And that has greatly profited US.US has earned Billions of Dollars by providing weapons to Arab countries thanks to Arab-Iran conflicts emerged thereafter.
Not really. PGCC regimes' weapons imports from the USA had been steadily rising prior to the 1979 Islamic Revolution already. So the latter was not necessary to occur for Washington's PGCC clients to keep ordering American-made armaments.
Secondly, if they managed to destroy Iran and exploit her natural resources (among the richest in the world), the regime in Washington and American companies would furthermore stand to earn countless billions.
Thirdly, financial gain is not the only factor in the way a country shapes its foreign policy. Iran's resistance against USA hegemony has represented a serious challenge to the latter. For the sake of its hegemony alone, the presence of the Islamic Republic irks the regime in Washington.
Fourthly, Washington has tried about every tool in the "regime change" repertoire to topple the Islamic Republic, to no avail. Which proves that the USA wants the Islamic Republic gone.
Fifthly, there's a logical flaw in the quoted argument. Namely the following: if the theory were true, then PGCC leaders would either have to be complete idiots not to realize Washington is milking them, which means they'd have gained in operating a rapprochement with Iran in order to eliminate any rationale behind an arms race; or they cannot do otherwise because they are subordinated to American political overlordship. In the latter case however, relying on an Iranian bogeyman wouldn't be required - a simple request from Washington would suffice to make its clients comply and place those orders.
Finally, countries do not purchase weapons simply for defensive reasons. They can have proactive ambitions of their own, and PGCC regimes are far from exempt from this rule.
