Iran saber-rattling is domestic political ploy

Frank Rich, of the NY times, makes a very good case that unlocks why Bush and Cheney seem so hell-bent on war with Iran despite the catastrophic fallout that is likely (Pakistan, a country with actual nuclear weapons falls to its own internal Islamist dissidents).

The GOP has decided their one best shot is to make Iran a boogeyman for the electorate so they can define the eventual Democratic nominee as soft on terror. If they actually attacked Iran, it would sink their candidate. By setting up that war with Iran is an imperative to protect Americans in the scary post9/11 world, they make tough on terror (instead of failure in the ME) the dominant debate.

Rich writes:

Whatever happens in or to Iran, the American public will be carpet-bombed by apocalyptic propaganda for the 12 months to come. Mr. Bush has nothing to lose by once again using the specter of war to pillory the Democrats as soft on national security. The question for the Democrats is whether they’ll walk once more into this trap.

So, would Clinton walk into it? Obama? Edwards? Biden or Dodd?