The question on the minds of everyone watching the events unfold in the Middle East (namely, the whole world) is “what will the United States (meaning President Donald Trump) do?” Reports, from the Wall Street Journal and elsewhere, tell us the president has approved a U.S. strike plan against Iran, but is holding off issuing the order, in the forlorn hope the Ayatollah and whoever is left of the cretinous band of sadists who comprise the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary government will at long last do the one thing their Islamic Revolutionary DNA has never allowed them to do: completely, verifiably and under international supervision, surrender their efforts to develop an Islamic Revolutionary nuclear bomb.

You may count this scribe among those whom Tulsi Gabbard has identified as the “political elite and warmongers” who hope that, by the time you read this, the president — with congressional approval — will have followed through with his promise.

First things first — Israel had absolutely no choice but to strike Iran when she did. The Economist received the inside details about the intelligence that spurred Israel to the critical moment:

“…the information presented by Israel includes a detailed account of a recent, more urgent, push by Iranian scientists toward ‘weaponisation’, or the creation of an explosive nuclear device… Israel’s intelligence states that a meeting had been scheduled between the scientists and commanders of the IRGC’s air force, who are in charge of ballistic missiles. The information shared by Israel with its allies argues this proposed meeting was a Rubicon, with the missile chiefs being let in on the secret for the first time, suggesting in turn that planning for the ‘mating’ process of a nuclear device to a missile warhead was about to begin.”

Stay up to speed: Sign up for daily opinion in your inbox Monday-Friday

Say what you want about flawed intelligence, an honest argument after the failings of the world’s intelligence services in the lead-up to the Iraq war. But warnings do not get more dire than this.

Among the more preposterous arguments of the appeasers, left and right, against American assistance, is if the Israelis didn’t have the military capability to fully take out Iran’s nuclear sites — meaning the principal one at Fordow, buried under a mountain, destruction of which would require ordinance possessed only by the United States — then it should not have embarked on its crusade. This is on the order of saying if someone is threatening your children, and you doubt your physical capacity to defeat the threat, the best course is to tell them “sorry,” and leave the assailant to his devices.

The progressive left and the isolationist MAGA faction, both seem to yearn for, at best, a continuation of the Biden-Obama policy of appeasement and half-measures — “lead from behind”, if at all — or at worst a head-in-sand abdication of leadership, out of a misplaced fear of “escalation.” That policy discredits U.S. deterrence, and exacerbates the situation, accelerating the outcomes of the escalation so feared.

The appeasers argue for further diplomatic negotiations; but the U.S. has weakened its diplomatic hand over the years precisely because of shows of military weakness, indecision, and trepidatious half-measures — i.e. Afghanistan, Ukraine and the Houthi attacks on American ships in the Red Sea.

The advocates for American retreat from the world can bemoan American “imperialism” or whatever other trope they care to utilize all they want; they cannot eliminate the central reality of modern international politics — namely that the United States alone has the power to effectively deter nuclear aggression.

Iran is an enemy of the United States, has been since 1979 when the Iranian revolution stormed the American embassy and first took Americans hostage. The Iranian Mullahcracy’s hands have been stained red with American blood going back to the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983, and several times since. After the fall of the Soviet Union, they have been the world’s predominant state sponsor of terrorism. And now they are a hair’s breadth away from having a nuclear weapon.

This is not about regime change, however welcome that would be. The core U.S. strategic national interest is in arresting Iran’s offensive nuclear ambitions, before it is too late to do so. War is ever an unpalatable option. The strategic situation makes unpalatable actions necessary. Israel, as German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said, is doing the dirty work for the world. If Israel cannot complete the noble mission on their own, it is imperative the United States help finish the job.

Kelly Sloan is a political and public affairs consultant and a recovering journalist based in Denver.