We’ve been using the “limited war” strategy since 1951 when Truman fired MacArthur because Mac was into crushing the enemy during Korea.
I am certainly on MacArthur’s side.
I am just as unhappy as you about the division of the Korean peninsula caused by Truman firing MacArthur, but I can understand his concern about a full-blown Third World War if we engaged Mao's armies directly. We know much more today about the weakness of the respective positions of Mao, Stalin and Kim than we did in the early 1950s.
But let's for a moment grant that Truman was right. If so, then just what does Obama think could happen that is forcing us to fight a limited war now? Seems to me the best argument for encouraging the Israelis to make a full-scale attack now is to **PREVENT** a much bigger war later.
Win the battles, but lose the war. If this becomes the battle of end-times Israel, the Israeli’s will suffer enormous numbers of KIA’s, MIA’s and grievous losses, but the Arab’s will get nuked back to the days of their false prophet. So much so, that most will quit mosques and islam all together!