# International responses to "problematic" countries (like Iran) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 8, 2026, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122 "2026-04-08T17:39:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Frodo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/frodo/32/302_2.png) [@Frodo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frodo)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2026, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/41 "2026-04-09T20:39:47Z")
I was wrong then, thanks for the correction. I would amend then my position to “Sanctions rarely work”. In Apartheid S. Africa’s case it looks like the prospect of losing their economic wellbeing through sanctions affected the minds of the white minority in power enough to change the regime. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2026, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/42 "2026-04-09T21:50:58Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > We _never_ intended to help people. Which is _exactly_ what I said. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/43 "2026-04-10T13:03:51Z")
[quote=“Sitnam, post:2, topic:1029122, full:true”] I asked you for solutions to the Iranian government killing it’s own people… Lots of people in trouble my main man. We don’t start no fucking wars for them. > [@Sitnam](#): > > I think you underestimate the damage the US has already done to the structured military Iran _was_ using to kill unarmed protestors. These are weapons they won’t get back. A couple of Shahed drones won’t change that. > > So Iran closed the strait because that was all they could do, enraging their sanction skirting customers in the process. Good. Trump’s aggression gave the regime some legitimacy and a few new cards to play, but they all suck. See this is part of the problem. People like you (and presumably Trump by his actions) don’t seem to understand the basic environment. Nothing the United States has done has lessened Iran’s ability to crack down on unarmed protestors. It’s more like “a couple of thousand”, maybe tens of thousands of cheap, easily manufactured Shahed drones. “All they could do” was close the Strait of Hormuz, blocking 20% of global oil supplies. The only people who seem “enraged” are our NATO allies who have been enduring Trump’s derisiveness for years and who now he is demanding help from. I think you estimate the damage a cheap Shahed drone can do to a billion-dollar cargo ship. They ARE getting those weapons back as they can produce a hundred drones in a day and a hundred crappy ballistic missiles in a month. In contrast, each Patriot missile costs $4 to $7 million and a 20mm Phalanx CWIS cannon fires $3500 per second. Does invading a country of 90 million, mostly urbanized people seem like a good idea, given our past success rate? Midterm elections are coming up in 2026, so the only “regime change” we will likely see is ours. I get that there is a certain simplistic appeal in believing that through American military and economic might, we can simply dictate terms to other countries or overturn regimes at will with no unintended consequences. But I kind of feel like the adults who actually know what they are doing understand that this is a complex process of negotiations and political theater. So I suppose the answer to “what do we do” is go back to that complex, tedious political process. Which is a bit hard to do now that Trump has blundered around the Middle East like a bull in a China shop. ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/44 "2026-04-10T13:12:30Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > Lots of people in trouble my main man. We don’t start no fucking wars for them. We probably _should_. The fact that the Western world is sitting around with its collective thumb up its collective ass while things like the ongoing Sudan genocide are happening is pretty sickening. ---
**Author:** ![Frodo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/frodo/32/302_2.png) [@Frodo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frodo)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/45 "2026-04-10T13:25:46Z")
A problem is that starting wars to solve that kind of problem is easier that actually having the resolve to keep at it until it’s resolved, so most probably “the west” will bomb some people, destroy some buildings, and then go away leaving the target country still in the grip of the genocidal forces only more impoverished. Another problem is just who gets to decide where to intervene, there are no “good guys” who can be trusted to do so unilaterally, and the only thing that could optimistically be expected to take that responsibility is the U.N. … an entity sidelined and disrespected by “the west” (or at least the U.S.) So again, we are not choosing between: 1. stopping the genocide and 2. doing nothing We are choosing between: 1. killing people and spending millions only for the genocide to continue and the victims in a worse position than before. and 2. Using diplomatic pressure and “soft power” to ameliorate the situation as far as possible. Lacking a Kryptonian in blue that could magically resolve the situation, option 2, shamefully insatisfactory as it is, remains the best available. ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/46 "2026-04-10T13:41:37Z")
