One op-ed "War Is Probably Our Best Option" in The Washington Post makes a very clear case for the use of force against Iran as against the current "negotiations" that actually mean surrender to Iran in many eyes.
The Obama Kerry Iran appeasement is causing immediate unintended consequences in the world most unstable and explosive region. Already this week Saudi Arabia has reached out for nuclear agreement with South Korea and has promised to "match" anything Iran does. Egypt will certainly be next, followed perhaps by Turkey and others. Why? Because they see the consequences of the Obama-Kerry plan, and are adjusting to reality. The reality is, the USA is going to allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon and ICBM delivery systems too. The latter a crucial and overlooked marker from Iran as to it's future intentions.
Further reality is that the USA has lost the trust of key Sunni Middle East countries like Saudi, Jordan,the Gulf States and Egypt- not to mention Israel. More reality? They are going to go nuclear too, and Israel will have to also go the ICBM route to match Iran. So much for "Nuclear peace in our time". The result is a nuclear nightmare.
The fruit of this plan, worse than Chamberlain's piece of paper with Hitler. will be darker than any limited strike on Iran in the long run.
The worst nightmare would be a nuclear armed Middle East, dominated by Iran, given the fundamental Sunni-Shia divide that has driven all Islamic politics since the death of Ali at Kebala in 680 AD. The arms-race in that region as a result of the Iran Obama/Kerry deal will be fast paced, multi-country and determined.
The author is correct- only force or the threat of it stopped Middle Eastern nations from acquiring nuclear weapons abilities. That did not happen with North Korea only because, with uncertainty over the neighboring China's reaction, force could not be used. Who is going to render the same virtual protection to Iran? Only China and Russia can, and there is no indication they wish to have a nuclear Iran on their doorsteps either. Their outrage would be cosmetic.
It is the threat of force and crippling sanctions that brought Iran to the negotiating table in the first place and only guarantor of a non-nuclear Middle East, on the doorstep of Europe, is more of the same. The USA has the technology to take out Iran's nuclear programme with very little cost now. It will be impossible to remove it, or control it, a decade from now.