I'm not an apologist for Iran's actions. Iran certainly has supported activities of terrorism, and the Houthis don't have clean hands. The Houthis have engaged in crimes too. But the idea that that justifies American involvement in a civil war in Yemen doesn't make any sense strategically.
There isn't a doubt that Iran constitutes the single most important single-country strategic challenge to the United States and to the kind of Middle East that we want to see.
Whether it is Iraq, whether it is Yemen, whether it is Lebanon, whether it is Syria, I mean North Africa, you could go through the list of countries where Iran as the largest state sponsor of terrorism uses these proxies... to foment chaos in the Middle East.
The West sees Iran as an important force in the gulf.
I don't believe Iran is a suicide state.
The biggest problem that we have on the face of the planet is Iran getting a nuclear weapon.
When the President of Iran talks about removing Israel from the face of the Earth and is building nuclear bombs with a range of 3000km, you have to be worried.
Iran has long sponsored terrorists who carry out homicide bombings in Israeli cities. However, it is a mistake to believe the danger Iran poses is directed at Israel alone.
Few Westerners know Iran as well as Robin Wright: her first trip there as a journalist was in 1973, and she has covered every important milestone since, from the Islamic revolution and the hostage crisis to the more recent staring contest with the West over Tehran's nuclear program.
We have never recognized that Iran lives in a dangerous neighborhood. And it's not surprising that they want some protection. We have not been forthcoming about explaining a security relationship for the region, in which Iran can feel secure and thus maybe willing to do something.
Well, Israel, obviously, thinks of the Iranian nuclear program as an existential threat to Israel.
I'm not an Iran expert.
Is the Iranian record of intervention and terror worse than that of the U.S.?
Iran has not invaded any other country. We have not threatened to use force. Just exactly the opposite of Israel. Israel threatens to use force against Iran almost on a daily basis. And it has a record.
Although it is true that Hizballah is organized, inspired, financed, and armed by Iran, its main bases in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley are under Syrian military control.
Iran has basically propped up Assad, who has waged an absolute war of horror against the Syrian people. And he has done anything he could to stay in power with the full support of the Iranians and including Iranian troops and Hezbollah from Lebanon, which are an Iranian proxy.
The problem with the Iranian regime, of course is, one, its unsettling effects on the Sunnis, particularly Saudi Arabia, and, secondly, its potential threat to Israel.
Iran has had a very harmful effect in a variety of ways in the region... fomenting unrest to a degree in Saudi Arabia, undoubtedly in Bahrain, and definitely in Yemen with Hamas, with Lebanese Hezbollah among other activities in locations.
From a geo-strategic point of view, I consider Iran a bigger problem than the Islamic State. ISIS is a group of adventurers with a very aggressive ideology. But they have to conquer more and more territory before they can became a geo-strategic, permanent reality. I think a conflict with ISIS - important as it is - is more manageable than a confrontation with Iran.
There are nothing but hardliners in Iran.
Iran's stance has always been clear on this ugly phenomenon (Israel). We have repeatedly said that this cancerous tumor of a state should be removed from the region. No one will allow a bunch of thugs, lechers and outcasts from London, America and Moscow to rule over the Palestinians.
I don't think that the Iranians, even if they got the bomb, they're going to drop it immediately on some neighbor. They fully understand what might follow. They're radical, but not total mishuginas.
If the world powers are not prepared to insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal is signed, at the very least they should insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal expires.
The issue with Syria, I think for many of us, has always been about Iran. This is an anchor point for them in terms of regional domination. It means a lot to them. They are all in here.
We're seeing Iran now through the Shia militias in Iraq. We're seeing Iran in Syria; we know the Quds Force is in there.
