And now...Iran

American forces are and have been operating in Iran since last year, according to a New Yorker article.

"These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country's religious leadership. The covert activities involve support of the minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organizations. They also include gathering intelligence about Iran's suspected nuclear-weapons program."

My question is, how would the U.S. look upon it if Iran had military forces crossing into the U.S. from Mexico or Canada and formenting revolution?

BushCo would clearly look upon it as an act of war, although they would probably classify it as "terrorism" and "Islamic extremism" since those are the buzz words the Repugs have counted on to sway elections.

Oh, and what is that I hear? Is it the Bush incantation of "WMDs...WMDs...WMDs" which magically cause us to become involved in wars?

Perhaps Bush (and McCain) should spend a little less time campaigning and speechifying and a little more time studying their history. How many empires have been successful fighting wars on three fronts?

Or perhaps they could take a couple of hours to listen to the Sicilian Vizzini's advice in The Princess Bride...

"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The most famous is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."

Now we're looking at three?