Quote:
|
Originally Posted by politicophile
Iran has just had a democracy with a majority Shiite population established next door. That same country is now an ally of the United States, as is Iran's neighbor to the west, Afghanistan. Waging a conventional war on Iran would be no more complicated than it was in Iraq, albeit the troops currently in Iraq will not be available for use until Iraq takes over its own security.
We can't invade Iran in the next, say, two years. After that... let's just say that I don't like the thought of Iraq possessing nuclear weapons: religious zealots are prone to being extremely irrational and MAD only works if all the actors are behaving rationally.
|
It would be foolish though to think that the Shiite government in Iraq is more loyal to the U.S. than to Iran. Richard Clark was on NPR this evening pointing this out. As well as the fact that the U.S. invasion did what Iran was trying to accomplish for 20 years: the toppling of Saddam Hussein and an installation of a Shiite government. He also brought up that the majority of al qaeda leadership is in Iran under "house arrest" while they refuse to extradite. But everything that comes out of his mouth is fiction right Karl Rovians?
They're not stupid though, it's quite obvious that any attack on Israel means that large portions of their country would be vaporized by the U.S. The only thing that would prevent this would be if they could ally with Russia (really unlikely) or China (even more unlikely).