Definition of Insanity.......

Hello Readers!

It's often been said that the definition of insanity is doing the same things over again and expecting different results. Any dictionary containing this definition it seems should be followed by:
See US Foreign Policy.

Because I can think of no place where that better applies. Take for example US relations with Iran and Iraq.

1) In 1953, Britain created a coup (also backed by the US) where the elected leader Mohammed Mossadegh was replaced by the Shah. The Shah was predictably a tyrrant.
2) When the Shah was overthrown and the Islamic Republic was put in place Ronald Reagan decided to arm Saddam Hussein so he could start a war with Iran. The war lasted eight years.
3) Years later with the US unable to get out of a war with Iraq, many politicians still consider invading Iran a possibility.

One thing that many people aren't aware of, is the historical connections between Iran and parts of Central Asia. However, the same stupidity seems to apply to central Asia.

1. In the late 70's the CIA began aiding the Mujadeen in Afghanistan in an attempt to "encourage" the Soviet Union to invade Afghanistan.
2. The rational given by Zbigniew Brzezinski was to "Give the Soviet Union its Vietnam". Which is to say that he recognized the historical similarities in the two countries. Both have a long history of resisting domination by foreign conquerers and an extremely difficult geography.
3. During this time the CIA funded individuals like Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban.
4. When Bin Laden launches a terrorist attack on the US, the solution becomes invading Afghanistan.

So if those in charge of US policy actually do expect different results then they fit at least one working definition of insanity.

But perhaps they don't want different results at all. Maybe they think the "results" we are currently getting are just fine.

Say Goodnight Readers!