Split views on how to deal with Iran

Re “Masters of muddle,” editorial, Aug. 24

The Times correctly asserts that Iran’s latest response to the U.N. Security Council’s deadline for stopping uranium enrichment is another example of stalling for time. The editorial is also correct in stating that Russia and China are reluctant to agree with any meaningful sanctions because of their economic ties to Iran.

However, the conclusion that a military option is out of the question for now simply does not follow. After so much obfuscation on the part of Iran, it is now time to put the military option on the table. The U.S. should lead an effort to garner international support for surgical airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities if it continues to stall. If the international community doesn’t act now, Israel will have to act because for Israel, a failure to act now will not result in economic consequences. The most likely result will be annihilation.

FRED FERKETIC

Newport Beach

*

The Times still does not get it. You do not present a sovereign nation with a “yes-or-no question” and expect capitulation. What Iran is doing and has been trying to do for some time is to actually negotiate. But the U.S. and its allies are not interested in negotiation. They are interested in a pretext for another destructive war in the Middle East.

CHRISTIAN HAESEMEYER

Champaign, Ill.