Let me say again that you guys seem to think I’m proposing containment as my preferred policy toward Iran. As I’ve already said at some length, it isn’t. I’m not going to recapitulate my reasoning, it’s my previous posts.

Kooshy, I mentioned the Gulf States, not Egypt or Jordan. You can throw around the word imperialism as much as you like, by the way, it doesn’t bother me. As an American, my first concern is for the welfare of the American people. I would very much like to see the U.S. forge a partnership with Iran, because I think that would further the interests of the American people. Now, I have stated that I doubt such a partnership is achievable. IF a grand bargain is not on the cards, I personally would prefer to see the US withdraw completely from the Middle East. That, however, is even less likely to occur than a US-Iranian grand bargain. If neither a grand bargain nor withdrawal is going to happen, then I would prefer that we adopt a policy of containment. Containment would not have to be “active” in any way — unless Iran attempted to extend its power throughout the Gulf area. We would simply remain in the area with sufficient force to deter any temptation that Iran might feel to extend its power and influence in ways harmful to the US. As an American I have to think of my country and my fellow citizens first, just as any Iranian or Chinese or British citizen naturally thinks first of his own land.

I’m sorry if you resent the fact that we are talking about America in Iran’s backyard. I’m sure I wouldn’t be happy if Iran was messing around in the Western Hemisphere. But it’s not my fault that the US has grown into the greatest power on earth, while Iran’s day as world power number one came and went 2,500 years ago.

Guys, I have to admit that I’ve had enough of this topic for now. Please feel free to have the last word, and I will carefully read whatever you may have to say.

“Kooshy, if Iran’s credit rating is so high, why haven’t the Gulf States asked us to leave?”

Jon your question above, which in reality is your justification for the US continued presence in the gulf, is laughable.
Jon, who do you think, is supposed to ask, US to leave the region? King Abdullah, a client and a viceroy of US? or Mr. Mubarak’s government.
Look, we are not talking credit rating with the opinions of the region’s kings and Presidents for life, the only reason they are still in power, is because of the US support.
Do you know the justification for USSR invading Afghanistan back in 79 was that the Afghan government of Babrak Karmal asked them to move in. do you see a difference between your justification and that of Leonid Brezhnev. This is an old imperialistic reasoning, which has further distanced the US from the regions public and as the result
will work against the long-term US interests in the region.

Kooshy, if Iran’s credit rating is so high, why haven’t the Gulf States asked us to leave?

The US may indeed leave the region some day. That wouldn’t bother me in the least. Indeed, I would welcome it under some circumstances. It’s not clear to me, however, that the US will be forced to go. While Iran is the biggest power in the Gulf region and perhaps indeed its “natural hegemon,” it remains a second-rate power with formidable internal problems. Iran as the wave of the future is not a scenario I take very seriously. Partnered with the US, it possesses major advantages. On its own it will have difficulty achieving that “natural hegemony.”

Therefore, like you at this time I am also skeptical a grand bargain rapprochement will work, without having a grand restructuring of US regional strategic policy, which I also think it, is too early to hope for one. A mutual trusted small steps are the only options and that is what Iran is willing to take for now, but apparently not enough for US.

And Jon about the
“Because Iran has not followed an expansionist line for 250 years means little, especially since it was restrained by Turkish, Russian and British power during most of that period.”
Jon, of course this means something, here in the west this is called the Credit Rating, now just guess, who has a better credit rating in the opinion bank of the region, US or Iran?

Remember, I said I’m 100% behind efforts to achieve a rapprochement with Iran. If that proves impossible, my preference would be for the US to exit the region. However, my preferences count for nothing in this. The US isn’t leaving the Middle East in general or the Gulf in particular. So, if a rapprochement doesn’t happen (for whatever reason) and a US departure is not on the cards, then containment is the least bad option left. Surely, we don’t think war is preferable? If the US remains in the region, and US-Iranian relations remain hostile, the alternatives are containment (or an “armed standoff” if you prefer) or war. We may not like that picture. But that’s the reality.

Jon Iran’s regional strategic policy is not, and has not, been based, on a military expansion to its neighbors for almost 3 centuries going back to when one, with the same last name as mine invaded India. If, it was they would have attacked the Taliban when they killed Iranian diplomats in Mazar e Sharif. However, Iran historically has tremendous amount of soft power with regards
To its cultural ties with next of kin neighbors, like what is evident in Iraq or Afghanistan specially among the Shih and disconnected Muslim communities in all the region’s states, how do you propose to contain that soft power, you mentioned above that in absence of US power Iran has the ability to “overawe “ the Gulf states, so can you
Explained why with presence of US in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Gulf why Iran still has such tremendous influence.

The truth is that Iran does not need to overrun its neighbors, to influence their policies and get her in the same quagmire that currently US has put her.
So to go over the list
Economic containment – we have done our best and so far not much to write home
Political containment – Iran is culturally and socially connected with its neighbors will not have an effect as seen in the past
Military Containment – No need, since Iran is not exercising an expansionist policy for past 300 years( I have seen this number as low as 250)
Military Economic Blockade = War in the Gulf or as GWB said the No. 3 is coming

I think we simply have a disagreement re the Soviet model. Mind you, I don’t claim the parallel is exact. But I think the Cold War model is close enough in its essentials to warrant the comparison. You may be quite right to say that Iran does not harbor ambitions in its neighborhood comparable to the expansionsit impulses of the Soviet Union. My retort would be that if by chance you’re wrong, then it’s too late for containment. With containment you cover your bets. With containment war is almost certainly OFF the table (here I disagree with the Leveretts), whereas war seems likely to me if engagement fails and no containment policy is ready to hand.

Again, I personally favor going the last mile on engagement with Iran. I just don’t think we can get an administration in the US that will do this. Should our hopes for engagement wither, I would prefer to see the US withdraw from the Middle East entirely. That, however, is not going to happen. If engagement and withdrawal turn out to be nonstarters, where do we stand — not theoretically, but in the real world? Seems to me that IF we came to that point, containment would be the best of several bad choices we would have. That’s all I’m saying.

As always I appreciate your thoughts, whether I happen to agree with them or not.