Iran is a cancer. Always has been. For some inexplicable reason we've been putting up with it for 40 plus years.

Two reasons:

1) First, as I'll remind you, there is a large segment of the population and the political spectrum that does not believe it is America's job to use its own blood and treasure to excise the cancers of the world. You know, the ones who opposed getting involved in foreign wars. Makes it very hard for the U.S. to commit many tens of billions of dollars in some foreign "excursion" (to borrow the President's phrase).

2) Second, not all cancers respond to surgery. Some are completely inoperable. You can't always just cut a cancer out, because it will simply grow back.

So it's pretty explicable. No one's been able to rationally articulate why going to war with Iran would improve things sufficiently to justify the massive investment in military resources that it would require.

This is not just "Oh, well, what can we do?" It's one thing to disagree with the foreign policy choices of Obama or Biden - but it's another to dismiss them as folly if you don't have a plausible suggestion for what they should have done instead.

You can't operate under the following syllogism:

We have to do something about this problem.
X is something.
Therefore we have to do X.

...because it's a logical fallacy. Just because invading Iran is a different foreign policy than that of Obama and Biden's doesn't mean it's a better foreign policy. It just means it's different.

Unless, again, you think that Obama or Biden should have invaded Iran, and you would have supported them if they had?