That is inevitable. We will but the right question is when. Look who is in charge of the country and what we have been through while he has been in office. i am sure it will happen before the end of his term. weird thing is, i am in the service and truely believe this

not if it were up to me, but since it's not up to me, I would say it's possible because the gov prefers to be in an almost constant state of war, and needs enemies to fight

I would say it is unlikely. Public opinion is against it,and very many in the government don't want it and would block the way to war.The mistakes made by going to war with Iraq,will make it difficult to go ahead and make a worse problem elsewhere

I hope not. It would be foolish. The hostage crisis is in the process of being resolved, so I don't see what reason they'd have to invade. Plus I'm sure the public would be against such a move after seeing what a mess Iraq has become. We won't be duped by 'weapons of mass destruction' again, despite knowing that Iran probably does have some. It would be dangerous to attack Iran, as we have no idea what nuclear facilities or weaponry they have available - like sticking a stick in a wasp's nest. I say it's better to wait for them to cancel themselves out, as Russia did in the Cold War. The Allied forces presence in the Middle East would begin to look very much like a domino strategy, taking over each country and replacing them with ruins. As Tactitus said, 'They made a desert and called it a peace.' And this sort of peace is very difficult to maintain. I don't believe there are enough troops available to start another war and continue to act as peacekeepers in Iraq and Afghanistan. To take attention from one spot would be to allow resistence to grow up, and lead to enemies on all sides - because you just know that extremist elements in Iraq will be funded by elements within Iran and surrounding countries.