The Islamic Republic is the enemy, just ask them.

Enemies don't have identical ends, as we do.

If by psychology you mean their desire to obliterate us, you're right. Unfortunately, those stumbling blocks are the hardest to overcome.

Maleki's categorization of terrorist groups is typically self-serving. It translates to: "There are two kinds of insurgencies: those led by terrorist groups that Iran does not sponsor, and those led by terrorist groups that Iran does sponsor."

oj, I sympathize with your desire to avert the impending nuclear war, but pretending that Iran is an ally and a democracy will not stave it off long.

Well, obviously our ends are identical. They want Israel destroyed, we want...what was the first part again?

They don't want Israel destroyed. They just want to learn the Farsi version of Kumbaya. Then peace will reign forevermore.

And I'm not sure why we get to decide for the Iranians and the Arabs that Shi'a/Sunni hate trumps Persian/Arab hate.

"The only stumbling blocks to working together are psychological."

Said Jodie Foster to John Hinckley, Jr.

"...the Iranian system has checks and balances" such as executing 16 year old raped victims to check their "immorality", letting the rapists go to balance their needs to release their rage against helpless victims.

David:

It doesn't. That's why the neocon fever dreams of a Persian empire are so silly.

Heck, we all want Israel destroyed. That's how this world ends.

The only checks and balances in Iran are based on who has the biggest goons and the best private army. Iran today is about as democratic as Germany was in late 1933. Perhaps they will have their "Night of the Long Knives" before the year is out, and then things will be clearer.

The mullahs, pretty much the whole spectrum, are not our friends. They encourage the deaths of Americans around the globe, and are enabling the deaths of our troops in Iraq today. To say nothing of their complicity in the deaths of numerous Israelis, Palestinians, Iraqis, and Lebanese. The fruits like Ahmadinejad are even worse.

Of course the neo-con dreams are silly - there don't seem to be any 'Persians' of power right now.

I hasn't ended all the previous times that Israel was destroyed.

Were you abducted by aliens? After reading your comments today, I can't come up with another expalnation.

How in the world do you think we can 'dialogue" with Iran. They're controlled by Islamic Nazis!k

It's a much more open society than Nazi Germany. Indeed, Ahmedinejad won't be re-elected.

Ahmedinejad won't be re-elected

He will if he's counting the votes, or if the Mullahs want him to be. And when you say, Heck, we all want Israel destroyed. That's how this world ends, then you really are allying yourself with Ahmedinejad. He thinks he can imminentize the eschaton, too.

David:

We can not immanentize--we're on God's schedule, not ours.

Iran's elections have been free and fair once the candidates are picked. Ahmedinejad only won because reformers boycotted an election they'd have won.

The reformers thought they had won in 1997, too.

Oops.

What identical ends?. They wish to impose their
religion on the rest of the world. Is it your aim too?

vm:

That's exactly what we do.

We cannot, in fact, immenentize, but that doesn't stop people from trying. If we take Ahmedinejad at his word, he wants to set up a situation that will force the 12th Imam to appear.

Your concession on Iranian democracy -- that it's fair once the candidates have been hand-selected by the Mullahcracy -- gives the game away. Further, it's not obviously true. There are a lot of rumors that Ahmedinejad's clique when he was governor of Tehran was in charge of counting enough of the ballots to deliver the result.

Your theory about the Shi'a is that, because of the tenets of Shi'ism and because of their history of oppression, they can easily be led to secular democracy. Ayatollah Sistani provides great evidence in your favor. But Iran has rejected that idea -- and has rejected Sistani -- in favor of a theocracy. In order to bring about a ring of stable Shi'a democracies, we need to show them that the Iranian path must be avoided; that, to coin a phrase, secular democracy is the strong horse and theocracy is the weak horse. Thus, we are Iran's enemy, not its ally.

Yes, Ahmedinejad is a nut, which is why he won't be re-elected. All democracies are not alike. Britain had a healthier one when the monarchy could dismiss a government. Iran is trying something similar with clerics, which is unwise and un-Shi'ite and they know it. They'll reform on their own, though it's good policy to push them.

Totalitarians (and wannabes) don't reform. Just because the Iranian version has "religion", doesn't make them any different from goons like Honecker or Castro.

Of course it's their religion that makes them different and makes Iran not a totalitarian society, hardly even authoritarian.

If Iran is not even authoritarian, then why is the general population so submissive? Fluorine?

And why do the various competing factions insist on having their private goon squads? Iran is Germany, circa 1933. However, it has already been messing around overseas for 20+ years.