As with most decisions, the tolerance for uncertainty remains one of the most difficult elements. A reflexive opinion about not thwarting the Iranian nuclear capacity can only reflect ideology ( it is wrong to do ) , a fear of consequences ( retaliation) or caution ( they can still be persuaded). I decision to attack reflects either an ideology ( they are an existential threat) and an accurate or fanciful interpretation of the facts. One best way to guide a decision is to ask, Where would you prefer to be wrong? The prospect of a nuclear Iran is only a matter of time and definitions ( implode device, warhead or suitcase radiation ). There is no credible evidence that there is a counter government in waiting or that Iran does not seek regional hegemony that will be markedly enhanced by this new capacity. And it will move the Sunni's to acquire weapons creating an uncontrollable risk arc from Pakistan to India to Iran to Saudi Arabia....If now now, when?
U.S. officials say agreement reached with Russia to extend Aleppo ceasefire (AP)
from the article: Here's how to decide whether to support an attack on Iran