Military Action

North Korea is threatening "retaliatory measures" for a decision by the United States to withhold 240,000 metric tons of food promised as part of an agreement announced less than two months ago. Never mind that the cancellation followed Pyongyang's failed launching of a missile designed to put a satellite into space, an operation the U.S. considered a violation of that same agreement, not to mention U.N. Security Council resolutions. The regime's chutzpah and hypocrisy know no bounds.

Who's ready to go to war with Iran? Oh, I forgot. Since we now have an army of professionals, none of the rest of us is actually required to go to war. And, since we now allow commanders-in-chief to unilaterally send that army into battle whenever they please, members of Congress don't have to bother voting for a declaration of war. War has become a matter of presidential choice. That's why we should take seriously what the candidates for president have to say about attacking Iran.

  President Obama's first news conference of the year was loaded with questions on Iran, Israel and Afghanistan; notably absent was almost any talk of the still-limping economy. That's just the way the president's campaign team wants it. As he positions himself for a close-fought reelection battle in which domestic issues - particularly the economy - remain weak spots, foreign policy has emerged as an area of strength for Obama. That reverses decades of political tradition in which Republicans have been able to characterize Democrats as soft on national defense.

President Obama on Tuesday ruled out a unilateral U.S. military campaign to support the beleaguered rebels in Syria, calling such an operation "much more complicated" than the NATO-led air war launched to help protect civilians during the civil war in Libya last year. At a White House news conference, Obama described the shelling and other attacks on civilians and rebel fighters by forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar Assad as "heartbreaking and outrageous. " But Obama made it clear that he is not prepared to send U.S. forces to try to stop the carnage in Syrian cities and towns, or to help overthrow Assad, as some Republicans in Congress have urged.

President Obama told the Israeli prime minister Monday morning he thinks there is "still a window" in which diplomatic pressure will deter the Iranian nuclear program and that he is thinking about the "costs of any military action" as he contemplates that possibility. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thanked Obama for recently acknowledging that "Israel has the sovereign right to make its own decisions," but he emphasized that "Israel must be able to defend itself. " With those brief remarks before television cameras, the two leaders began a closed-door session in the Oval Office in which each will try to persuade the other of a future course of action.

President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday sought to offer a united front against Iran's growing nuclear program but appeared to differ on whether a diplomatic solution remains possible or if military action is needed to prevent Tehran from gaining a nuclear bomb. At a White House meeting, Netanyahu said he reserved the option to launch a unilateral attack on Iran despite Obama's position that more time is needed for stiff economic sanctions and international diplomacy to work.

Reporting from Washington -- President Obama informally opens his conversation with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a high-profile venue Sunday morning, discussing U.S. policy on the Iranian nuclear program before the American pro-Israel lobby as he prepares for a critical meeting with Netanyahu on Monday. The speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee will cover a range of issues concerning Israel, but the attention is tightly focused on Iran's drive toward developing nuclear weapons, the threat it presents to Israel and the international effort to head it off. Obama has signaled in recent days that he wants to stay the current course of putting pressure on Iran with sanctions and holding military action against rogue nuclear facilities as a possibility rather than an explicit threat.

Most of Hollywood spent the weekend preparing for the Oscars, but moviegoers preferred to go to war. "Act of Valor," a military action movie featuring real Navy SEALs, opened to a solid $24.7 million, according to an estimate from distributor Relativity Media, making it by far the most popular choice for audiences. "Good Deeds," the latest movie from writer-director Tyler Perry, opened to a decent $16 million. It's the second-smallest opening ever for the prolific filmmaker and actor, ahead of only 2007's "Daddy's Little Girls.

Listening to the Republican presidential candidates, one would believe there is no foreign policy challenge more threatening to the United States than a nuclear Iran. As the remaining candidates attempt to distance themselves from President Obama and one another, all but one (Ron Paul) has described the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapons capability as "unacceptable" and endorsed the use of military force if that were necessary to prevent an Iranian bomb. The most troubling aspect of this default position held by most of the Republican candidates is the complete absence of any details on how the use of force could accomplish this ambitious objective.