The military option - or accepting Christ as your own personal weapon....

So apparently the Bush war making machine is looking ahead to the next stage of the "Long-War" as they are now exploring the military option in Iran. To say that this would be disasterous is merely most egregious understatement ever. Iran for its part understands that this is mere political maneuvering to force nuclear monitors back into Iran (they hope, as do we).
Bush, of course, denies that the military option is being explored.
"The doctrine of prevention is to work together to prevent the Iranians from having a nuclear weapon," Mr. Bush said after being asked whether the United States would allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons. "I know here in Washington prevention means force; it doesn't mean force, necessarily. In this case, it means diplomacy." (Jim Rutenberg, NY TIMES http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/11/world/middleeast/11prexy.html?th&emc=th )
This denial is despite the fact that Seymour Hersh reported that the Joint Chiefs of Staff (these folks might be consider THE RELIABLE SOURCE if ever there was one) were trying to remove a nuclear option in Iran from the table - and considering resigning if it wasn't removed. (The New Yorker, http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact ) The very idea of nuclear prevention is nuts, I think Fred Kaplan of Slate put it best:
"Pre-emptive war—attacking a country to keep it from attacking us or an ally—is sometimes justifiable. Preventive war—attacking a country to keep it from developing a capability to attack an ally sometime in the future—almost never is. And preventive war waged with nuclear weapons is (not to put too fine a spin on it) crazy." (http://www.slate.com/id/2139610/?nav=tap3)