Changes

In spite of the relative overstretch of the U. S. [[military]], the utility of an attack on Iran, or at least its nuclear facilities, was a live [[debate]] among American opinion leaders throughout 2006.  Objections to such an attack were mostly based upon the belief that this would represent the first step on a [[slippery slope]] to [[occupation]] of Iran, which would probably require [[conscription]] in the United States, a step [[conservatives]] and most military leaders oppose.  The debate, however, appeared to have been won decisively by the hawks following the regime's suicidal decision in late March 2007 not to promptly release 15 British sailors and marines it had captured on March 23, 2007.

In spite of the relative overstretch of the U. S. [[military]], the utility of an attack on Iran, or at least its nuclear facilities, was a live [[debate]] among American opinion leaders throughout 2006.  Objections to such an attack were mostly based upon the belief that this would represent the first step on a [[slippery slope]] to [[occupation]] of Iran, which would probably require [[conscription]] in the United States, a step [[conservatives]] and most military leaders oppose.  The debate, however, appeared to have been won decisively by the hawks following the regime's suicidal decision in late March 2007 not to promptly release 15 British sailors and marines it had captured on March 23, 2007.

==References==

==References==