> [@Frodo](#): > > A problem is that starting wars to solve that kind of problem is easier that actually having the resolve to keep at it until it’s resolved, so most probably “the west” will bomb some people, destroy some buildings, and then go away leaving the target country still in the grip of the genocidal forces only more impoverished. Sure, that is a problem, but the solution isn’t “don’t do anything about actual genocides”. > [@Frodo](#): > > Another problem is just who gets to decide where to intervene, there are no “good guys” who can be trusted to do so unilaterally, and the only thing that could optimistically be expected to take that responsibility is the U.N. … an entity sidelined and disrespected by “the west” (or at least the U.S.) The problem with the UN is that every country gets one vote and every country gets to be a member, even the ones currently doing whatever it is that the UN is considering putting a stop to. It doesn’t exist to protect people, it exists to avoid international conflict. And it does a good job of that, but _avoiding conflict is not the greatest of all possible goods_. Right now the UN can’t point to a country like Iran that’s a bad actor and say “stop that or else” because the UN is primarily composed of dictatorships nearly as shitty as Iran who are shifting in their seats thinking “are we next?” And who therefore vote “no”. Not least of which is of course Russia, the king of all bad actors and permeant security council member. If the UN was composed of liberal countries with respect for human rights, it could conceivably be expected to take a United stand against countries that don’t support human rights. But as long as the UN is composed of all nations, it will never take real steps to protect human rights; that goes against the interest of most member states. > [@Frodo](#): > > We are choosing between: > > 1. killing people and spending millions only for the genocide to continue and the victims in a worse position than before. > and > 2. Using diplomatic pressure and “soft power” to ameliorate the situation as far as possible. Except that we aren’t choosing between those two things. You think that it is fair to say that we are _Using diplomatic pressure and “soft power” to ameliorate the situation as far as possible_ in Sudan? We are doing _nothing_. > [@Frodo](#): > > Lacking a Kryptonian in blue that could magically resolve the situation, option 2, shamefully insatisfactory as it is, remains the best available. We supposedly have UN Peacekeepers. The problem is that they do shit like this: > **[UN peacekeepers refused to help as aid workers were raped in South Sudan –...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/06/un-peacekeepers-refused-to-help-south-sudan-rebels-raped-aid-workers-report)** > > Chinese troops abandoned their posts rather than engage in fighting and protect civilians, says US-based rights group As long as UN Peacekeepers stand around and “document” or whatever the fuck they’re doing while civilians are being raped or militants shoot of rockets in their field of view, they will accomplish nothing. UN Peacekeepers are fully _capable_ of taking actions to protect people in situations like that; they _choose_ not to act, and where they lack equipment, it’s because of the _choices_ made by the UN. And that’s because the UN is a body built _entirely_ for conflict _avoidance_. This makes it not just useless but counterproductive. ---
**Author:** ![Frodo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/frodo/32/302_2.png) [@Frodo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frodo)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/47 "2026-04-10T13:48:33Z")
> [@Babale](#): > > Except that we aren’t choosing between those two things. You think that it is fair to say that we are _Using diplomatic pressure and “soft power” to ameliorate the situation as far as possible_ in Sudan? We are doing _nothing_. Doing nothing is better than making the situation worse, and armed intervention with the current framework is almost guaranteed to make the situation worse. > [@Babale](#): > > As long as UN Peacekeepers stand around and “document” or whatever the fuck they’re doing while civilians are being raped or militants shoot of rockets in their field of view, they will accomplish nothing. UN Peacekeepers are fully _capable_ of taking actions to protect people in situations like that; they _choose_ not to act, and where they lack equipment, it’s because of the _choices_ made by the UN. And that’s because the UN is a body built _entirely_ for conflict _avoidance_. This makes it not just useless but counterproductive. So you agree with me that there is nobody that can be trusted to: 1. Decide impartially when and where armed interventions is warranted 2. Actually go through with the necessary force and not leave until the situation is resolved. 3. Not to abuse the power. Given that situation “soft power” or even “do nothing” are the better alternative. I agree that is shameful, BUT, the answer is not to promote half-assed armed interventions, the answer is to reform international institutions so they can be trusted to manage this kind of thing. Until and unless we have something like that (which is INCREDIBLY difficult) I will continue to oppose armed intervention. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/48 "2026-04-10T13:59:52Z")
