While the reporting is good the presentation is all over the place. I think it could be tighter in terms of tying things together. The facts are chilling in themselves but we need more of a starting point or a reference channel to make heads or tails of what he is saying...

An article that attempts to gather together all the current "thinking" about bombing Iran. Although confusing, the question becomes: is the article confusing, or are the events surrounding the Iran question confusing? Whichever, the article makes an excellent point: radically conservative war hawks have learned nothing from their reckless excursion into Iraq. In their Disneyland justifications about the the bombings, and their myopic focus losing Iran’s oil, with its $6 per-gallon consequences, they completely ignore the severity of Iran’s retaliation on Iraq and Afghanistan.

It's a comprehensive round-up of current thinking on whether or not we'll attack Iran. A think tank maintains it's not only doable, but manageable. Full disclosure: The submitter is the author.

The point seems to be that the Right is trying to justify an attack on Iran. Exactly what the connection between the recent Israeli air exercises and the White House is not at all clear. The author includes some information about an alleged kidnap plot. It's really hard to figure out what he's actually trying to prove.