posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 01:50 AM
I think yes.
Someone linked to a film about the process it would take to get to nuclear war, and the main focus was unsuprisingly culminated in an invasion of Iran
and a naval battle in the Strait of Hormuz, which was the touchpaper that started it.
Also, the BBC Docu-drama 'Threads' (Which I honestly think is the most horrific film I've ever seen) also had the cause of WWIII's nuclear
armageddon being Russia and the US fighting over Iran, from using two tactical warheads to a full exchange.
The resource rich middle east has always been where the last big war will be fought, because when everything starts drying up thats the only place we
are going to keep our precious cars and industry going from.
One of the sad truths is, while in the cold war the principle of MAD between two superpowers kept everything in a balance, with the self-destruction
of the USSR the US has pretty much been granted posistion as the only superpower (arguably), and as such has been carrying out reckless actions that
they would never have tried during the cold war.
The fear is, these reckless actions have made the idea of using a small scale nuclear weapon more 'feasible' in military strategy, small tactical
weapons and those new bunker busters make the idea more and more attractive for dealing with a hardended base.