Bomb Iran?

Like many people, I believed that Iran's capture - more correctly kidnapping - of 15 British sailors was an act of war and that military retaliation may be justified if they had not been released.  It was my hope that their release was the result of, shall we say, back door communications between the governments of Great Britain and Iran.  Indeed, Tony Blair emphatically stated that no deals of any kind were made to secure their release.  Still, this presented a potential casus belli which would justify the removal of the mullahcracy in Iran, something which has to happen one way or the other if peace in the Middle East is ever to be a reality.

However, after reading this article by the esteemed Victor Davis Hanson I find myself somewhat embarrassed to admit that I was missing something.  Not that my logic was invalid, but there was one essential fact that I overlooked:

It’s probably a good rule to do the opposite of anything the Iranian theocracy wants. Apparently, this government is now doing its darnedest to be bombed. So, for the time being, we should not grant them this wish.

Indeed.  The first rule of this war should be "Never give the terrorists what they want if at all possible."  Methinks that Prime Minister Blair was being craftier than I gave him credit for.  However, note that I said "if at all possible."  Actually, to clarify I should probably add "and if it makes sense strategically."  There may very well still come a time when military intervention in Iran is required, for example if intelligence indicates that they are close to manufacturing a working nuclear weapon.

Hat tip to Sithmonkey at Cold Fury who has some wonderfully subversive ideas on how to topple the Iranian regime without a military invasion.