It's relative. It's not exactly a reasonable, balanced position, but it's more reasonable than the alternative which is clear and unambiguous war crimes, and possibly meets the criteria for genocide.
On Iran, Project 2025 advocates a markedly more confrontational stance, denigrating diplomacy and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in favor of barely veiled advocacy for regime change.
It literally says diplomacy is preferable but all options are on the table.
Am I nuts or is that a reasonable, balanced position?
All options are on table is not reasonsble especially when irsn never seeked a nuclear weapon
This is not a reasonable, balanced position.
It's relative. It's not exactly a reasonable, balanced position, but it's more reasonable than the alternative which is clear and unambiguous war crimes, and possibly meets the criteria for genocide.
We knew what Trump's policy was on the campaign trail: