This, as we know from last week, is bad news (see Iran and the “Arabian Gulf”).

Check out the New York Times article: “Muslims Won’t Play Together.”

Money quote from a member of Dubai’s Iranian Business Council (IBC):

“You can get anything you want, and you can ship anything you want to Iran,” says Morteza Masoumzadeh, an IBC director and owner of a shipping company that transports goods between Iran and Dubai. “Every company in Iran is either here or has representatives here.”

Guess it made sense, we were living in Arabia. Of course, the United Nations guidelines are clear:

The term “Persian Gulf” is used as the standard geographical designation for the sea area between the Arabian Peninsula and the Islamic Republic of Iran. The full term “Persian Gulf” is always used to designate that sea area when it is first referred to in a text and is repeated thereafter whenever necessary for the sake of clarity.

But Arab states still call it otherwise, upsetting Persians.

So what’re they going to do about it?

How about: “Iran Threatens Airline Ban Over “Arabian Gulf” Tag.”

That being said, the results of a Nuclear Iran would probably be a lot less spectacular than people making both pro and con arguments realize. Israel will always have its second-strike submarine based arsenal, and attacking Israel wouldn’t further the Iranian agenda in any way. And as North Korea has found out, having a nuclear strike capability isn’t a golden ticket into the First World or make you the baddest kid on the block. Of course, all this doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t keep trying to dissuade them diplomatically and economically from arming themselves.