For every human problem, there is a neat, simple solution; and it is always wrong.
   -H. L. Mencken

From James Joyner at Outside the Beltway:

The problem with a pre-emptive war to avoid a possible war at the time of the enemy’s choosing is that you definitely get a war at the time of your own choosing. I’m not yet convinced that’s a worthwhile exchange.

From Thomas Holsinger at Winds Of Change.NET:

America has come to another turning point - whether our inaction will again engulf the world and us in a nightmare comparable to World War Two. This will entail loss of our freedom as the price of domestic security measures against terrorist weapons of mass destruction, though we might suffer nuclear attack before implementing those measures. The only effective alternative is American use of pre-emptive military force against an imminent threat - Iranian nuclear weapons, which requires that we invade Iran and overthrow its mullah regime as we did to Iraq’s Baathist regime.

All the reasons for invading Iraq apply doubly to Iran, and with far greater urgency. Iran right now poses the imminent threat to America which Iraq did not in 2003. Iran may already have some nuclear weapons, purchased from North Korea or made with materials acquired from North Korea, which would increase its threat to us from imminent to direct and immediate.

Now, note the reaction of the White House as voiced by spokesman Scott McClellan to the recent release of a taped message from Osama bin Laden, “We do not negotiate with terrorists, we put them out of business… The terrorists started this war and the president made it clear that we will end it at a time and place of our choosing.” I’m not advocating negotiation, but if we could end this at “at time an place of our own choosing” why the Hell haven’t we chosen to end it yet? Making arrogant posturing statements that are obviously beyond our capabilities, this is helping our cause?

So, after tying up our military strength against a “threat” that was ambiguous at best even before it became clear that there was no “there” there, we are presented with a real threat of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a state that is known to have direct links to multiple terrorist groups.

Now what do we do?

How about instead of reacting with typical partisan idiocies, we search for a solution?

What a concept…