> [@Babale](#): > > We probably _should_. The fact that the Western world is sitting around with its collective thumb up its collective ass while things like the ongoing Sudan genocide are happening is pretty sickening. And how do we do that? Sudan has a population of 58 million people. How many billion dollar F-35s should we send to try to stop people from hacking each other apart with machetes? Do we conquer entire countries and then try to restructure them in America’s image? ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/49 "2026-04-10T14:03:42Z")
> [@Frodo](#): > > So you agree with me that there is nobody that can be trusted to: > > 1. Decide impartially when and where armed interventions is warranted No, I don’t agree. If the US, or France, or a coalition of neighboring African nations, or some combination of the above decided to intervene, I’d likely support that. > [@Frodo](#): > > Actually go through with the necessary force and not leave until the situation is resolved. That’s a political problem within the states capable of intervention right now, not an inherent problem with intervention as a concept. For example, in 2013 France intervened in Mali, which was a great move by them. > [@Frodo](#): > > Not to abuse the power. If the US or France or the surrounding African states intervened militarily and put a stop to the conflict (that has so far killed an order of magnitude more people than other conflicts that get many orders of magnitude more airtime) but that led to some level of corruption or abuse of power, I think that would be a clear net win. > [@Frodo](#): > > I agree that is shameful, BUT, the answer is not to promote half-assed armed interventions, the answer is to reform international institutions so they can be trusted to manage this kind of thing. Right, the answer isn’t a half assed armed intervention, it’s a well thought out and planned intervention. And I agree, we need to reform international institutions, but how can you possibly reform the UN to better oppose bad actors when a country like Iran or North Korea is a full member in good standing and a country like Russia is a security council member? ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/50 "2026-04-10T14:05:25Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > And how do we do that? Sudan has a population of 58 million people. How many billion dollar F-35s should we send to try to stop people from hacking each other apart with machetes? > [@msmith537](#): > > Do we conquer entire countries and then try to restructure them in America’s image? You support the legitimate Sudanese government against the Rapid Support Forces, not conquer the country. ---
**Author:** ![Frodo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/frodo/32/302_2.png) [@Frodo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frodo)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/51 "2026-04-10T14:11:37Z")
And what happens when Trump is in power in the U.S. and some similar loathsome far right pustule is in power in France (by no means impossible) Do you still let them decide which interventions are good?. IF the legitimate government of the country in question, say Sudan, asks for help I’m not _a priori_ against it. But if we let some self-selected group of “good guy” countries intervene whenever they feel like it the end result is chaos. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/52 "2026-04-10T14:12:06Z")
Trump and Hegseth are incapable of making any situation better, in the Sudan or Iran or anywhere else. No one should be trusting these massively stupid, massively immoral people to accomplish anything at all positive. ---
**Author:** ![Frodo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/frodo/32/302_2.png) [@Frodo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frodo)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/53 "2026-04-10T14:21:20Z")
I think our main point of contention @Babale is that you trust certain countries to have humanitarian motives for armed intervention and I don’t. I think history mostly validates my thinking, there are no _good guys_ in international relationships, but I would think that of course. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/54 "2026-04-10T14:26:09Z")
To point out the elephant in the room, if we’re supposed to stop “problematic” countries, then how are we to stop the US and Israel? Because the main thing that makes Iran special is that _they_ don’t like it, not that it’s especially “problematic”. And of course there’s the equally problematic China, and North Korea, and so on. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/55 "2026-04-10T14:27:01Z")
Even if there could be good guys, it’s more than clear that, under this administration, America is the bad guy. Bad guys intervention is not going to make things better. ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/56 "2026-04-10T14:28:30Z")
