Now. Now. You don't want him shooting you in the face and then you have to apologize to him.

And give the Iranian people a reason to unite under their dictatorship? Hell no. The Green movement will be back with a vengeance next election.

Lets invade China, I hear they might have nuclear weapons.........

war is good business

I agree invading Iran would unite the Iranian people under the current regime.

Also Iraq was a bad choice, but attacking Afghanistan was fully legitimate. Sure the end result did not turn out well as the Taliban are still powerful, but Al Qaeda's abilities have been diminished.

I agree that we should have used more Drone based attacks in Pakistan from the get go as Obama has done.

Also I expect great turmoil in Iran in the next election after the results of the Arab Spring.

Afghanistan was fully legitimate, and a war I still tacitly support, at least for the time being.

And drone attacks in Pakistan is pissing them off. In fact, a lot of what Obama is doing is at the expense of our relationship with Pakistan. Admittedly, it's gotten things done, but its coming at the cost of an ally, albeit an ally that always straddled the line between potential friend and potential foe for awhile now.

That being said, any sort of attack on Iran would be god damn stupid, and I'm relieved the Bush administration isn't in power right now. They have a much stronger military then Iraq had, and completely destroying our diplomatic relationship with them would also eliminate any ability we have to keep them from going nuclear, which is frankly highly unlikely anyway regardless of who's president. Let them have the drone. It's not worth starting a war over. Honestly, listening to this, it's no wonder we started a war with Iraq over non-existent weapons of mass destruction and links to Al-Qaeda.They've got that mindset.

Quote:
USA going into war on Iran would be crazy. Doing some airstrikes etc. is rather safe. But what's the point of airstrikes alone? As soon as they'd send ground troops, the human losses for the USA would be dramatic. Iran's military doctrine is extremely defensive, centered around the idea of preventing an invasion.

Cheney's talking about one airstrike, on the drone itself, no invasion force. It'd still have a chance of causing a war, but its not what your describing.

What number president was he again? :p

So...what, if a country shows itself to be a potential threat, we have to invade?

By that logic, we'd have attacked Iran and North Korea years ago, the other two parts of Bush's stupidly named "Axis of Evil".

Yes, if Saddam was a nice, polite US ally who did everything we asked, we wouldn't have invaded. But on the other hand, Iran and North Korea have also long been defying the UN and the US. We haven't invaded them, and we didn't need to invade Iraq either.

You also seem to forget that we invaded Iraq based on a LIE. Or at least, something that wasn't true, if you don't want to go that far. Bush and Cheney walked up to the American people, and claimed that Iraq had nukes and ties to Al-Qaeda. It would later come to light that they had neither. Meanwhile, our relationship with North Korea would continue to collapse, not helped by Bush's "Axis of Evil" comments, and would eventually drop the Framework Agreement with the US to prevent from them from developing nukes, and would then test their first nuke. And now Iran is coming ever closer to the same capability, which is practically inevitable.

In short, the Iraqi war was built on a lie, and Iraq itself was not a unique case, as other countries have been just as uncooperative. Being dickish to the UN is, as far as I'm concerned, not a cause for war. It's as far as I'm concerned, a unjustified war. Not necessarily a waste of life, because at least we've given the Iraqis a shot at freedom.  Only time will tell how they use this chance.

The country has spent billions on a lie (Iraq war)...so much money that could have gone to far more useful things.