Iran and the Iraq War

Writing that the Bush administration s spent the past few years lost in isolated delusions of fantasyland", the St. Petersburg Times editorializes about Delusion and denial 04/13/06:

The specter of a nuclear arsenal controlled by Iran's extremist clerics demands military preparedness. Still, an imminent U.S. military strike in Iran would be an act of almost suicidal recklessness. First, Iran's nuclear facilities are believed to be so scattered and well fortified that even massive air strikes might not eliminate them. Second, Iran's regime is far more powerful than Saddam Hussein ever was. It could retaliate against any attack by destabilizing the world oil market, unleashing Hezbollah and other terrorist groups and fomenting tensions throughout the Islamic world.

Fortunately, Iran is still believed to be a few years away from completing a nuclear weapon. But responding effectively to Iran before time runs out will require the Bush administration to rebuild the internal credibility and international support it has squandered - along with oceans of blood and treasure - in Iraq. (my emphasis)

Back in 2002-3 before the invasion of Iraq, critics of the Bush policy were saying that Iran was more advanced on its nuclear program and also a more active sponsor of terrorism, especially terrorism that had been directed against Americans, than Iraq. None of the Republicans and other war fans wanted to hear it.

But in reality, the war in Iraq has benefitted Iran more than any other single country - including Iraq. Even Israeli officials are starting to worry that the disintegration of Iraq, which looks more likely by the day, will be more of a threat to their national interests than Saddam Hussein's regime was.

And one of the main benefits to Iran has been the way that the risks to America of confronting Iran are much increased from what they were before the Iraq invasion.

| +Save/Share | |