Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
I see almost no chance that we can coerce Iran into not building a bomb. Period.
|
Wow. Really. So do you think they will use it on Isreal once they get it?
Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man We lost our ability to coerce Iran when we got the vast majority of our available land-based military power stuck dealing with Iraq next door. (Which has the added benefit for Iran of giving them a chance to bleed us or not -- and thus leverage.) They know that there is almost zero chance of us taking military action against them, and will act accordingly.
This make a diplomatic approach difficult to say the least,
|
I think before Iraq, military action against Iran was pretty dicey. The only real way to get the weapons would be to invade. Before we were in Iraq, where would have we invaded Iran from?
Like Ty said, I disagree to some extent.
Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man From their point of view -- a Middle Eastern/Muslim/Arab/Persian perspective - the U.S has already been humiliated in Iraq. Long-term, it is in Iran's interest that Iraq be stable. Any pseudo-democracy we create will be Shia dominated -- as Ty points out.
I'd expect that the interests of a democratic Iraq will be generally aligned with and peaceful towards Iran. (Big neighboring oil producers who share the same faith.) Iran has some interest in, but no real urgency towards, helping us get there.
S_A_M
|
I think Iran's number one desire is to see the US leave humiliated. Even if that means a total mess. Then Iran will move in to set up a Shia theocracy, just like the one they have in Iran. The Sunnis will never go for it and there will be war for the forseable future.
