To: Peter Dierks who wrote (180330 ) 1/19/2006 6:45:11 PM From: Keith Feral Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500 Interesting to see the theory of escalation finally make it's way into international relations with the ME.news.yahoo.com The only way to get any kind of international cooperation is through the ultimate negative consequence. It was the only way that the US and the USSR were able to overcome opposing ideologies. Currently, the threat of nuclear consequence is taken with almost no credibility. Iran is laughing at the West because they are following their own pathway to national sovereignty. They think that the West is not schrewd enough to dump nuclear weapons on any part of their country, given they have no nuclear weapons to pose a threat. All they pose is a threat to pose a threat. Conventional attack is not going to make any sense. How do you attack a country that is united in their disgust for foreign policy? Is the West brave enough to launch it's first war against a hostile country that poses no military challenge? There is no hope for success in convincing the Iranian population to appease it's policy without totalitarian control over the entire nation. Herein lies the problem with Iran's outlook. It is totally within the interests of international security to eliminate soverignty from Iran and to maintain free market access to their oil assets. Hence, the confidence by Iran seems so far from reality. Saddam probably felt the US could never justify the war in Iraq. Russia and China never interfered with the invasion of Baghdad. To be sure, the powers in Western Europe are not going to be left out of the next war. They need some degree of influence in Iran when the dust settles. Otherwise, all of the oil reserves in the ME will be concentrated soley in US dollars. They need to maintain their balance of power. If Iran and Syria decide to stand out as renegades, they will get little support from their Sunni allies. I don't think that Saudi Arabia gives one shit whether or not Tehran is ruled by the US or not. Why would Sunni countries like Pakistan or Afghanistan care? They think that Shiites are on the same level as Israelis. If US policy in Iraq is supported by UN support against Iran, there will be a complete loss of autonomy for the Shiites in the long term. They will get the complete opposite of what they are fighting for since the powers of Europe are licking their chops to overrun the Iranian oil interests. We are talking billions of dollars. The Chinese would rather see Western Europe and the US controlling the oil fields of the ME than Iran. They get 80% of their oil from the ME. They can't afford to let the Iranians fuck it up for everybody. Herein lies the dilemma for Iran. Should they choose to play games with everybody on the nuclear card, they are going to risk their control of the oil power. Western Europe cannot afford to sit out from another war and let the US enjoy the spoils of victory in the ME all to ourselves. Hence, they become our cooperative allies once again to wipe out the immense nuclear threat since they can't keep their mouths shut about their hatred for Israel and the US. 2 years after the invasion, we will be trying to justify why we sent in our troops in the first place since they don't have any wmd today. This guy is a total loon if he doesn't think that the US and Europe have the collective nerve to take over their government. The comments by France seem to indicate that the EU is chomping at the bit to put Iran into it's proper place. I think the hopes for negotiation by OBL and Iran are getting surreal. They underestimate the resolve of Western cooperation to attack ME fundamentalism.