Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

 H. L. Mencken once wrote, “The public demands certainties, but there are no certainties.”

 That’s one reason Mr. Mencken was not elected to public office.  Uncertainties make for uncomfortable politics, especially for the young and Americans.

 We prefer things to be black or white.  Former President George W. Bush exemplified the attitude after the nine-eleven attack when he warned, “You’re either with us or with the terrorists.”

 But Mr. Mencken’s advice is a good policy to remember when wading through the slog of foreign affairs.  That’s what the country is doing now on the question of Iran’s development of a nuclear bomb.

 Republican presidential candidates except for Congressman Ron Paul have vowed war against Iran if one of them is elected and Iran doesn’t take an about face.  Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich seem to be itching for a fight, which is a popular sell among the very conservative wing of their party.

 To Israel, the most threatened by Iran, war is not campaign bluster.  A lengthy, January, report in the New York Times described the current Israeli policy toward Iran, which has declared its intent to destroy Israel.

 Israeli leaders, conservative and liberal, believe Iran will have a nuclear bomb or the capability of building a bomb this year.  Here is what the New York Times reported:

 “Iran today has five tons of low-grade fissile material, enough…to make about five to six bombs; it also has about 175 pounds of medium-grade material, of which it would need about 500 pounds to make a bomb.  It is believed that Iran’s nuclear scientists estimate that it will take them nine months, from the moment they are given the order, to assemble their first explosive device and another six months to be able to reduce it…to a payload for their Shahab-3 missiles…”

 The reporter concluded Israel will attack Iran sometime this year.  Israel Defense Minister Ehud Barak, a liberal in the Netanyahu government, told the reporter, “The bottom line is that we must deal with the problem now.”

 The consequences of such an attack are real: a crippling counter attack on Israel; an immediate global oil shortage and shock to the shaky world economy; United States’ involvement in yet another war; and worst of all, a nuclear, if limited, war.

 President Obama, the only adult in the American conversation, has proceeded with caution, not campaign swagger.  It’s a path of uncertainties, but less likely to cause us to “cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.”