[blueunicorn6]

Asked to comment about his foreign policy, President Obama replied

“Fore!”

[Boogieman]

Here’s a hint: when the Israelis and Saudis are in complete agreement about something, there is probably something to it.

[Cronos]

Here's my point -- what is the problem with Yemen, Syria and Iraq being Irani "satrapies" (which the first two aren't -- Syria is more an ally for now)?

The Saudis, Qataris and Pakistanis are Sunni jihadis who hate us and Shias. The Shias hate us and Sunnis.

Since the Irani revolution, the Sunnis have been in ascendance in power and money. Now the Shias are clawing their way to equal viciousness. So the Sunnis will target the Shias more and more and leave us alone.

Why not encourage that? Keep both sides at parity and let them kill each other?

[Cronos]

Over the weekend, a Houthi spokesman directly threatened the Saudis. “When we decide to invade,” he said, “we won’t stop in the city of Mecca, but will continue on to Riyadh to topple the government institutions.” While that invasion may not be imminent, Iran’s strategy and objectives are now apparent.

That is not even possible. The Houthis are local fighters and far away from any support from Iran. They can hold on to their territory, but invading Sunni-led southern Saudia? Not possible. The Shias are in the east of Saudia and they are twelvers, not Zayidis like the Yemenis

[Cronos]

To the west of Saudi Arabia is the Red Sea. Iranian domination of Yemen would mean control of Bab-el-Mandeb, the “Gateway of Tears.” This 20-mile-wide strait separates Yemen and the Arabian Peninsula from Djibouti and Africa. Whoever controls Bab-el-Mandeb also controls marine traffic in and out of the Red Sea, which has, at its northern end, Egypt’s Suez Canal.

This may be the Irani's dream, but it's not possible. Western Yemen is Sunni and the Djiboutis are Saudi supporters. What would happen is a stand-off.

[Cronos]

With Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen already under Iranian domination, other Arab nations would soon come under severe pressure to accept the suzerainty — and perhaps the hegemony — of what could legitimately be called a new Persian empire

Another impossibility. The Sunnis wouldn't do that -- and the Arabs would call on their servants, the Pakistanis and Turks to prevent it.

[Cronos]

Even so, Iran’s rulers are doubtless confident that, over time, they will defeat their Sunni jihadi rivals — with Americans continuing to assist the effort.

"confident"? Not unless they are smoking hashish. They would believe they can control the Shia areas of Syria and Iraq and Yemen, but they aren't going to believe that they would hold the Sunni middle in any way. Also, they will have no illusions about the way Sunni Pakistan and Turkey will fall -- the Pakis and Turks already openly support the jihadis

[Cronos]

It’s an ambitious plan. Nothing would do more to bolster it than for America and Europe to lift economic sanctions and end their opposition to Iran’s nuclear weapons program

Not really. It would take years for Iran's economy to arise

And as for nukes -- the Pakis already have them and I'm sure some are targeting Tehran

[mosesdapoet]

Satrap a title and name given to a Persian province or dependency and its governor.