I'm not suggesting a full invasion of Iran at this point. Precision bombing of certain areas to crimple their economy or their war-making capacity would be a beginning. I know that sounds harsh, but that is what war is, and I am not the one making these decisions.
Also, while our military is wearing down, and a full scale invasion at this point seems unlikely, Iran has a few things Iraq doesnt. The chances of sectarian violence following a military engagement is much smaller considering the breakdown of their population. Also, their population is much more westernized, and in fact there is a large dissent within the population who are pro-western (more so than many in Iraq). Especially among the highly educated. Finally, Iran tends to have overall a more educated population and a bureaucracy and infrastructure in place already which is able to run the country. These two things would seem to make a regime change easier than Iraq.
Overall, your point is well taken. The US strategy in that region has been mixed messages since at least 1980. I think what will actually happen is Iran will get nuclear weapons (assuming they dont have them already). Following that, it's a whole new ball game.
|