What is the definition of madness?

Do we not ever learn from our past mistakes? And by we I mean the US foreign policy establishment, which by default should be an extension of the White House's foreign policy objectives. And by mistakes I am of course referring to the US policy toward Iran, and more specifically the current regime in Iran known as the Islamic Republic.
This is an important nuance, as the current regime specifically requested and mandated the United Nations to refer in all of its communications and displays as a member state to the form of the regime and not the nation. Therefore as far as the United Nations is concerned it is the Islamic Republic of Iran that is represented and not Iran as it had been from 1945 until post 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Iran, as a nation state has existed for over 2500 years, ever since Cyrus the Great created it as a united kingdom. But as an Islamic Republic, it has only been around since Khomeini's fundamentalist revolution in 1979. The current rulers of Iran are extremely sensitive over this issue and want the world to know and acknowledge that it is far more important to them to be known as representing the revolution of 1979, rather than the Iranian nation. There is something very "totalitarian" and "fascistic" with this approach. It is very much a "Bolshevik" or "Nazi" mind set. The Bolsheviks insisted on being referred to as the Soviet Union, and the Nazis preferred the Third Reich. This mind set is extremely important to understand when formulating a foreign policy to deal or negotiate with a regime such as the Islamic Republic. Which brings me back to the question I posed at the outset.

US foreign policy toward this regime, since 1980, more or less, has been one of behavior modification, and this has been never more true than the Obama Administration's approach. And yet, expecting behavior modification from this regime is just as ridiculous and foolhardy as expecting behavior modification from the Nazis or the Bolsheviks. Committed fundamentalists, whether religious fascists or dogmatic national or international socialists believe in the principle of the end justifying the means, and therefore any behavior modification would simply be a tactical one and not a sincere policy.
At a time when the middle east is torn by internal and external strife and terror, and the whole region has become subject to religious as well as strategic hegemonic struggles and machinations, dealing with the perpetrator in chief of this terror and instability as if it is a rational and sincere government, is at best naive and at worst appeasement of the worst kind.
The Islamic Republic wants war, it has proven over the past 33 years that wars are its life blood for existence and consolidation of power. The Islamic Republic also likes to play the role of victim on the international scene and as the bully on the regional scene. This schizophrenic behavior is also symptomatic among totalitarian and fascistic governments.

Hitler consistently complained about the international community not recognizing the suffocation of the German people in neighboring states, and at the same time sought to control and bully the very same neighbors. This was also true of the Bolsheviks, which continuously railed and ranted about the international struggles of independence and rights of self determination and yet were the very stranglers of any such aspirations within their own borders or spheres of influence. The Islamic Republic in Iran, acts and behaves accordingly. It rails against the injustices perpetrated by the so called "Zionist State" against the Palestinian people on the one hand, while it suffocates, murders and purges its own people and minorities. It complains about the US role in the region, yet it sows the very seeds of discontent and terrorism.

Expecting behavior modification from the Islamic Republic, is like expecting behavior modification from a child molester or rapist. Exactly how many molestations or rapes, or lack thereof, demonstrate an acceptable level of modification?

The US foreign policy toward the Islamic Republic should be no different than what we have demonstrated, begrudgingly at times, for the sake of the people of Libya, Tunisia, Egypt and Syria, the one big difference being that we do not need to fear the rise of the Islamic fascists in Iran, as they are already there, and they are the ones that should be going away, permanently, through free elections and the establishment of a free and secular democracy.

Source: INTER PERSICA