Iran could have had a new government, too

Submitted by Henrik Ræder Clausen (Denmark), Sep 11, 2005 at 16:00

I have some inside information for this: Before the Iraq war, the Iranian government was suffering serious instability and was suspectible to being overthrown. Having the 'Big Satan' step in right next door made the external enemy visible again, and permitted the government to rally against them instead of having to deal with their internal challenges.

Picking Iraq as a battleground against terrorism was an odd choice. Afghanistan was obvious to do first, but second could have been various other, not least Iran. The current situation is heavily resource-draining as well as much more unstable than expected - might even end up in yet another Islamic theocracy eventually.

What then, should we just have been sitting back and wait for the next terrorist attack? Well, yes. And _then_ beat the heck out of them like in Afghanistan, setting another clear example that terrorists will be hunted down and killed.

But now, I guess we'd better hang in in Iraq. We have chosen that battleground against terrorism, and they are drawn there with magnetic force.

Next battlefield: unknown...

-Henrik

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".