With the calls for a war against Iran by the US presidential candidates and British government figures, and the ongoing "covert operations" against Iran it is time to ask the questions: (1) "What are the reasons for this war?" and (2) "What will be its consequences?".
Before we consider these question we need to clarify who is "the West". "The West" in the context of this article are the current governments of Israel, USA, and Britain, as well as the various "lobbies" and "pressure groups" controlling these governments. From now on we shall be referring to these groups of individuals as "Israel", "USA" and "Britain", as there are differences in the motivations of these groups.
The main motivation for a war against Iran comes from Israel, as it sees the present government of Iran as an "existential threat", and wants to use the military might of the USA and Britain to replace the present Iranian government with a government that would be less "dangerous" for Israel.
The current government of the USA and the presidential candidates either have strong personal loyalty to Israel or heavily depend on financial support of pro-Israel lobbies and pressure groups and for that reason are calling for, preparing for, or waging "covertly" a war against Iran. Also a war is seen by them as a "patriotic stance" which they hope will generate for them the popular support they need to retain, or to put themselves into, the government office.
While in Britain one can observe the same motivations as in the USA, there is also an additional specifically "British" motivation. One can hear from the members of the British establishment statements like: "It is good for us to wage wars, when we attack some scruffy country, people are afraid of us and respect us more", or "Our military might lets us pull weight beyond our size", or "we are interventionist". It is this "nostalgic imperial hubris" that pushes members of the British establishment to "intervene" and to "throw around their weight" at any opportunity.
In case of the USA and Britain, in addition to these current "personal" motivations there is also an institutional factor - the "historical inertia" of the "Cold War" and "the Arms Race" of the past. The military, diplomatic and intelligence institutions of these countries have been moulded by these political phenomena of the past and they need an enemy to function in the ways which are natural for them. A war, cold or hot, gives them a sense of purpose thus prolonging their life-span. In conditions of permanent peace they risk withering away.
So, given the aims (1) of securing Israel and (2) of satisfying the psychological and material needs of the governing establishments of the USA and Britain, will a war against Iran achieve the desired by them results?
The consequences of a war against Iran will be as follows:
Much of the above is already happening, and some of it would have happened anyway - wars or no wars. But some of it is the direct result of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and all of it has been speeded up by these wars, and a war against Iran will still further strengthen the present tendencies and lead them to their logical conclusion.
Then, why the Western Leaders cannot see the obvious? Why are they so stubbornly heading to their own demise?
Because the real danger to the West is not North Korean or the (non-existent) Iranian Atomic bombs, and not even Al-Qaida or any other movement. The real danger to the Western Political Establishment is that political establishment itself.
They want to dominate the rest of the World, and to impose on it its own values, and they hope to achieve this by force of arms. But what are their values? Lawlessness, arrogance, dishonesty, depravity and corruption of every kind. They seek to deceive the rest of the world by their propaganda by talking about "Freedom", "Democracy" and "Human Rights", but it is only themselves who believe this propaganda, the rest of the world see the reality: lawless wars, genocidal brutality, and such "household" words as "Guantanamo" and "Abu Graib", or the recently revealed atrocities against corpses of murdered Afghans, which make many Americans, Britons and Israelis being ashamed of being citizens of their own countries.
But to accept the Reality as it is (rather than as painted by their own propaganda) for "the West" is "humiliating" and "unpleasant". And they, "the West", are proud and pleasure-seeking people. So, they will continue to live in the pleasant world of their dreams. And this is why they might attack Iran.
But, is there any other ways to save Israel than bombing Iran?
Israel is in danger because they have created a state in Palestine by displacing some of its previous residents in 1948, and then occupied militarily more of other people's land in 1967 and do not want to give it back.
A regime change in Iran will not make Israel safe, and not even "wiping Iran off the face of the Earth".
The only permanent ways of resolving a conflict arising out of illegal seizure of other people's property is (1) returning it to the lawful owner, or (2) buying it from the lawful owner at a price the lawful owner would accept.
The cost of a war against Iran is likely to be higher than buying all of Palestine between the Sea and the Jordan River. And, as the Iran War is likely to bankrupt "the West", today's opportunity to "resolve the conflict" by buying the land will be lost - as the bankrupt West will have no money left. And the Global Tide of Anti-Westernism which will sweep the world in the aftermath of the Iran War could spell the end of the State of Israel as it is known today. It happened in Rhodesia, it happened in South Africa and in many other countries of Africa and Asia, which were once "solid Western possessions".
And who in the West believed Ayatullah Ruhullah Khumeini when he predicted demise of the Soviet Union?