Every wise ruling must avoid what harms it and resolves the positions from the safety concept from any international law suites. We are not the ones that started enmities with Iran, where we welcomed the leaders of that country and its religion scholars, and we maintained the diplomatic relations running even with the campaigns that don't leave a chance without using it, but to reach to the big border by conspiring on the nation's security or using terrorism as a new tool is something outside its frame which leads to very dangerous processes. We always said when the war were started by the west and Israel by preparing for the precautionary strike and demolishing the Iranian nuclear reactors that we are against the wars regardless of its causes, but we are against being neighbors of a nuclear country that chose tensing the relations and military threatens. The case of killing the Saudi ambassador in Washington that involved a big country in it with what it considered to be a violation of its security and laws, and the problem may be proposed on the Security Council and recruit its allies by dealing with the conspiracy by adding a tight control and isolation on Iran, and for the first time the American statements come to consider other options, meaning a reaction that reaches using power. The great countries, in most cases, are not concerned with the results of the dangers if their policies are drawn according to its strategic gains and national interests without any other considerations. The evidence is that America won the Second World War by controlling the economy, science and military power to the extinct of invading space to be the carrier that pulls the world, taking out its Soviet rival, but it fell in Iraq's and Afghanistan's mud, and the process of it being seen by Iran helpless to describing it to be the sick man is an illogical view. In fact a lot of war provoking came by the great powers to gain economic, political and spiritual interests in addition to moving its various industrial machines, and we don't forget that who runs the management in these countries knows that the Arabian Gulf wars and the entrance of the NATO into Libya and before it the war of the two Koreas had huge returns for America and Europe. The more dangerous from all of this is that it doesn't need in some of its wars a national legal covering if the congress approved any plan that it wants. We hope from our side that the events don't reach to moving from diplomacy and continuous control on Iran to using power, but no one has a say in what America and its allies will do. Of course that Iran's threatening, conspiracy and announcing that it will send its flock to the American shores and stand with all of its weight against the Syrian citizens' will, and manipulates Lebanon as well as wanting to create chaos in the gulf, all of those problems are not measured to be revealing a complex Iranian situation, but the opponent countries that have higher interests in the world take those statements as a condemnation justifications and pressuring tools. If Iran didn't realize that the fire starts off a spark then it is the one that wants to burn itself and bring fire to others, and it is logical to anticipate surprises and not seeking manipulating the terminologies that may widen the clash circle to what may harm and damage its establishments.
