The bombs aren't falling in Iran - not yet anyway. Unfortunately, It's probably just a matter of time - it depends on how uncooperative and belligerent the Iranians get.
It is not in the best interests of organized nations to permit Iran to gain nuclear weapons. It's a given that the uranium enrichment they want to do is for development of fissile nuclear weapons - to spread their "Islamic fundamentalism" abroad.
The path of diplomacy is currently being tried in earnest. Trouble is, these "Islamic fundamentalists" do not seem to respond to diplomatic solutions very well. When diplomacy fails, the last resort is often a military one in these kinds of cases.
Iran pokes at Israel and the U.S. in an effort to draw a military confrontation. The main purpose of that is to manufacture an excuse for even more acts of "Islamic fundamentalism" (a.k.a. terrorism).
Iran should be careful what they wish for, because they might get it - and they won't like it. Iran thinks the underground hardened facilities are safe - but they are not. The U.S., The U.K., and Israel have the tools to take out those facilities if need be.
Military action against terrorism has been considerably more effective than the opponents of military action in Iraq and Afghanistan are admitting.
Quote:
|
what does destroying infrastructure do for us?
|
In a war scenario, destruction of infrastructure hampers the ability of the opponent forces to fight back. You take out power plants, communications, and other things that the opponent forces need to continue to wage war. Conventional wars are won by killing the opponent forces and blowing up the things that they need. Unfortunately, non-combatants (civilians) are often effected by the same infrastructure damage.
Generally speaking, war sucks - that's why diplomacy is tried first.