nuclear plans pose an immediate threat to the world. The real question is would the USA back a president or military action against Iran if the only real case for war was the death of some US troops in Iraq?