A useful debate is taking place in the WaPo, between Richard Holbrooke and Newt Gingrich about best approaches to managing the global struggle with Islamic jihadism, and I'm curious to hear reactions from readers of this site to these issues.
Do readers here believe, or disbelieve, the assertion that the struggle with jihadism is the clearly dominant foreign policy issue of this era, the equivalent of the struggles against Nazism and communism from earlier eras? If so, what policies should Democrats propose for winning this struggle? Is "winning" a serious, sensible goal?
To be more specific, is this threat so severe and so impending that, for instance, the U.S. should seriously consider military action to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons? Would a nuclear-armed Iran pose a "real and present danger" requiring a military response? If not, how should such an Iran be handled?