A reader writes:
We didn't invade the Soviet Union because it was physically impossible to do so, not because we were so self-confident. If you want evidence of how little self-confidence we had, take a look at how many brutal dictators we backed in the Western hemisphere on the theory that any little incursion of Communism would spread like a virus. Look at our policy in Vietnam, entirely premised on the notion that Communism was some kind of unstoppable force that we could not allow to take hold. Better yet, look at how our fear of the Soviets turned inward on ourselves. We reworded the pledge of allegiance of the US to include "under God" in a reaction to the godless Communists. McCarthy launched massive witch hunts on the premise that somehow Soviets were infiltrating our country and turning our own against us. None of that exactly wreaks of self-confidence.
And yet successive presidents and Congresses nonetheless avoided outright conflict and slowly allowed the Soviet Union to implode, while doing all they could to make its survival as costly as possible. That doesn't mean inaction. But it does mean steadiness and a certain level of restraint.
I'm not saying that Iran is an identical case. Its oil gives it a lifeline. But its elite is as stupid as the Soviets in running an economy; and it has fatally lost its own people. Containment is a strategy worth exploring, given the horrible nature of the alternatives.
The Dish 