REPLIES TO THE CURRENT QUESTION

Our question last week was:

Iran apparently now has enough fissile material to build a nuclear bomb, if the material is enriched further.  What should our strategy be?  Negotiate?  Let them have the bomb?  Attack?  Impose sanctions?

Here are your answers.  The name of a writer is included only if he or she actually placed a name at the end of the message.  Otherwise, we assume the writer wished anonymity and "name withheld" is inserted.

There were only two replies to our question this week.  We encourage readers to give us their thoughts:

Attack! Attack! Attack!
 
As Michael Ledeen says, “Faster, please!”
 
Alan Weick

I doubt if anything short of the destruction of Iran's nuclear program will prevent it from developing the ability to deliver a crippling attack -- first to Israel, and then to the United States.  Nonetheless, I think we might start with a very "big stick" - a blockade of shipping, and any other serious sanctions that have any chance of working.  When these fail to work, they will at least provide some moral cover for the destruction of Iran's atomic weapons program.  We cannot sit still and allow Iran to launch a nuclear attack.

To date, all diplomacy, sanctions, and tough talk have failed.  The U.S. looks weak, and we have wasted valuable time.  At some point, there will be the need for a well-planned and well-executed offensive to take out Iran's nuclear weapon capability for a very long time.  We have been kicking this can down the road far too long.  The danger grows as we continue to delay.

Is there any possibility of such a response?  Not really. Europe, China and Russia will be of no help. And as the chaos in Washington grows, Obama is reportedly too "tired" and "overworked" by the economic crisis to deal with foreign affairs and other trivial distractions.

Mary Grodnik