Writing in the Washington Post, Former UN Ambassador John R. Bolton suggests that an Israeli attack aimed at the eradication of Iran’s emergent nuclear capacity is a reasonable proposition. And just yesterday, Vice President Joe Biden told George Stephanopoulos that such a strike was within Israel’s sovereign power even if it was not entirely in line with US policy. What is going on here?
First, the idea that American political leaders and opinion makers on both sides of the aisle are comfortable with even suggesting this kind of proxy warfare is morally reprehensible. If bombing Iran is such a great idea, then we should do it ourselves. And if we know that it would be misguided for us to do, then we ought not to invite others to do it for us.

Second, the notion that such an attack would not immediately jeopardize American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan is inane. So to the extent that an Israeli strike would widen our wars in the region, it’s not even an effective use of the morally offensive proxy that these guys seem to embrace.
Third, no matter how much it bothers, me or anyone else, the notion that the world will eventually have to live with a nuclear Iran is a reasonable proposition in and of itself. Not because that’s the way it ought to be, but simply because it is the nature of all technological capacity to diffuse to ever-wider audiences. Think gunpowder between the 16th and 18th centuries.
So in light of all this, I ask you: Should Israel bomb Iran?