I am certain Trump would have even willing to tarnish his fake 'peace maker' image had there not been considerable risk to the American soldiers who are stationed in the Middle East: They have been called 'sitting ducks' by many analysts. Plus, the Arab nations' unwillingness to help an attack on Iran makes this even more risky and complicated--and, yes, Arab nations are not helping, at least as of now, and this was confirmed by Trita Parsi in a vlog yesterday; I consider Mr. Parsi to be the number one resource on Iran-America relations.
NY Times main headline right now.
Israel had planned to strike Iranian nuclear sites as soon as next month but was waved off by President Trump in recent weeks in favor of negotiating a deal with Tehran to limit its nuclear program, according to administration officials and others briefed on the discussions.
Mr. Trump made his decision after months of internal debate over whether to pursue diplomacy or support Israel in seeking to set back Iran’s ability to build a bomb, at a time when Iran has been weakened militarily and economically.
The debate highlighted fault lines between historically hawkish American cabinet officials and other aides more skeptical that a military assault on Iran could destroy the country’s nuclear ambitions and avoid a larger war. It resulted in a rough consensus, for now, against military action, with Iran signaling a willingness to negotiate.