Saul Singer in the Jerusalem Post argues that “Iran is pivotal.” It’s hard to disagree with Singer given Iran’s proximity to and connections with Iraq, its nuclear program, its connections with terrorists, and the disaffection of so many Iranians with the regime that poses such a threat. It’s also hard to disagree with Singer’s view that, with Iranian elections set for June, the Bush administration should be more engaged.
Meanwhile, Caroline Glick, also in the Jerusalem Post, fears that even with a better effort by President Bush regime change won’t come to Iran quickly enough to prevent the Iranian nuclear weapons program from reaching completion. Glick thinks that only an attack on Iran can accomplish this, and that the U.S. cannot expect Israel, preoccupied as it is with the Palestinians and with pulling out of Gaza and Samaria, to launch that attack.
-
-
Most Read on Power Line
Donate to PL
-
Our Favorites
- American Greatness
- American Mind
- American Story
- American Thinker
- Aspen beat
- Babylon Bee
- Belmont Club
- Churchill Project
- Claremont Institute
- Daily Torch
- Federalist
- Gatestone Institute
- Hollywood in Toto
- Hoover Institution
- Hot Air
- Hugh Hewitt
- InstaPundit
- Jewish World Review
- Law & Liberty
- Legal Insurrection
- Liberty Daily
- Lileks
- Lucianne
- Michael Ramirez Cartoons
- Michelle Malkin
- Pipeline
- RealClearPolitics
- Ricochet
- Steyn Online
- Tim Blair
Media
Subscribe to Power Line by Email
Temporarily disabled
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.