gandalf: I think Reagan’s real strength was that he was a true believer. He was a Cold Warrior in the most ideological sense of the term. The Soviets respected strength and Reagan went right at them. No more proxy wars, but a clearly stated upping of the ante. And, Reagan was just crazy enough to have the Russians believing that he just might go off the reservation at any time, if sufficiently provoked.
I think that is where the Bush Administration falters. I don’t get the sense that Bush truly believes in much of what he espouses. And I don’t think there is quite the ideological concurrence or cohesiveness within his administration. Clinton suffered from this as well, but it was more based on Bill’s playing the polls and “triangulating” rather than any lack of intelligence.
I believe we engage the Iranians, with an eye to how the largely moderate population as a whole is going to view our approach. Iran has some fairly serious structural weaknesses, including their economy. Obviously, they are not a serious military threat to us. If there were to be a revolution, I don’t think it would be violent, I think it would be more along the lines of what happened in Eastern Europe right before the Wall came down. Countries that present these monolithich fronts invariably suffer from large, unseen cracks that can be exploited. Iran’s population is younger, educated, articulate and pro-US, all of which plays to our advantage, if we take a measured approach.
