While I am coming to the conclusion that we won't initiate any aerial campaign against Iran until they roll out a missile that glows brightly enough for the New York Times to see, when that time comes, this will be a weeks long campaign that will be far more intense than the Kosovo War in 1999.
Ralph Peters thinks that Israel can do no more than hit Iran's nuclear facilities while it will be necessary to hit a broad target set to blunt an Iranian counter-attack. Peters sets forth the target sets.
I think his list is too short, as I wrote two and a half years ago.
Yes, such a campaign may make Iranians hate us, as Peters writes. So it is hardly ideal. But perhaps not for long. Our Left got over their "we're all Americans, now" moment within a couple years of the 9/11 attacks. I bet another attack on our country would lead large portions of the Left to argue Bush is responsible.
And as I've said many times, why would it be superior to have Iran's mullahs armed with nuclear weapons ruling a population that likes us over an Iran defanged with their people angry at us? I repeat, I will not take much comfort that the Iranian people are really sad that Iran nuked Charleston.
Unless we get lucky, there is no easy solution to the Iran problem. And an aerial attack would be no surgical strike that quickly and cheaply ends the problem.