Three prominent opinion writers offered sharply contrasting views on the ongoing U.S.-led strikes against Iran, now in their second week. Nicholas Kristof, Bret Stephens, and Megan K. Stack debated whether the campaign represents a strategic success or a dangerous escalation during a New York Times round table.

Kristof warned the war could drag on as Iran seeks to re-establish deterrence, expressing surprise at discussions of deploying ground troops to secure nuclear materials or Iran's oil export hub. He criticized Trump administration actions that boost Iranian nationalism, including attacks on cultural sites and a strike on a girls' school. Stephens countered that pessimism is premature, arguing American casualties remain low and Iran's military capabilities are diminishing.

Stack raised legal and humanitarian concerns, calling the strikes an 'illegal war' lacking congressional or U.N. backing. She highlighted destabilization effects across the Middle East, from oil markets to the Strait of Hormuz, and warned that bombing typically produces the opposite of regime change through the 'rally round the flag' phenomenon. The writers agreed on little beyond the war's uncertain trajectory.