> [@Frodo](#): > > But if we let some self-selected group of “good guy” countries intervene whenever they feel like it the end result is chaos. We _already do that_. Russia, viewing themselves as champions of traditionalism and Christianity, are vigorously acting upon the world stage, and have been for over a decade; we dragged our feet in opposing them, allowing them multiple unopposed victories including Crimea, and only now in the larger Ukraine war are we doing the barest of bare minimum to help Ukraine. Meanwhile, the self described “Axis of Resistance” is Iran’s way of acting on the world stage, less openly than Russia but no less vigorously. Self-selected and self-described “good guys” are _already_ acting and intervening whenever they feel like it, and the result is indeed chaos. Liberal nations, meanwhile, are endlessly wringing their hands over whether it is right to intervene or not. And the result is a significant decrease in Liberalism’s influence on the world stage. ---
**Author:** ![Frodo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/frodo/32/302_2.png) [@Frodo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frodo)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/57 "2026-04-10T14:28:58Z")
As I said above: “Who decides which cases warrant intervention”? ---
**Author:** ![Frodo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/frodo/32/302_2.png) [@Frodo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frodo)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2026, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/58 "2026-04-10T14:34:47Z")
And which nations are “liberal” right now? is the U.S. in that group? We had something called “The rules based international order”, rules that were more honored in the breach unfortunately, but it was better than the alternative. The U.S. broke it, IMHO, in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq under false pretenses without an U.N mandate, what we are seeing now is the fallout from that AND the continuing violations of international law under Obama and specially under Trump. A fragile and unjust system, but a system nonetheless, existed it has been broken and now is every man by himself. Rebuilding a functional system will take a lot of effort and rivers of blood will be spilled until it’s done if it ever is. ---
**Author:** ![Mk\_VII](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Mk\_VII](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mk_VII)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2026, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/59 "2026-04-11T15:39:56Z")
The UN intervention in Korea was the first time the New World Organisation had attempted to deal with a civil war between two parts of a _defacto_ partitioned country. They never did it in that way again, and could only do it because the UN was still largely a creature of the United States, and because the Soviet delegate on the Security Council had been instructed to boycott the Council. The intervention in the Belgian Congo in the 1960s went less well. The end of the Portuguese colonial empire in Africa made things much worse for South Africa, their client Rhodesia was surrounded on three sides by hostile States and became economically unfixable and fell. Now they had a hostile set of African nationalist states to the north and trouble in Namibia to the side. ---
**Author:** ![penultima\_thule](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/penultima_thule/32/3833_2.png) [@penultima\_thule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/penultima_thule)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2026, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122/60 "2026-04-12T01:15:12Z")
> [@Frodo](#): > > but it was better than the alternative. Which is, alas in terms of international relationships the probable best we can expect. My approach, doubtlessly and vociferously contested by shorter fused, nationalistic, and excessive red meat eating persons might be captured by this quote. > [@William Shakespeare's Julius Caesar Act 1 Scene 2](#): > > _Let me have men about me that are fat,_ > _Sleek-headed men and such as sleep a-nights._ Democracies that trade with each other have a long record (through vested interest) of not launching ordnance at each other. It wasn’t very long ago that the UK fought two wars with Germany, or Australia fought Japan. That sanguinary rivalry now extends barely past sporting events. Indeed, is difficult to conceive a return to the hostilities and distrust of yore. I’ll concede any points of order on the prevailing fall from international grace of 'merkinland. Now sure, initial overtures might be frosty but progressively the decadent Western lifestyle wins over the people who had supported the hardliners and their austerity. Security, a soft bed, a full belly, and a pocket of readies having a lot going for it. Fundamentalist religions do cruel that utopian perspective, of course. Such ideologies as where the next life is preferable to the current one. But you can’t reasonably expect me to solve all the worlds problems in a single post? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-responses-to-problematic-countries-like-iran/1029122.md?page=4)