People seem to have gotten enought of the speculation about the underlying motivation of the Iraq war. I have drawn my own conclusions - and with no doubt - so have you.

But Iran - on the other hand - is a brand new issue...

To analyze.. Why is Iran so important?

Iran does not seem agressive. It is difficult to speculate possible security threads from Iran's side.

Iran seems to not support terrorism at the moment. There might be some support for palestinian groups exist, but no support towards any group posing any thread to western citizen.

Iran has W.M.Ds and it has a nuclear program. Still for me it seems that it lacks the will to use them for aggressive purposes. This weaponry will not likely pose any direct thread towards U.S and neighbours.

The argument for self-defence or pre-emptiveness simply lacks content.. But.. it has not been used neither.

Still, the Iraqian nuclear program changes the power situation in the ME. With no doubt with a new nuclear power with negative attitude against U.S and Israel would decrease their ability to operate in the ME area..

And after all, the continuity of the less agressive leadership is never guaranteed. No-one can tell Iran's future leaders. Of course, this relates also to Pakistan..

About security, there is always the ideal of not creating example of a state that could develope nuclear weaponry outside U.S influence and gain any concrete benefit. The Iran's nuclear weaponry program could set this example for other states to follow. This could seriously lesser the U.S capability to operate over the globe and even pose an actual security thread.

There is the oil, but it is of lesser importance. There are oil reservers with the same magnitures as in Iraq, but the oil reserves are already in utilization of the Western world and industry.

Another issue is the control of oil and who will get the economic benefit of its trade.

The last thing to mention is the good of Iranians. One thing is freedom and democracy, which they are lacking. Another thing is the quality of life, which they have and which a war could seriously threaten.

I don't know, if Iranians would be ready to pay the price of blood and money required for democracy. And this decision is certainly something not for U.S to make.

Perhaps the neoconservatives believe the stuff they are letting out of their mouth, and consider bringing democracy to Iran as a great benefit, even worth of the war.

Hmm..

I see the traditional cards: security, power interests, economical interests and.. ideological interests? How many interests there really do exist?

I suppose there might be motivation even to invade Iran, but most likely U.S will be satisfied with the termination of the weapon program... But who knows?

I find it quite difficult to believe that they could start another war as long a huge part of their strength is binded in Iraq. Or.. of course they could start the war, but it would became greatly more difficult than the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Unless - of course - Iraq calms down and they can free the troops for the second war.

- BtD

__________________
"Orthodoxy means not thinking - not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness."
[George Orwell, 1984]
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
[George Orwell, 1984]

Btd wrote: "Iran does not seem to support terrorism at the moment....Iran has WMDs and it has a nuclear program. Still for me it seems that it lacks the will to use them for aggressive purposes. This weaponry will not likely to pose any direct threat towards U.S. and neighbors."

Iran is a breeding ground for terrorism. Many of the insurgents in Iraq are coming from Iran. As for the nuclear threat, Israel will be in danger for sure if these types of weapons are continued. I tend to think a large bombing campaign destroying their military sites, weapon sites, and government sites would suffice. We tend to hold Israel back from attacking(such as in the first gulf war) but this may be a time that Israel will be an ally in attacking.

http://www.CapMag.com/article.asp?ID=2635

"Most of the Mideast is ruled by thugs who would be paralyzed by an American victory over any of their neighbors. Iran, by contrast, is the only major country there ruled by zealots dedicated not to material gain (such as more wealth or territory) , but to the triumph by any means, however violent, of the Muslim fundamentalist movement they brought to life. That is why Iran manufactures the most terrorists.

If one were under a Nazi aerial bombardment, it would be senseless to restrict oneself to combatting Nazi satellites while ignoring Germany and the ideological plague it was working to spread. What Germany was to Nazism in the 1940s, Iran is to terrorism today. Whatever else it does, therefore, the U.S. can put an end to the Jihad mongers only by taking out Iran."

I would not be certain that Iran is any different for Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, what it comes for breeding terrorism. I don't see so much difference between Wahhabism and Iran's religious movement.

I have difficulties remembering any terrorist attack towards West, where Iranians had been involved. There might be a the sunni-shia religous wall even with terrorism. Al'Quada has its roots in sunni muslims. Is it able to attract people from a different muslim group?

These actions have a political price. For me this approach seems quite arrogant. I have to say, I partly understand the U.S interest with Iran and their attitude against the nuclear weaponry. I personally hope this would end in a peaceful solution, where Iran would simply terminate the weapon program.

I still see the bombing of the Iran quite questionable. There is no other justification for bombing, except the U.S's will to maintain its own hegemony in the area. It is all power politics from top to bottom.

In the end Iran can be blamed for nothing else, but threatening the U.S interests...

But such is life.

- BtD

__________________
"Orthodoxy means not thinking - not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness."
[George Orwell, 1984]
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
[George Orwell, 1984]

They are trying to obtain nukes. That seems obvious to me.

If they dropped their nuke program, our interest in them would vanish. Yes, I believe they are friendly to terrorists on some level...but not any more so than half a dozen other Mid-East nations. It is their desire to obtain nukes that makes them a target.

Btd said:Do you know about the hostage crisis? Thankfully it turned out ok in the end.

According to a State Department report of 1999, Iran "is the most active state sponsor of terrorism training and arming groups including Islamic Jihad, Hamas, and Hezbollah."

At a meeting that was known about by the State Department held in Teheran in 2001 the world's leading terrorist groups resolved to fight a holy war against the US.

This happened like 26 years ago...

Well, almost all the ME islamic countries are somehow involved with the terrorism against Israel.. I was talking about terrorism towards West.

- BtD

__________________
"Orthodoxy means not thinking - not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness."
[George Orwell, 1984]
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
[George Orwell, 1984]

Yeah and we're talking about religious extremists who would like to reclaim territory they lost 1100 years ago.

__________________

I love the smell of napalm in the morning...It smells like victory.

************************************************** ***
Bugalugs: "people join the military because they are stupid and gullible."

the links are tenious at best. would you say ireland supported terrorism? you think it would have been a good idea to invade ireland? i don't see any evidence that it was sponsered by iran rather than them being from iran. theres a difference.