I get we could seven degrees of Kevin Bacon to get how Iran’s hostility across the Sunni and Israeli regions in the Middle East can be considered a threat to US national security, but directly it’s really not. The nuclear weapons, that’s a real threat to national security. Those have to be dealt with. So, just so we are clear I don’t agree with you in that we have to be fully responsible to stop Iranian aggression in the Middle East. I don’t really see that as a provocation for US military action on any scale larger than a strike here and there for humanitarian reasons or just to check them back a bit.
Israel (and all their lobbyists) would beg to disagree with you. They have endured Iranian proxy wars and terrorism for a long time. The nuclear threat is just an addition to the long standing set of problems with Iran. One important point is that either Israel will have their western allies deal with the Iran problem.... or if we don't support Israel then they will eventually deal with it in their own manner (which will involve nuclear mushrooms across most of Iran).
I'd also question the timing of proxy aggression against American troops as the deal was in place and resumption timing of said aggressions, though I agree w/your premise that Iran does not have to cease war by proxy if other rivals aren't in the negotiations (Saudi, Israel) and not stipulated in the agreement.
Why would Israel want to become persona non grata to the rest of the world by committing nuclear genocide?
Just wait till Iran launches either a nuclear or chemical strike first..... the follow-up by Israel is obvious.
Iran has every reason to maintain and escalate its proxy war via Hamas. The recent flare up there was to probe the current American administrations position on Israel and the Palestinian situation. And it was a HUGE success for them. It confirmed that the President is weak on Israel and surrounded by pro-hamas people. As with Cuba, after a couple days he puts put some statements and mouths some generic support but there is no will or fire in him for it. In addition, much of the western world sided with hamas and the palestinians . It was a massive public relations victory for them and gave them a clear signal of the path they should follow. That path is to crank up the Palestinian conflict, while simultaneously turn down the burner on vitriol coming directly from Iran- at least until sanctions are removed and Joe has given them everything they want. Iran has been dealt a new set of cards to play on this Israel/Palestine conflict and it is a pretty good hand to hold. I am not aware of anyone or any forces in Washington that can outplay it. All they need to do is follow the trend. That was the same way they played the nuke development game. Just buy some time to keep following the trend which shows gains every year. Similarly, this palestinian hamas thing is trending in their favor. Just add more time into the mix.
Ok but there is a constitutional problem with your assertions in regard to the president having unilateral power to declare war on Iranian aggression in the Middle East. Like I said, the nuclear stuff is a legit American national security issue. But not the hostilities throughout the Middle East, unless of course you play seven degrees of Kevin Bacon. Listen to me, “dealing with Iran” is a much bigger lift than you make it out to be. It’s not like it would be easy or not have enormous consequences or that we can just snap our fingers and get the entire western world to coalesce and attack them. What you’re posing is a massive, Massive, MASSIVE undertaking with a high level of difficulty to execute. It would exhaustive, expensive and it would just be another open ended drawn out occupation. Not to mention there is no guarantee it would not ignite a region wide war.
More of the same thing as GWB. You guys cannot separate regional conflicts from American national security issues. To you guys there isn’t a conflict you don’t want America to fight in.
Yeh, not sure how those comments go with my post. I guess you just wanted to make some statements and found a post to attach them too. Otherwise. I was replying to GWB's point about Iran needing to tone down the proxy wars by saying I did not see that in regard to Israel because the Hamas thing is working great for them. And in regard to Iran itself taking action, I said I thought it was to their advantage to lay low while negotiating a deal on sanctions etc with the U.S. Not sure how that comes across as advocating American involvement or war on my part. Next time just make a post with whatever you want to say rather than attaching them to my post.
Either none of the Middle East is our concern (including our naval bases, etc.) or all of it is our concern. Either be a leading power or get out of the Middle East (where Russia & China would love to increase their influence). The problem is that there is no easy path to abandoning the Middle East without leaving our allies; UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Israel, etc. in a lurch. If we stay in the Middle East now -- there is no open path for appeasement. Appeasement is off the table after the last attempt in the Biden administration -- where Iran took all the cash we gave them to spread terror rather than helping their own people.