The country in the best position to impede Iran's progress is the United States, so the question falls to President Barack Obama whether or not to use force to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities and send its nuclear program backward.

While most of the Republican presidential candidates have called for striking Iran, Obama has said diplomacy and maintaining sanctions on Iran are the keys to weakening Iran.

"We are focused on diplomacy. We, of course, never remove from the table any option in a situation like this, but we are very focused on diplomacy, and we certainly think that is appropriate and our approach here has had the kind of effect, the positive effect, in terms of pressuring and isolating Iran," White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

Several commentators think Obama would escalate to more violent actions.

Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic, writes "based on interviews inside and outside the White House, that [Obama] would consider using force -- missile strikes, mainly -- to stop the Iranians from crossing the nuclear threshold."

His four reasons: U.S. doesn't like losing, every U.S. ally around Iran fears a nuclear Iran, Obama doesn't like nuclear weapons and Obama doesn't want to be "remembered as the president who failed to guarantee Israel's existence."

At The Guardian, Simon Tisdall writes that the 2012 candidates' "campaign-trail nonsense...is dangerous nonsense – and it ramps up the pressure on Obama."

For now, the Obama administration is considering how to toughen sanctions on Iran and is consulting with Israeli officials, who are said to be very interested in military action against Iran.

Like reporter Paresh Dave on Facebook, follow him on Twitter, circle him on Google+ or send him an e-mail.