When or Will the U.S. invade Iran like they did Iraq?
They have sent an Additional 20,000
troops to "Stabilize" Iraq? Maybe to
'Re-inforce' the existing force in Iraq.

Never. Not the way you're thinking, anyway. I'll bet it can be done by an uprising of the populace.

I couldn't see the point of this: Iran, both as a Shiite countryand as a non-Arab country, is relatively isolated. It is also much bigger and far more heavily populated than Iraq; and the Shiites in Iraq could be a most unpleasant Fifth Column.
The fact that it appears pointless is of course no guarantee that US hawks won't do it; but I should have thought patience was the watchword.

having just read about Iran from a visiting amercian academic, I don't think that there will be an uprising at all even if it was supported by the CIA.

The revolution has raised literacy rates, cleaned up their cities, and reduced corruption to very low levels. Certainly they can be oppressive but there are definite benefits in the way they live now, than under the shah from the 70's.

They are becmming increasinly western and open towards the west, and a war or action by the west will only serve to drive them back to fundamentalism and extremism.

Its a bad move, by people who seem - based on past evidence unable to predict how cultures other than their own will act.

I agree with Netty on the position that a war with Iran would do much greater harm in the region than good.

As far as the crime rate being lower, cities are cleaner, etc., which would be better, to live in a clean but oppressive city or to suffer some litter in a free environment?

I dont think you guys really understand... the US doesnt give a rats a$$ about whether a war would make the situation in the region better or not.

They are interested in one thing and one thing only... making sure that OPEC does not have the capacity to change oil standard currency away from US dollar, and in the process destroying the US economy.

It is nice to think that some people still believe the US has peoples rights and well being in mind, but in the real world, such considerations are secondary at best.

Make no mistake, I don't think the government, or any government, is interested in individual well-being but the well-being of the nation.

It seems to me that in the intermediate and long run causing such waves in that region will do more harm than OPEC going Euro. They have a tendancy to remember things for centuries, not decades.

What do you think, Dragonrider, which do you think would be more detrimental?

I think that long term instability in the region is a non-issue, at least in the minds of the planners of these campaigns... Their main interest is to eventually (as soon as feasible with positive public support) control as much or all of OPEC as can be gained through financial, political, or military means.

Originally posted by dragonrider
I dont think you guys really understand... the US doesnt give a rats a$$ about whether a war would make the situation in the region better or not.

They are interested in one thing and one thing only... making sure that OPEC does not have the capacity to change oil standard currency away from US dollar, and in the process destroying the US economy.

It is nice to think that some people still believe the US has peoples rights and well being in mind, but in the real world, such considerations are secondary at best.

Do you have figures which relate to oil transactions using the US dollar ?
I can't see the US economy being destroyed by a devalued dollar.