I love that. "Ahmadinejad's Shenanigans"
If and when the DR checks in, I would also like to know his opinion on whether this could be a viable band name for an Irish/Moslem group in the mold of the "Pog Mahones."
Too damned funny. It'd be a better band than Nirvana, and a better name.
I, however, would prefer a band called Seamus O'Sama and the Oil Pints for the Irish Muslim band . . .
Irany. That's a pretty good term in this case. I did notice the same parts of the article you quoted, Darth Rotor. Talk about cognitive dissonance.
There's another recent thread here regarding Ahmadinejad's shenanignans, but it's turned towards the topics of the Holocaust and Zionism.
What I'm interested in addressing in this thread: Is Iran becoming an imminent threat to its neighbors? And if so, how will it affect us? I understand you've served in Iraq, Darth. I'd be interested to hear your take on this, since you have the first hand experience to weigh in on issues like this. Do you think war with Iran is inevitable?
No, I don't think war with Iran is inevitable, though my experience is only informed by partial experience in the war, two years ago. Some things have changed since then. Some things have not changed at all, like the difficulty in working with various factions in Al Anbar Province.
While I thank you for the nod, I personally think Garrette has a better handle on the situation than me, due to his work for the command in Bagdad, and the nature of his work.
I do think that if the US withraws post haste from Iraq, a war featuring Iran is likely, though not certain. That depends on the the responses from the Gulf States (including Saudi), Syria, and Jordan to any Iranian adventurism in Iraq as the US leaves the inevitable power vacuum. Also open is the question of what Pakistan does if Iran goes postal in the Persian Gulf.
If US bolts from Iraq quickly, temptation in Iran to take advantage of that might be too great, given the oil reserves in southeastern Iraq and Iran's finite reserves. (Predicted to go dry in 10-20 years.) I tend to think that Iran would work covertly, though Pasderan and agents, rather than overtly. Meanwhile, Iran continues its deliberate misdirection vis a vis Israel, Hezbollah, etc. Smoke screen to hide the real aims, in the Persian Gulf.
If the Sunni of the region choose to fight that, overtly or otherwise, US most likely comes in on the side of its clients, but perhaps purely in Maritime and Air action.
As the 8 ball says when I shake it each morning: "Future unclear, ask again tomorrow."
The number of variables is high. Some dominos can fall without upsetting the situation, but if some particular pieces fall, the snowball effect begins. Then, the Straights of Hormuz get mined. That gets the world's attention.
Consider: why is Al Sadr still alive? For one, he's not the leader of the Irani-centric Shia in Iraq. His problem is being too close to the Sunni for the two factions not to screw with one another.
I think that the US has a vested interest in a civil war in Iraq, Shia on Shia, and in backing Al Sadr's faction. Once that is done, the US interest is served by a follow on civil war in Iraq, Sunni on Shia, US backing the Sunni. That sequence of events would be to Iran's detriment.
I don't care, personally, how many Iraqi's die before Iraq settles down. I'd like to see the number be low, not high, but I have no emotional investment in their longevity beyond a general wish that, per Rodney King, they all get along.
I care how many Americans die, or rather, don't.
But no one in Washington asked me, perhaps for a good reason.
DR
Than separates it from Irani, a person from Iran, stress on second syllable. It almost rhymes with tyranny, which is intentional. 
