[kabar]

Was a former terrorist President in Iran when you lived there? Don't you think that radically changes the equation?

Former, no. Khomeini was alive at the time. Iran is the home of militant, Islamic fundamentalism and the world's biggest state sponsor of terrorism. They have used for amost 30 years asymetrical warfare against its enemies. In the interest of their own survival, they recognize that direct confrontation was not the best course of action. The WOT won't be won without regime change in Iran.

FYI: I consider the President of Iran be a current, not former, terrorist. He is also a puppet of the mullahs. His pronouncements have created the perceived external threat to Iran to create a diversion from the regime's domestic troubles and it has had the effect of raising oil prices pouring more money into the mullah's coffers.

[rodguy911]

the WOT won't be won without regime change in Iran

Agreed whole heartedly!

But now-a-days in our new(Dem/rat inspired) environment of milquetoast, PC inspired wars how do you get an army of CIA types working in unison with Iranian locals big enough or well funded enough to get that job done? And without upsetting the world wide oil distribution system which is so key to the economic survival of the world yet located in the area.

[MNJohnnie]

The WOT won't be won without regime change in Iran.

Oh yeah spot on.

[Phsstpok]

I certainly hope you and MNJ are right that they aren't crazy and will be wise enough to avoid any mistakes that set off a wider war.

On the other hand I have become fascinated with history and have spent a lot of time over the last few years learning about what the world was like in the 1920s and particularly the 1930s, leading up to world war 2. No one thought Hitler was crazy enough to do what he did, either. What is being said now is eerily similar to what was being said then.