Ahmadinejad receives his support from the rural poor, a sector of the population which is pretty much socially obsolete, and resigned to simply trying to preserve tradition, even if that means an unending cycle of poverty. In Iran now there is 15% inflation & 11% unemployment. Only the youthful population of Teheran looks to the West, and it is this group that is capable of finding common ground with the rest of the world. Sometimes political theatre should be taken with a grain of salt, especially the language of exaggertion employed in the Near East concerning the vanquishment of Israel. Rafsanjani is as liberal as you'll find in the Iranian political arena, and his constituency is among the educated Teheranis. So, pragmatic considerations lead to the choice of Rafsanjani over Ahmadinejad.

A chess metaphor is suitable for defining an approach to Iran that will not result in an immensely destructive and stupid conflict. Subtlety and finesse are hallmarks of Persian culture. I have known a few Persians (co-workers in physical chemistry), and love of intricate logic is a common character trait. I believe that a skilled, tactful diplomatic corps from the US could be seated at our side of the chess table, and sustain a dialogue, parrying and thrusting their way through the treachery and danger. I think we need a robust relationship with Iran to find any success elsewhere in the Near East.