Ever notice how reporters just love to nail down Western leaders on precisely "which options are on the table" when dealing with terrorists and rogue nations?

They seemingly want to get presidents and prime ministers of free nations to tie their own hands and declare certain options, such as military action, as "off the table."

Why?

Why should the world's free nations hamstring themselves when dealing with threats and potential threats from their enemies?

Republican presidential candidate-to-be Fred Thompson properly declined to take potential military action vs. Iran off the table while chatting with reporters after a speech in London recently.

But why should he even have to answer the question? Why is he, or any other leader or potential leader, even being asked to show their most effective cards to the opponent?

When was the last time the Iranian president, or the North Korean president or the head of al-Qaida told the world that any option - such as, oh, obtaining nuclear weapons or killing innocent civilians in malls - was off the table?

When was the last time they were even asked such a question?