That, and the insistence of some in that country that Israel needs to be "wiped from the face of the earth".

Other than that, they're downright wonderful.

And note that Iran, of all the players involved, is the only one that hasn't invaded anyone in many decades. Arguably, if you count the Islamic Revolution as the formation of a 'new' Iran, this Iran has never invaded anyone.

The real problem is that Iran has oil, and they are not subservient to the United States.

Well this isn't going to help the war effort:

Iran's foreign ministry on Saturday labeled the U.S. Navy's rescue of 13 Iranians from pirates who had hijacked a fishing vessel a "humanitarian and positive" act.

"We consider the actions of the U.S. forces in saving the lives of Iranian seamen to be a humanitarian and positive act and we welcome such behavior. We think all nations should display such behavior," Iran's foreign ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast told broadcaster al Alam.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/01/07/iran-hails-us-rescue-sailors-as-...

That, and the insistence of some in that country that Israel needs to be "wiped from the face of the earth".

If you want to play the "some in that country" card, we've got a lot of nutcases in our country, too, and what ever happened to our core beliefs that everyone, everywhere, has the right to express an opinion, no matter how stupid or violent that opinion may be?

SANTORUM: I would be very direct that we would, in fact, and openly, talk about this. Why? Because I want to make sure that Iran knows that when I say that Iran is not getting a nuclear weapon, that we will actually effectuate policies that make that happen. This president has not done that. He has opposed tough sanctions on Iran, on their oil program. Why? Because he's concerned about this--the economy and his re-election instead of the long-term national security interests of this country. I would say to every foreign scientist that’s going to Iran to help them with their program,’You will be treated as an enemy combatant like an Al Qaeda member,’ and finally I would be working openly with the state of Israel and I would be saying to the Iranians; ‘You need to open up those facilities, you begin to dismantle them and make them available to inspectors or we will those facilities with air strikes and make it very public.’

GREGORY: You would lay out a red line and if they pass it, air strikes?

SANTORUM: Iran would not get a nuclear weapon under my watch.

MR. GREGORY: Well, two previous presidents have said that. You would order airstrikes if it
became clear that they were going to...

FMR. SEN. SANTORUM: Yes. That's, that's the plan. I mean, you can't go out and say--this is,
this is the problem with this administration, you can't go out and say this is what I'm for and then
do nothing. You become a paper tiger and people don't respect our country and our allies can't
trust us. That's the problem with this administration.

MR. GREGORY: All right. Before I let you go, back to the politics.

Speaking of civilians, I don't think Obama wants a war with Iran. Sec. of State Clinton rattled that saber for a while, then vanished off the face of the earth. The same thing happened under the Bush administration, when Powell started to clash with the party line. They were both muzzled. That indicates to me that the CiC does not want that particular saber rattled.

Which makes a whole lot of sense, because war is terrible, even if (and I'm not saying it is) it's the right thing to do.

I think that Malor has it right. Iran had a moderate, largely secular government. We wouldn't support it because it didn't want to follow our orders, and it was overthrown the United States overthrew it and inserted a vicious, violent puppet dictatorship. Now we have a fundamentalist theocracy. I'm not saying we get to decide which government another nation will have, but we can definitely support opposition movements.

“Anyone who threatens to disrupt freedom of navigation in an international strait is clearly outside the community of nations,” said Lt. Rebecca Rebarich, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet, which is based in Bahrain. “Any disruption will not be tolerated.”

Aetius wrote:

A decent story on Hekmati from the Washington Post, including this gem of a quote:

Quote:

“Anyone who threatens to disrupt freedom of navigation in an international strait is clearly outside the community of nations,” said Lt. Rebecca Rebarich, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet, which is based in Bahrain. “Any disruption will not be tolerated.”

So you'll be letting those Iranian oil ships through to sell their product, right? The double standard is palpable.

I think we should just dispense with the whole pretense of the impartiality of international law. We have the only blue water navy. As a result, we are the only nation allowed to park aircraft carriers (with enough nuclear weapons to wipe out life on half the planet) within sight of another country's coast with impunity. Admitting such may make us a bully, but at least it eliminates the piercing irony.

I believe most carrier battle groups have at least one ICBM sub.

Just in case.

“I think the pressure of the sanctions, the diplomatic pressures from everywhere, Europe, the United States, elsewhere, it’s working to put pressure on them,” Panetta explained on Sunday. “To make them understand that they cannot continue to do what they’re doing. Are they trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No. But we know that they’re trying to develop a nuclear capability, and that’s what concerns us. And our red line to Iran is, do not develop a nuclear weapon. That’s a red line for us.”