Former Secretary of State James Baker was interviewed February 21st on CNN by Fareed Zakaria.  The full transcript is available here.  Some gems from the interview:

Baker on Obama's Iran policy thus far:  "I think it's too soon to say everything has failed. I don't -- I think you keep doing what you're doing. In other words, I think what you need to do is keep pushing for stronger sanctions and keep talking to or being ready to talk to the Iranian leadership, if they're willing to talk.  Those things -- and support the reformers in the streets. Those three things. They're not mutually exclusive. It's exactly what we did for 40 years with the Soviet Union.  We talked to them about nuclear -- we negotiated arms control agreements. We supported the dissidents in the Soviet Union. We worked hard on Soviet-Jewish emigres to get them the right to leave. We met with dissidents when we would go over there as -- as Secretary of State.  And so there's no reason why we can't do all three of those things and continue to do them."

Those of us who oppose efforts to impose "crippling sanctions" on the Iranian people - an approach supported by many in Congress (and most of the Jewish community) are often belligerently asked: "if you don't support these sanctions, what is your alternative?"  The implication being that if we can't propose another course of action then we must support the crippling sanctions, even if nearly everyone agrees that such sanctions won't work and will likely prove counterproductive. 

This is of course a silly argument - imagine two doctors arguing about how to treat a patient: Doctor 1: "We've tried everything we can think of and he's not getting better, so I propose we try radiation."  Doctor 2: "Are you nuts?  Given his condition, all medical science points to the fact that radiation won't do anything to help him and will almost certainly make him worse"  Doctor 1:  "Well, unless you have a better idea you have no choice but to accept my recommendation." Doctor 2:  "Where did you get your medical degree??"

But imaginary dialogues aside, there are some sanctions that actually make sense.  For example, it seems self-evident that it makes sense to impose sanctions on those who are enabling Iran to block the internet, censor electronic communications, and otherwise interfere with the ability of Iranian citizens to communicate with each other and the outside world (anyone remember the term "twitter revolution?")

To which I think most people would reply: great idea!  Someone in Congress should get working on this!