King, some might think we are discussing semantics about the use of the word "will" but I do not believe that to be true.
I am not arguing for one second what the fallout of the US acting to destroy Iran's potential nuclear capability might be. Why they may or may not act. Nor am I arguing about what may happen if Israel did it. I am not arguing about back channel discussions that may or may not have taken place between any of the interested parties.
I am simply stating what should be obvious.
There is a difference between having the will to act and wishing to act but feeling constrained for whatever reason. The US has unarguably felt restrained from taking decisive action to stop other countries from gaining a nuclear capability. It doesn't matter whether that has been an internal reason (attitude of populace/political fallout) or external reason (foes and allies being dismayed and feeling forced to respond in some fashion).
To suggest the US has the "will" to stop Iran, or in the past tense, Korea, India, Pakistan etc., is just not factual. If they did, they would have. They haven't had the stomach for the fallout of such action.
THAT MEANS THEY HAVEN'T HAD THE WILL.
