On Iran

Update: I was working on this post when CNN gave an update which I will include at the end.

I have been meaning to post on the administrations scary rhetoric on Iran, and what I have seen as some serious flaws in their logic. I have no great credentials- that's Juan Cole's http://www.juancole.com/ turf- but I have been reading and paying attention. I have had a longtime interest in Middle East history, and I sometimes feel that I'm more knowledgeable than some of the so called experts. So here is my take:

The accusations that Iran is providing weapons to insurgents in Iraq sounds false on it's face based on three glaring contradictions.
1. The main insurgency is in Anbar province, a Sunni region. Iran is a Shia theocracy and it would be quite unlikely that they would be arming their rivals.
2. Iran has every reason to support the Maliki government, with whom they have long term ties (Maliki lived as an exile in Iran while Saddam was in power). The Iranians would benefit more from Maliki's success than from his failure.
3. Iran would have no reason to aid Moqtada Al'Sadr, who's as strongly anti-Iranian as he is anti-American. The Iranians know that greater instability would only increase Al'Sadr's power.

So why is the Bush administration trumpeting these weapons claims with their "anonymous intelligence officials"? Are they really crazy enough to want another war?
And, by far the most important question: How can we stop them? Because we damn well better do everything we can.

Update: CNN is reporting that Iranian weapons have been going to SCIRI, the Bush backed militia run by Abdul Aziz al-Hakim. Remember him? He met with Bush a couple of months ago. Anyway, here's a link:http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/12/sciri-iran/