Russell Leiman: Nuclear grandstanding

Regarding Charles Krauthammer’s Jan. 22 column “GOP gets Iran prisoner swap wrong”: There are many elements to the nuclear deal with Iran that are far from what a “perfect” deal might include, and some are justifiable causes for concern and extreme vigilance.

However, prior to the start of the process that led to the agreed deal, Iran was widely accepted to be within at most 60 to 90 days of “nuclear breakout” – that is, the ability to produce sufficiently enriched nuclear material to make a bomb. That being the case, in the event Iran walked away from a deal that would have gained Krauthammer’s approval and instead moved swiftly to achieve nuclear breakout, what would Krauthammer have the United States do, in the following 90 days, to prevent that outcome?

Unless Krauthammer is willing to answer that question, he is just grandstanding. He won’t give that answer because the only option at that point is massive deep-bunker bombing that, at best, might delay Iran for some years, but never fully remove its ability to achieve breakout. And that bombing would precipitate an immediate regionwide, decades-long crisis.

Charlie-One-Note has become exceedingly wearying.

This story was originally published January 28, 2016 at 6:06 PM with the headline "Russell Leiman: Nuclear grandstanding."