Backed against a wall

J. R. Dunn writes at The American Thinker about the position Israel now finds itself in with regards to Iran:

An acute observer might well think that everyone involved was trying to ease the way for a strike to be carried out – by the U.S. or Israel or both. It really wouldn’t matter so long as the EU and the UN were not involved. (The French nuclear threat only highlights this point – it’s best read as a statement intended to direct Iranian intentions elsewhere.) Israel, after all, does have a history of the coup de main, the all-or-nothing strike such as occurred in 1956, 1967, and 1981. Look at the situation from Israel’s point of view to grasp how far it may be forced to go. This is the state founded in the shadow of the Holocaust, as a lifeboat for [the] oldest surviving nation on Earth. The only people the world ever consciously tried to destroy.

It's very easy for doom and gloomers to overstate the horrors of what could happen. But I don't see how the situation with Iran isn't extremely serious. And, given the diplomatic brick walls that Europe and the US have been running into, I don't see how Iran can be peaceably disarmed. The only questions are when will action be taken, who will act, and what will be Iran's response.