John Bolton says that Iranians' rejection of their rulers means now is as good a time as any for the Israelis to bomb Iran. I actually heard this argument bandied around last week by a friend who had heard it at a dinner with high-powered New York business and media types, but I couldn't really take it seriously. I guess I underestimated the Right once again. Is it any surprise that the man who joked about nuking Chicago and virulently supported the Iraq war thinks that bombing Iran will solve Israel's problems?
The broader point is that Bolton does a lot to attack Obama's position but very little to defend his own. It's as if he believes the burden of proof is on those who don't favor war. But this is not 1981, Natanz is not Osirak, and the Iranian nuclear program will not be easy to destroy. The best the Israelis could hope for from an attack on Iran is a temporary setback to Iran's bombmaking capabilities, offset by a redoubled Iranian desire for a bomb. That doesn't seem like a good outcome for Israel.