Think of it this way, if a foreign power took over Canada and Mexico, and threatened the US, would we not foster instability in these two countries (despite the refugee flow) if only to keep that other power busy, and bloodied enough, to prevent it from attacking us?

Invaded two of Iran’s neighbors this decade and installed two governments friendly to America.

Garrisons well over a hundred thousand troops just a few hundred miles away from Iran’s borders.

Has bases in several nations that surround Iran, including navy bases which harbor ships that carry multiple nuclear warheads.

Has called Iran an “axis of evil” – shortly after Iran provided some help during the attack on the Taliban.

Has openly declared that it is spending $75 million to covertly overthrow the Iranian government.

… and yet Iran is the aggressor.

Hmm… yeah, how do you think we’d feel if, say, China invaded Mexico for some semi-legitimate reason, based hundreds of thousands of troops there and installed a pro-China government?

There are so many points of converging interests between the two countries, and a few quick, tough decisions made on both sides could buy security benefits for all (and kick the price of oil down 20% too). Unfortunately, Boucher and Rice simply don’t realize that complaining and empty threats against Iran won’t do anything; actual diplomacy is about changing enemies into friends.

In short, I can see them using such a proxy war scenario as a means of running out the clock on the Bush administration. The added benefit, is that if done well, they can also tweak the situation further to their favor in both countries.