Well JB, it maybe a case of hand in glove. One touches the other despite the West's secular stance since the 1920's. And despite the few secular states in the region we regard as Islamic.
I've lost the link to a piece on what Islamic law looks like in day to to day life. Sorry I can't find it. The tone of the piece wasn't shrill which naturally winds up distracting from the matter at hand. Nope, just can't find it.
Prior to war, diplomacy can avert conflict. The missle crisis comes to time. Also, diplomacy can fail when one party or both lack good will. Munich comes to mind.
The reason diplomacy/discussion can alter future events is both sides share values that each regard as dear, and they both see that war may well cause a loss of those values or valuable things (lives, natural resources, money, posessions, etc).
Back to values, they don't exist theoretically merely. An example would be, "all men are mortal, we inhabit this small earth, and cherish our children's future." That may not be the best example, but it demonstrates how and that values form the basis for any society. Values and truth, also, come hand in glove. And they change over time. Not truth with a capital T so much, but certainly with a small t.
Values and ideals that govern acts or that sanction acts aren't foolproof. Be they evil values or virtuous. We humans fall short, cave, break with the "way things are" and various times.
Now, as to Iran . . . and I don't know how much Iran and Saudi Arabia have in common regarding their "mission" so to speak (Saudi Arabia is another thread. I'm just musing aloud). Mission being how folks go about living out their values. The truth. Granted, during my lifetime alone, there's abundant examples of controlling the truth by controlling what people read, hear, are taught, and what they can or cannot discuss.
Any serious glace at Middle Eastern history or American history provides enough evil acts for any person with a conscience to feel shame. Ignoring religion for a moment. Humans behave badly covers it, but not with the equivalent force of many of any nation's sanctioned acts.
The roadblock with Iran, I suppose, is a matter of the big question: "Why Are We Here?" America and American's can point and probably would point in some way to the Consitution -- trying to keep this secular on our side -- Iran would not point to a secular point of origination.
Neither would many American's either. But America is not a Theocracy. Iran is. Is it not? Or, it postures that it is. At it's core is another matter. Cores are tough things to get at and easy about which to conjecture.
Republic vs. Theocracy is how I see it. Also, along the way things can change. And not always for the worst. "We will bury you" isn't being pronounced by Russia anymore in the UN. That may have been a bluff too, but you get my point.
That's my glance at it from a secular point on view. Go back to the "fundamentals" of society, then the picture changes a bit. I'm even thinking of before the Edict of Milan.
Good Thread,
hap
