Well there’s two alternatives for the US if they are determined to be involved in the Middle East, they can work with the Shiite Iranians or their arch-rivals the Sunni Saudis.
The Iranians haven’t actually attacked the US in about thirty years, Iran, despite being an Islamic Republic tolerates other religions, there are many Christians and indeed Jews living peacefully in Iran. Last year the Iranians elected a president with the specific mandate of ending Iran’s isolation and reaching out to the US. The Iranians are supporting the democratically elected government of Iraq, the democratic government that the US spent billions and thousands of lives getting installed. Iranians are much more open to the west and used to be America’s best friend in the region.
Or the US could continue to what it has being doing for decades; using its military as the House of Saud’s foreign legion, protecting the oil fields the feeble Saudi military could not defend, while the Saudis, who loathe America and the west, fund the Sunni and Wahabi extremists who are currently fighting in Syria and Iraq.
Oh and the men who attacked America on 9/11 were not Iranians but almost to a man Sunni Saudis led by a Sunni Saudi.
Yeah, I can see why the US wouldn’t want to side with Iran in this fight, er, maybe.
Although it would have made world oil markets dangerously unstable. .my first choice (after a quick demolition of the Taliban in Afghanistan) after 9/11 was the Saudis. 15 of 19 came from there and their vicious wahhabi teachings have continued unabated.
But it’s hard to go after an enemy who keeps the economies of many nations functional.
It’s an ugly mess.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3168140/posts
Apparently this may have slowed them down on the way to Baghdad. .
So the Iranians aren’t trying to build a nuclear arsenal nor ally themselves with North Korea, and really do love Israel? /s
Sorry, the political arena in Iran still isn’t amenable to world peace.