why should it be a news or surprise that Iran is interfering in Iraq?

Question

what our country would do when finds itself surrounded by all sides? isn't IRAN suppose to be our enemy and don't we treat it as such? didn't we help Iraq mainly during Iran and Iraq war. do we expect them to trust us while we have sorrounded them? do we expect them to roll a red persian carpet for us too? please try to answer as many questions as you can!

jayKKK, MAKE SURE YOU VOLUNTEER BEFORE THERE IS A DRAFT. DON'T YOU DRIFT AWAY FAR WHEN DRAFT IS HERE EITHER! WE CAN'T WIN ANY WAR W/O YOUR BEHIND!

sADDAM WOULD HAVE NOT DARED TO ATTACK iRAN W/O BEING SURE THAT USA WOULDN'T SUPPORT HIM IN FACT WE GAVE HIM A GREEN LIGHT! SO SADDAM WAS NOT MUCH OF A THREAT ANY LONGER FOR IRAN. AS FAR AS MOJAHEDIN KHALGH GOES THEY MAJORITY OF THEM HAVE LEFT IRAQ AND USA AND OUR ALLIES ARE SUPPORTING THEM. THEY ARE A PAWN TO BE THERE IN CASE WE NEED THEM JUST LIKE kHOMEINI. WE COULD HAVE TAKEN CARE OF HIM BUT WE USED HIM TO HELP BRINGING HEZBOLLAH IN ORDER TO KILL OFF AND FIGHT COMMUNISTS AND SOVIETS

Sulliva, you have some points correct but mostly wrong! Usa millitary and/ or mercenneries even fought against Iran so there was none announced war AWAX in Saudi Arabia was used to help Saddam too and those puppets don't do anything without USA's approval, however our main objective was to keep the war even and weaken both countries and their infra-structure. you just don't see the whole chess board, that is why you are wrong in general!

sulliva, you are repeating what was on the news and that is where you went wrong. public media never tells the truth and teach you how to see and read the chess board!

Answer 1

War is the ultimate game of Chess and Iran was placed in "check" a while back.

Afghanistan was a no brainer after 9/11.

Iraq was easy because there was legal basis with all the UN Resolutions. Any country can choose to enforce them. So now we are on these 3 sides of Iran.

This is also poker. Russia is trying to figure out how many cards to get.

I have always believed Iran is the ultimate target. Democracy to the east of me Democracy to the west and Sunni strong hold Saudi Arabia to their 6. The goal has been to start an internal revolution there for many years.

Answer 2

Who said it was a surprise, I could've told you on 9/11 if start messing with Afghanistan or Iraq, that would mean you're eventually going to have to deal with Iran. But the most avoidable problem with the Bush administration was when President Bush Blatantly called them part of the Axis of Evil, without any intentions of backing it up.
I do know we supported Iraq in the Iran/Iraq war, but I also know we took out Saddam, a thorn in the Iranians paw for the past 30 years. As far as I'm concerned they should say thank you and be on their merry little way.
I also believe that if we allow Iranian forces to persue Mujahideen-e Khalq(MEK) into Iraq it would go a long way in improving relations, as the MEK are our common enemy
EDIT: First off, what's with the caps? It's annoying
Secondly, the MEK is on the US terror list, officially they are our enemy, if you have information to the contrary I'm open to seeing it.
Thirdly, Why would Saddam need a green light, both Iran and Iraq know America encouraged the fight between them. And Saddam didn't need an all out war to support terrorism, infiltration and dissention in Iran, up until the war in Iraq it was very tense.
Lastly, Since when have the MEK gone and left Iraq, sure their training camps have been diminished in Western Iraq, but that doesn't mean they don't have fully functioning cells, the Iran-Iraq border is still the most unsecure, just ask all the terrorists Ahmadinejad is sending over.

Answer 3

Let's take a look at this.

*Nobody* ever gave a ' green light' to Saddam Hussein for anything. He took it, the old bastard...

Geopolitical consequences started back when Jimmy Carter thought it would be a good idea to let a ' religious man' travel from exile in France back to his Persian homeland. So, he got the Ayatollah Khomeni in Iran, and the Shah -- stuffed.

There ended the one stable (non-Jewish) regime in the area. The good Ayatollah wasted no time in making a damned fool out of Carter.

Hussein figured on taking the Sha'at Al Arab, after Khomeni purged his military of all the better-trained military, and winding up with a load of sanctions that clipped his parts supplies. (American equipment, mostly -- M-60 series tanks, F-14A tomcats, M-16 rifles, trucks, , etc.)

Previously, Iraq and Iran shared the port. Hussein wanted it all. did we support Hussein? Not really. I remember boatloads of AT weapons going to the Persians, in order to give their key-waving cannon fodder some flying chance against Iraqi (Russian) tanks. Part of the Iran-Contra deal, remember?

The Persians almost did it, despite the ineptitude of their newly minted top brass. hundreds of thousands of kids waving " keys to Heaven" , stomping through minefields, so the professional Iranian military could follow them without getting themselves blown up. Hussein used chemical weapons on them to try and stop them, and finally, cut all the dams up-river, turning the area east of the harbor into a quagmire -- and, an ecological disaster. Not only the inundation, but the chemicals (Distilled Mustard and VX, which will be in that mud for another forty years or so.).

By the time the war ended -- by simultaneous exhaustion -- the Ayatollahs had to make a "deal with Satan" -- Hussein, that is.

The Sha'at Al Arab is still shared by both countries, Several years later, and several hundreds of thousands of casualties later, that is.

Hussein's loss was not missed by the Persians. They were working to gain influence in Iraq before, they will continue to do so now that he is gone.

I don't think Iran will opt for an Iranian-managed government in Iraq so much as they would go for an Iranian-influenced government; there is a subtle difference. Those old chess-players would love to be able to control, but not openly appear to be pulling the strings. That's why the Sadr faction gets so much Persian help == they think they can control that little whacko.

I don't think they will get that -- I don't think Sadr can be controlled; but they believe Sharia law (if fully established) will keep him in his place.

In the meantime, there are several branches of Kurds jockeying for position -- in Kurdistan. A few might be tempted to extend their turf, but they will be rebuffed by other groups, both Sunni and Shia. Beyond that basic distinction, there are a myriad of tribal allegiances and differences to contend with.

There was an old first Sergeant I knew in Vietnam, when the phrase "winning the hearts and minds" first came about. his take?

" The best way to do that is to grab' em by the balls -- the hearts and minds will follow."

That's what we need to do in the Mid-East. Grab'em all in the best way, and let the hearts and minds follow. The trick is in settling on the best way.

Answer 4

Need to talk with Iran and not at them.
Like it or not, and probably not, with the fall of Saddam Hussein, Iran has become a regional superpower.
If a pro-American government in Iraq has any hope of survival, it will need the blessing of Iran.
Unpleasant, but reality is like that.

Too bad no one thought about what the geopolitical consequences of a unilateral US invasion/occupation might be.......

Answer 5

i don't think that it would be. it is more surprising what the US is doing,supporting MEK,having disagreements with the leaders of Iraq and Afghanistan,over Iran. the "axis of evil" speech was why Ahmadinejad was elected. prior to that speech Iran helped to overthrow the Taliban and they are still helping Afghanistn rebuild

Answer 6

It's not at all a surprise - which is why we never should have come into Iraq in the first place. It was obviously going to dissolve into a quagmire, as Cheney himself said.

Answer 7

It's no surprise the usa,uk,etc.,are interfering,makes me feel ashamed.