Time to Attack Iran? | Foreign Affairs

[Some articles are limited unless you have a subscription.]

Essay – Jan/Feb 2012

Time to Attack Iran

Matthew Kroenig

Opponents of military action against Iran assume a U.S. strike would be far more dangerous than simply letting Tehran build a bomb. Not so, argues this former Pentagon defense planner. With a carefully designed attack, Washington could mitigate the costs and spare the region and the world from an unacceptable threat. Read

Response

Not Time to Attack Iran

Colin H. Kahl

Matthew Kroenig’s recent article in this magazine argued that a military strike against Iran would be “the least bad option” for stopping its nuclear program. But the war Kroenig calls for would be far messier than he predicts, and Washington still has better options available. Read

Author Interview

Q&A With Colin H. Kahl on Dealing With Iran

Colin H. Kahl

As part of Foreign Affairs’ The Iran Debate: To Strike or Not to Strike, Georgetown Professor Colin H. Kahl took questions submitted to the conversation from Twitter. Read

Response

The Case For Regime Change in Iran

Jamie M. Fly and Gary Schmitt

Bombing Iran’s nuclear program would only be a temporary fix. Instead, the United States should plan a larger military operation that also aims to destabilize the regime and, in turn, resolves the Iranian nuclear crisis once and for all. Read

Response

The Flawed Logic of Striking Iran

Alexandre Debs and Nuno P. Monteiro

To suggest a nuclear Iran would result in a cascade of proliferation across the Middle East neglects the United States’ power to prevent clients from building their own bombs. Read