Quote Originally Posted by Dream of the iris
"I suppose you've never read anything through out history about countries backing nations of interest with Rebels and to overthrow their own government? You've never heard of covert ops or assassinations? It happens. While I don't necessarily agree with disrupting a government in place I do believe in helping the people to help themselves.

Your bit of sarcasm at the beginning of this statement is condescending and not appreciated. Instead of just stating your opinions they would be better served if you would back them with political and military reasoning or even use a reference from history to back it."

Alright well lets see here. America was responsible for the Bay of pigs invasion which ultimately led to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Of course nothing happened as we all should know, however, something really really bad could have gone down and at the time people really thought this could be it. Because we played our cards right we avoided a nuclear war but you can't rule out that it wasn't going to happen. Now here's something you might remember. The assasination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by a Serbian Terrorist from the Black hand. Guess what they tried to assassinate a leader to achieve what they wanted but essentially they started WWI. Of course you could also point out a number of other coups that went very smoothly such as the Glorious Revolution led by William of Orange or when Napoleon and other officers ousted the Directory out of France. The point I'm trying to make is that in spite of the fact that getting rid of the Iranian government through the methods which you described could result in peace, it could just as equally fall the other way and ultimately mean war. History shows that things don't always go as planned. Did we expect the Bay of pigs invasion to fall under and cause the Cuban Missile Crisis? No. Did those Serbian terrorists know they would start WWI? Absolutely not, and yet it happened just as ridding the Iranian government could prove fatal. And if you want to look at recent history just look at society around you. If you wach old videos of Bush when he first ran for president many of the things he said sounded similar to Ron Paul. Democracy, constitution, less foreign conflicts blah blah blah. Guess we didn't expect him to fight a war in Iraq. Only time will tell buuuuuuuuuudy.
Your arguement originally is that we should not go to war for other people because it's not our responsibility and that they would have more incentive to fight than we would.

So I explain how we can still support the ousting of the Iranian Government without our direct involvement. Like all things there is always risk factors. Nothing is perfect, but it would remove our direct involvement.

It seems that you want to argue just for the sake of arguements.

Like I've said before from the posts I've read from you it seems that you are thinking too far into the future. Before you can determine the risks and consequences you must first determine a course of action and how you intend to meet those goals before you can determine the risks and how to avoid them.

One step at a time. :thumbsup:

btw: good references. I like seeing that more than empty arguments/debates. I know most people on here are very intelligent and enjoy/prefer seeing people's mind in full gear as opposed to just making empty statements. Understand that I was never trying to pick on you but instead draw out something deeper from you.

Thanks for taking the time for the good response. :thumbsup: