I'm not so sure that there won't be some form of military operations against Iran in the near future. The current intransigence of the mullahs seems to preclude any purely diplomatic option, and I think the President (and others) find it unacceptable for the current Iranian government to produce a nuclear device. In all likelihood, they would supply a terrorist organization with it and deliver the weapon to its target by proxy.
The President understands the pro-American viewpoint of many Iranians, but if the decision comes down to alienating a foreign people and protecting American interests, you had better believe he will go with the latter. He is encouraging the Iranian opposition to act against the mullahs, and there is something afoot there, but it is unlikely that they will succeed absent outside intervention, or the defection of the Iranian armed forces to the side of the opposition (unlikely, because as I understand many are foreign mercenaries).
I'm sure the President and his advisors are well aware of the differences b/w Iran and Iraq, including the difficult topography of Iran and its different past. No two war plans look exactly the same, and I'm sure the powers that be have taken all that into account. That said, I hope and believe it won't come to all-out war.
Finally, I beg to differ about military actions against Iran being the greatest strategic foreign mishap in the history of the US. That would be, in my estimation, the failure to give succor to the Shah in 1979. If we had supported him then, who knows where Iran (and the Middle East) would be today.
You clearly know much more about Iran than I do, being an Iranian-American yourself, and I am an eager student. I'd appreciate any more info you might have to offer.
I'd love to help. I'm, of course, more a capital A as in American than I as in Iranian, but i'm an American who speaks fluent Farsi and can certainly help whenever desired.