Yes. Israel lacks the capability.

Iran has diversified its nuclear program to multiple locations and the most important facilities are hundreds of feet below ground. Last I read, even our most current version of the 20,000 lb "Daisy Cutter" would be ineffective. Use of tactical nukes to destroy these facilities is out of the question. Even a protracted multi-month conventional attack opens up a huge can of worms. All Iranian air defenses would have to be destroyed, all potential missile launch facilities destroyed, etc... The attack would most certainly invite protracted counter-attacks using unconventional means (i.e., terrorist attacks on "soft" US targets: shopping malls, sports stadiums, theaters, anywhere that large groups of unarmed civilians gather.)

In the end, unless the US intends to permanently occupy the territory, the attack merely delays the eventuality and puts the US in the crosshairs when they do become nuclear. There are numerous ways to place nukes in US cities without using ICBM's - thousands of cargo ships unloading in ports each year, cross border trucking, international air traffic, etc...

There is no "easy" military solution today. There was years ago. Economic strangulation through MUCH tougher sanctions and embargo should be immediately enacted. If the strangulation is tight and complete, Iran's economy will collapse, the people will revolt and another opportunity for regime change may present itself. I think this is perhaps the wisest, least destructive/deadly, and most durable solution to a difficult predicament. (Recall Obama had an opportunity to support a recent Iranian revolt but chose to not provide aid to those attempting an overthrow. Obama is not a leader, much less a decisive leader, so the future becomes increasingly dangerous through inept and ineffective negotiations while Iran speeds towards nuclear capability.)

Just my opinion.