[{DvT}Sapient6]

Originally Posted by {DvT}JonahHex

Without dismissing your comments on Saudi Arabia, how does Iran's alleged pursuit of atomic weapons figure into your analysis of Iran as a bad choice of bad guys to go after?

It figures like this: If we were to invade Iran there's a possibility we could put a halt to their nuclear program (I question our chances of success not because I think our military would have trouble doing it, but because I question our willingness to pay all the bills we'd have to pay in order to get it done). So maybe we topple them and stop their nukes, maybe we don't. What isn't up to question is whether we'd do more harm than good. Iran as a country has been westernizing for some time now, and while they don't love us, given time they're going to become more and more like us.

Show up and start murdering their babies, and well, the lefties there are going to lose what little influence they've got. That puts their society under complete sway of the conservatives, which means losing all the ground they made trying to shed the trappings of fanatical islaam.

The truth is that we aren't going to stop nuclear weapons from proliferating throughout the middle east. It is going to happen. So if we determine that hell or high water we're going to force all these people to hate us with every ounce of their being, well we're going to pay for it down the road. Westernize them, even though it takes a long time, and then we won't need to be nearly so concerned about their nuclear weapons.