Andrew McCarthy on Iran

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/271423/iran-war-us-andrew-c-mccarthy?page=2

When we first went into Iraq, I said that Iran is the real problem. I've even predicted that Iran could wind up temporarily contolling both Iraq and Afghanistan. I agree with McCarthy when he says if we are not in a war to win, then we should leave. We should leave because our involvement in the Mideast is basically a political undertaking, but our soldiers are in a war situation. America has no intention of winning, which would mean totally defeating an enemy and setting the terms of the peace. We're not real sure we can identify the enemy.

This is not the first time we've been in situations like this in the Mideast, and we should have learned from Britain's mistakes dealing with the Mideast during WWI -- the history would be comical if not so filled with needless death and destruction. Winston Churchill told the Prime Minister's daughter, Viloet Asquith, that "I think a curse should rest on me because I am so happy. I know this war is smashing and shattering the lives of thousands each moment-- and yet-- I cannot help it-- I enjoy every second I live." Well, the Ottoman war might have been invigorating to Churchill's ballistic spirit, but it wasn't good for Britian or Turkey. Our Mideast wars might be politically useful to our administration and a few congress people, but they're not good for our soldiers or our nation. If we were to leave, and if Iran managed to gain control of the Mideast, it wouldn't last. The Ottoman Empire never had complete control, and it disintegrated trying to maintain control. If America and other countries became energy independent, the whole region would collapse. I pity any nation that tries to control the Mideast -- it's a region propped up by oil money, and that can't last much longer.

Is Iran really capable of taking command of the Mideast and threatening the existence of Israel, then Europe, then America? It would be a suicide mission. Iran might want the image of a world power, but they don't want to be exterminated. First, they have to get the other nations, with all their diverse internal/cultural/religious squabbling, to go along with a Grand Scheme. How long would it take for the Mideast nations to turn on Iran? What would Turkey have to say? What would Russia's role be? How would India and China react? Much of the world outside the Mideast is now dependent on trade, not imperialist conquest. There's a lot at stake if another WW breaks out, and only the mad and insane would risk it. Even if Iranian leaders are mad, the rest of the world could quickly stop the threat.

We make a big deal over Israel being only a small country surrounded by large unfriendly nations, but they have the military capability to defend themselves, just as we could put all our military power in the state of Utah, and this little area of the world would be more than a match for the rest if nuclear war is the issue.

I don't know to solve the problem of Israel's physical position in the Mideast surrounded by unfriendly nations, but fighting political wars in 5 Mideast countries is not helping, and it's not making us any safer from a terrorist attack which can be planned and executed from anywhere in the world. So, what is the  plan? Destroy Iran completely and attempt to control the Mideast? It will be much easier to allow Iran to destroy itself.