It's not just the Weekly Standard, it's the Bush administration, the Kurds, the Sunnis, secular Shiites like the folks at Iraq the Model, and democratic religious Shia like Sistani. Not everyone will say it out loud, but Iran is the 800 pound gorilla, and everyone is wondering: what happens to us when the U.S. leaves and Iran tries to move in?

While Iran is trying to figure out how to defend the borders againest all these new threats, but not give the military enough power to throw a coup.

pj:

The usual suspects. We already know what happens when the Persians and Arabs fight.

People die? Dictatorships emerge?

People die. Period.

Robert - The coup has long ago taken place, the military runs Iran now, Ahmadinejad was the head of the military, and the Guardian Council does what the military tells them. The military even stages the elections, and selects the winners.

Nope, Ahmedinejad only won because reformers boycotted.

If the military throws a coup, the Theocrats will all be shot, in public. There will be no return from exile this time....

The theocrats and the military (Revolutionary Guards and Basij militia) need each other -- the military needs the legitimacy the mullahs give them, and the mullahs need the army to stay close to power. (Of course, the military leaders are also theocrats, so there is tremendous overlap between the groups. But military people have emerged recently as more influential than the mullahs.)

Reformers boycotted because the military stages the elections.

That's silly. The populace views the mullahs as illegitimate. They have no legitimacy to convey. Meanwhile, the military knows that once the mullahs are gone they can work with the US and India to become the regional Islamic power again.

oj - "The populace" is not a single entity with one view. Reformers and democrats among the Iranian people undoubtedly view the mullahs as illegitimate, but many devout Muslims respect their authority. In contrast, if military leaders proclaimed themselves rulers without any basis in Islamic law, they'd truly be without legitimacy -- even the rank and file of the military would not necessarily follow them.

I see no sign that the military leadership views the US as anything but a rival and enemy. And why would we cooperate with an Iranian military dictatorship to augment their regional power, at the expense of a democratic Iraq and long-time allies like Turkey and the Gulf States?

OJ:

After 27 years of rule by insanity, how wise (or how patriotic) can the military be? They have been supplanted, first by the Revolutionary Guards, and then by the Guardian Council's private armies. Iran needs a Night of Long Knives, but there are more than two competing groups at the moment.

OJ:

After 27 years of rule by insanity, how wise (or how patriotic) can the military be? They have been supplanted, first by the Revolutionary Guards, and then by the Guardian Council's private armies. Iran needs a Night of Long Knives, but there are more than two competing groups at the moment.

And don't be surprised if the 'loyalty' of a lot of these factions flows towards Hezbollah rather than the state.

jim:

Every military everywhere is loyal first to itself.

pj:

No, the most devout view them as the least legitimate.

Yes, the military would have to be call immediate elections or they would be illegitimate.

If the Iranians are not a single group, but a collection of fighting elements, why should we be so worried about their political and military power?

True enough - but how is the military going to feel if they are overshadowed by a bunch of better armed (and better fed) screaming nutjobs?

If that alone ensures their neutrality, then good. But there has to be a catalyst for them to deal with the amateurs. So far, the mullahs have been keeping the military in a vacuum.

If the Iranians make the mistake of even a head feint towards Iraq we will be flying everything with wings and tails into Iran and they know it. Their infrastructure will be in shambles before the UN could even call a meeting. I almost hope they try it.

oj - "The populace" is not a single entity with one view.

pj: Orrin's on a quest to find a Mob of Virtue, as lefties are wont to do, and he thinks he's got one in the Shi'a (actually that's his MOV for the eastern hemisphere. In the west he has the Mexicans.) Don't expect him to acknowledge such distinctions.

In democracies the majority is in fact a single entity and the Iranian majority opposes the regime. The Shi'a however are a number of quite different entities, most importantly one that's Arab and one that's Persian and never the twain shall meet.

The best way to deal with Iran is this: every time an IED goes off in Iraq, set off a bomb in Tehran or Qum. They'll stop messing around real quick. In fact, extend that to cover Hezbollah as well.

Michael Totten has had some interesting perspective on Hezbollah in the past few days. And I read somewhere (within the past couple of days) that Hezbollah has upwards of 12,000 rockets to fire south into Israel. Not the kind of thing to go unused, eh?

Of course it will go unused. Hezbollah's war is in Lebanon, not with Israel.

Hezbollah won the 'war' in Southern Lebanon. It is basically a lawless territory now.

The rockets are not pointed north, are they?

The ballot box is aimed at the north.

I was unaware that the ballot box had any force (or even presence) in the South. Silly me.

It has force everywhere and when The Lebanon vo=tes for an independent government it will be dominated by Hezbollah, which will evolve into just a normal political party like Hamas.

It will be a very cold day in the Bekaa Valley when ballot boxes show up in Southern Lebanon. Gangsters and feudal lords don't like them.

Hamas is having its agonistes right now - don't you think Hezbollah is watching? Sure, they have set up some parts of a society in areas of Lebanon (clinics, basic 'security', food distribution, etc.), but their raison d'etre is to fire those 12,000 rockets. Do they have Internet cafes? Do they have a free press? Do they have the right to assembly? Do they have the rule of law? And, to the point, would they have them if they ran the whole country?

Hezbollah is in better shape than Hamas because they have a patron who still pays.

Yes, Hezbollah actually began the transformation before Hamas did.

Hezbollah is a better quality terror group. Plus, they've killed Americans, and they are international. Hamas is stuck in the 'hood.

But, Hezbollah (as currently ordered) will never permit a real vote in Lebanon, especially for a parliamentary type government. If you believe that, you have moved into Baghdad Bob territory.

Likud (Irgun) killed Brits. We got over it. Hezbollah and Hamas will be a regular political parties too.