Honestly, I don't know enough about their sites or our military capability to answer that. E.g., I have no idea if their sites are too far underground to successfully bomb them, or if we even know where they are. I'm the last guy around here to ask about military capability. I know zip about our weapons and such. And I've never given us bombing them any thought either, just too unlikely to happen IMO. I know others believe differently.
Fern
Regarding the question you answered - I think it is unlikely the US bombs them unless there is strong multilateral support across the UN.
Additionally, I don't see anyone bombing Iran based solely on Nuclear capabilities. I think UN Sanctions are the most likely response to that.
On the other hand, if the plot continues to thicken with the assassination attempt, I think there are going to be some big questions coming Iran's way - and they better have some big answers or there is going to be some very tense political talks.
If there are further attempts like the above, I think some sort of military repercussion needs to happen (Even if it is just a Cruise Missile into the desert outside of Tehran to show them we aren't screwing around)
-------------
Regarding Jhnnn's post about Obama, I think the people disagreeing with Obama here simply don't feel that he tried hard enough during talks with Maliki. None of us really know and should leave the "judging" to those that were involved.
As far as his promise was concerned, Obama needs to look back and realize that was a dumb promise. He was a senator and had no military advisers that were intimately involved in Iraq; thus, that was a very risky/dangerous promise to run with - What something happened that prevented us from leaving by the end of this year? I would certainly hope he would do the right thing in a scenario like that and not just something to appease an ill-conceived promise.
-GP