There has been a lot of excellent analysis all over the web regarding the nuclear negotiations with Iran. Here is the bottom line with Iran: what are you willing to do to prevent Iran from enriching uranium, even at levels below what it could use in weapons? Certainly verification is a real issue (verification meaning the verification that Iran’s enrichment activities are for peaceful purposes). Because it would be FAR from ideal if Iran did build nuclear weapons. On one hand, theoretically, you’d think they should have as much of a right to have nuclear weapons as Israel, who also is known to have them (a dirty little secret that almost nobody likes to mention in this debate). However, at a bare minimum, reasonable people can probably accept the fact that if Iran develops nuclear weapons then Saudi Arabia (and Turkey and God knows who else) will also develop or acquire nuclear weapons (Pakistan being a likely source)…and then you have an entire Middle East filled with crazy dictators with nuclear weapons. That is definitely not an ideal situation.

But what are you going to do? Are you going to invade Iran? Put boots on the ground? Because they’ve got several nuclear facilities, some of them built deep into the mountains. And what if you find out later that they weren’t pursuing nuclear weapons like you suspected? “Whoops…” Again? Or what if your bombing campaigns fail and they DO speed up their development of nuclear weapons before you can win a ground campaign? Then you’re in the middle of a war with a newly nuclear Iran. Not to mention, I know that American people really honestly don’t care about civilian casualties in other countries, but the amount of innocent Iranian women and children that would die should be considered as well. And I hate to say that about Americans, but it’s unfortunately obviously true. Americans see civilian deaths as unfortunate collateral damage. Muslim women and children can just blame their own leaders for not satisfactorily proving to our leaders that they weren’t doing something that our government claimed they were…

These are people’s lives. I know people really care about Israel. But I would make a few arguments. Firstly, from a foreign policy standpoint, how much of a risk would a nuclear-armed Iran REALLY have to the United States? Because that should be our first concern. With regards to our responsibilities to our allies, what does friendship (at all cost) with Israel really buy us? From a military standpoint, if Iran develops nuclear weapons, Israel already has many, many more. Iran could try and drop one nuclear bomb in a major Israeli city. And then Israel (and most of the world) would immediately destroy Iran. Iran’s leaders, contrary to what some uninformed people might believe, are not on a suicide mission. They might send other people on suicide missions. But the leaders of Iran are not on any suicide mission. Attacking Israel might make them feel good at first, but it would end the only thing they really care about: their own rule. And I’d say to those religious conservatives that say America has a religious duty to protect Israel: if Israel really is God’s chosen nation, then I am pretty sure God doesn’t need our help. He’s kept them around this long. Against probably tougher odds. Religious Americans must have far too high of an opinion of America to think that if we don’t protect Israel then God can’t take care of them. Plus, if this is the end times…and Jesus is coming back, then there’s nothing that could be done to stop it. And how freaking crazy is it that some people seriously think that we should consider these kinds of things when we make foreign policy decisions?

But honestly, this whole Iran situation is about far more than nuclear weapons. And people really need to understand that. This is about the balance of power (and oil revenues) in the Middle East. Iran, honestly, has traditionally been a really sneaky, untrustworthy country that interferes in everybody else’s business…in incredibly dirty ways. And they’re ambitious. The whole region hates them. And they’re scared of them. Saudi Arabia has a sizeable Shiite minority that Iran likes to tamper with. Bahrain also. And those dictators (“monarchs”) in those Gulf countries worry about Iran having more money and power to stir unrest in the entire region. The Middle East has only been heating up more recently with regards to the sectarian conflict between Sunnis and Shias. It’s gotten worse in Iraq. It’s spread from Syria into Lebanon. And Syria is simply the main battlefield…where over 100,000 lives have already been lost in the sectarian war.

The risk of a deal with Iran (the risk that Iran will eventually violate the agreement and develop nuclear weapons) is great. And so is the risk of allowing the civil war in Syria to continue. However, the risk associated with acting on Bush’s pre-emptive strike in either country is equally great (if not much greater). This much seems clear: Russia has finally drawn their own red line (and it’s just on the other side of Syria and Iran). You want to know why Obama seemed poised to strike Syria, only to back down? The U.S. government has several military treaties with countries that obligate the U.S. to militarily defend their allies in any conflict. Well, guess what. Russia has security treaties, too. And I believe that the evidence strongly suggests that Russia (and Iran) have likely drawn their line in the sand and said, “If you attack our buddy Syria then you attack us, too.” Why would Syria be that important to Russia? Well, Syria is Russia’s last major lackey in the Middle East, it’s an important country for helping Russia keep its near monopoly as Europe’s energy supplier, and it provides Russia with a military port in the Mediterranean. Not to mention, I bet Russia is realizing that if the U.S. decides to reach a détente with Iran, it might scare Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern monarchs closer to Russia’s sphere of influence. Saudi Arabia (and other Gulf monarchs) have counted on the U.S. protection not just from foreign enemies (Iran), but also domestic ones (via U.S. arms sales). However, if they can’t trust the U.S. to protect them from either of their perceived enemies, that might open the door for Russia. Russia and the Middle East also have some common interests, most notably a higher oil price (Russia’s national budget is also heavily dependent on energy prices…which is why Syria and Ukraine become so important).

Don’t believe that Russia might be willing to fight the U.S. over Syria? I want you to guess how many warships Russia placed in the Mediterranean, between the U.S.’ own naval warships and the Syrian coast. Not to mention that Russia also has moved nuclear capable missiles closer to their western border. I believe Russia has made it clear: if you get involved in the Syrian war then I’m getting (more) involved, too. And if I am right (and I believe the evidence strongly supports that I am), then the whole country has to decide if we want the whole thing. Are we ready for another war? Is it worth it? Is it worth the hundreds of billions it will cost (when we’re already overflowing with debt)? Is it worth the lives of the innocent women and children who will inevitably die? Is it worth the lives of our own soldiers? All because we think Iran might be trying to develop nuclear weapons, which would still leave Iran outgunned compared with Israel and the United States? I don’t want a nuclear-armed Iran either (if for no other reason than they have ties to so many terrorist groups). But we can’t afford another war. Period. We can’t afford it financially. And we can’t afford any more lives. A nuke-filled Middle East dramatically raises the risk premium associated with Middle Eastern oil and threatens the global economy, but a war over Iran is likely to develop into something much bigger, more deadly, and ruinous than anything most warmongers could ever possibly imagine.

Some would like you to believe that people are offering a false choice: war or no war. They aren’t advocating war…they promise. Firstly, with regards to the just brutal sanctions that have really devastated the Iranian economy: you can only strangle a guy for so long. Not to mention the fact that we have how many warships, planes, and troops in the area? Are several Iranian warships near the U.S.’ Atlantic coast or are several U.S. ships in the Mediterranean and the Gulf? And finally, the bill that Republicans and Democratic hawks like Robert Menendez from New Jersey are pushing would basically obligate us to go to war if Israel decided to attack Iran. As far as I am concerned, that is my red line. I’d rather Israel not start a war, but if they want to (because they say they feel it’s necessary to protect themselves), then go right ahead. But I hope the U.S. would publicly condemn it in the strongest terms rather than risk getting sucked into yet another war and spending hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of American lives. If every Congressman who votes in favor a war also votes to make up the front line, then and only then will I ever support it. With Congress at a single digit approval levels, I bet we can find some other Americans who would agree.

I hope Menendez and Lindsay Graham will co-sponsor that bill.