@sualipa
There are so many points to unpack in your post:
"Yes, Iran’s no angel -they've backed dodgy groups, stirred things up through their proxies, and played a messy game in the region. "
Describing Iran as no angel is a bit like describing Hitler as "a bit of a bad lad".
But let’s not kid ourselves that bombing or toppling their regime is going to magically fix any of that.
As far as I am aware Israel is now seeking to topple the Iranian regime but simply to bomb the crap out of the nuclear bomb research and manufacturing to put back the development of their nuclear bomb.
We’ve tried that before in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan. How did those turn out? Not great.
I completely agree which is why any regime change must come from within.
Sometimes the devil you know really is better than the chaos that follows. The current Iranian regime is grim, but it still has something to lose. Blow the place apart or collapse the government, and you’ve got armed factions running wild, nuclear materials unaccounted for, and no one picking up the phone when you want to dial things down.
Which is why any regime change must come from within. It's curious that many on the liberal left are calling for the removal of Putin but not the Iranian regime. Similarly if Putin was forcibly removed by an external power then that would create a bigger problem.
As for the idea that a nuclear Iran would be untouchabl let’s be realistic. Nuclear weapons aren't a free pass. If anything, having them makes countries more cautious, not less. Mutually assured destruction still applies. No one wants to start World War 3.
I agree but it would enable Iran to continue its proxy wars as well as enabling terrorism in the West without fear of a ground invasion or regime change. Plus if there was an internal regime change then the current regime might just think let's drop a nuke on Israel before we get removed and killed.
And applauding Israel for dragging us into that mess? Really? They’re pursuing their interests, not ours. We shouldn’t be blindly following someone else’s foreign policy especially if it risks putting our own country in the firing line or sending oil prices through the roof.
So I would say stopping Iran getting nuclear weapons is in the UK's interest. Iran a country that has supported terrorist attacks on UK shipping, terrorists in the UK and kidnapped Royal Navy sailors.
So no, this isn’t about defending Iran. It’s about not blowing up the region (again) just because it feels like “something” should be done. Sometimes doing less is smarter than making things far far worse.
OK are you suggesting that we write a strongly worded letter to the Iranians asking them to stop developing nuclear weapons because otherwise they will have to go on the naughty step, because sanctions clearly haven't worked. Or do you have another suggestion?