Originally posted by chickeneater
It's a war of bluffers. They're all bluffing, let's see who blink 1st, Iran, Syria, Russia, US?

By the way, don't bluff against Israel, they'll just air strike you and call it a day. (my kind of nation, no-nonsense national security)

Originally posted by neformore

Originally posted by surrender_dorothy
So what dots have you connected together? What is, in your opinion, going on behind the scenes?

Well I'll chip in my 2 penneth if you are interested.

Russia is in an interesting position right now. Its seen its Warsaw Pact influences get chucked out the window, watched Pakistan and India develop into nuclear powers, and seen its regional influence in the Middle East get all shot to hell by the cowboy in the Whitehouse. Putin is concerned that any day soon there may be some smoking holes in the desert where a few Iranian nuclear facilities used to be, which will destabilise his countries position more. The Russian bear is grumbling and has sent a few of its toys out to play in the North Atlantic to remind everyone that, despite its quiet period during the reforms, it still has teeth and wants a say in the shape of the world.

Israel is desperate to get rid of any idea of Iranian nuclear weapons because its position as regional superpower will go out of the window. Its looking for any excuse it can to have a go at someone so the dots can be joined back to Iran, be it provoking the Syrians with overflights or dragging out evidence of Iranian rockets being used by Hammas.

The US, in its part, is torn, because the majority of people don't seem to want another war or military action against Iran following the folly of Iraq, and yet the Bush Administration clearly seems to have some kind of plan to try and confront Iran regardless of public opinion. It also sees a need to prop up the Israeli position, because Israel provides the US with the excuse to project power in the region.

The UK has had its fingers burned. Politically, another Labour Prime Minister supporting the US wholeheartedly like Blair did with Iraq will see the Labour Party more than likely dropped by the voting public in an election and consigned to the political wilderness like it was during the Thatcher and Major Years. At the same time, Britain wants to remain the voice of sanity and the bridge between the US and Europe. If the US attacks Iran, don't expect British assets other than tankers and airfields to be invoved.

Iran is mostly playing a watching brief. It knows that, if push comes to shove it really can't prevent itself from going the same way as Iraq (although it will give the US a far bloodier nose than Iraq did I suspect). When it boils down to it, the religious leaders (who declared a fatwah on the production of nuclear weapons in Iran btw) will, if need be, intervene, install a placid Prime Minister, sue for peace and protect their own interests providing that Israel doesn't do anything stupid to incite a religious war.

All in all it makes for a can of worms that can only be resolved by alot of talking, negotiating and thinking. That or several thousand deaths. I know which I'd prefer and its not in racks in bomb bay of a B-52.