See what can happen when we don't bomb them?

Abcnews.com provides me with another surprising story. Seems like Iran is on the verge of an internally-produced change.

...if you spend time here, you are likely to come away with the strong sense that things will change. The hardliners are still in charge. But there is a mood in the street — a determination to lead a freer, less isolated life — that in the long run, seems irreversible.

Wonderful.

This story reminded me of something Robert Wright wrote in Slate a while back.

So, why haven't any big anti-American terrorist plots been hatched by Iranians? For one thing, thanks to the 1979 revolution, America is no longer backing their repressive monster. Iran, like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, has lots of angry people, but the ones who are angry at their government don't have the United States to blame for it. In fact, since they want more moderate, perhaps even secular rule, the American way is as close to being the solution as the problem.

Good point. If it becomes impossible to blame all your problems on a particular group, let's say "America", then you're less likely to want to do bad things to members of that particular group. For instance, not one Muslim Theocracy thinks Finland is "The Great Satan". I wonder why?

In the interests of "American Security", it might be better for out armies to take a more "hands-off" approach. This is problematic, however, because I also feel that as a "superpower" the United States has a responsibility to take action, to "stop bad things when they are happening". What we need to do is to redefine what that entails.

I've linked to Wright's pieces before, but here they are again. I recommend all nine entries.