WWII saved the US from the great depression much sooner.

The USA was already pretty much out of the depression by WWII.

What it managed to do, was to put the USA on the pedestal of "Great superpower, police force of the world", which for the last few decades had been Britain and France. Iran certainly isn't going to become the police force of the world anytime soon.

The scary thing is, I really worry about how this plays out. Unlike other regimes that want to keep power, Ahmadinejad knows that his power base is waining, and that he won the election illegally. The only way for him to keep his country under control is to do something way out there....And its not *just* getting nukes, but proving they are a superpower by using them.

I would highly advise any and all Iranians to get out of dodge before nuclear fire comes to town.

It is because you have a ton of immigrants.

First, you both should really cool off a bit with the rhetoric. 

Second, for Zucas (but a point that I think everyone should keep in mind), ignoring the merits of your argument, you really should consider that comparing someone to Hitler, no matter how reasoned, is likely to elicit strong replies.  This is perfectly fine (provided other forum rules are followed) in a thread where this is the topic but in threads where it isn't the topic the rule of 'the most heated debate tends to hijack the discussion' will almost always come into play.  In short, think a bit about how your comment will effect the thread before posting Hitler comparisons please! It's a touchy subject for people no matter how you approach it, so when you do, it really should be a crucial part of your point rather than an example of your point.  I can promise you that a comment with a hitler comparison is a lot more likely to get into trouble by the mods than the same comment without that comparison.  That's just plain good advice everyone should consider.

For now I can see where you're coming from but since your point can stand up without the comparison I think we should move forward with the discussion minus the hitler comparison. Which brings me to.....

Third, lets try to keep this a friendly(or at least civil) discussion/debate focused on Iran. 

Yes, Israel has the capabilities to pacify Iran's nuclear program. They've been building up an incredible fleet of F-15's that have the distance and capability of hitting Iranian targets. Interesting factoid, I've met the guy that sold them the F-15s. He knew his stuff (I played 20 questions about F-15I specs and he knew his stuff top to bottom), and he made the statement that Israel wasn't playing when they purchase armaments. They know exactly what 15's are for, and what they can do to Iran.

Speaking from a tactical standpoint, the real question is if Israel has the intelligence to strike enough Iranian targets to cause enough damage to have the Iranian programme shut down, or hindered until other sanctions/blockers can be placed. That would be where other friendly nations come in (US, Turkey).

The scary thing is, I really worry about how this plays out. Unlike other regimes that want to keep power, Ahmadinejad knows that his power base is waining, and that he won the election illegally. The only way for him to keep his country under control is to do something way out there....And its not *just* getting nukes, but proving they are a superpower by using them.

I would highly advise any and all Iranians to get out of dodge before nuclear fire comes to town.

The USA was already pretty much out of the depression by WWII.

What it managed to do, was to put the USA on the pedestal of "Great superpower, police force of the world", which for the last few decades had been Britain and France. Iran certainly isn't going to become the police force of the world anytime soon.

I thought Iran was really building up their anti-aircraft stockpiles though.