> Afghanistan and Iraq.
>
> --- On Sun, 6/14/09, Michael Smith <mjs at smithbowen.net> wrote:
> Against whom would Islamic Iran
> > be
> > useful?
Hmm. Not bad. Iran has already been useful, in a sense, in Iraq. But that arrangement didn't require any rapprochement -- in fact it was consummated by Mr Bush's boys, without the least letup in the screeching rhetoric about Islamo-fascism and the axis of evil and the WMD on the way, etc. etc.
Iran, of course, has its own interests in Iraq. So perhaps for Tehran as for Washington, no rapprochement was necessary. One hand washes the other.
In any case, it seems clear that this kind of Realpolitik doesn't depend on having a "moderate" interlocutor on the other side.
Perhaps one of the reasons Mr Bush kiboshed the proposed Israeli attack on Iran was just this: "we" needed "their" help in Iraq. It will be interesting to see whether this will be one of the many elements of Bushobama continuity. Will Obie be able to wield the same big stick to equal effect? Stay tuned.
As for Afghanistan -- that, I don't understand. How could Iran be helpful in Afghanistan? Not a rhetorical question -- very likely I've missed an angle here.
--
Michael Smith mjs at smithbowen.net http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org