Well that’s good. Do you think he made a mistake by not allowing the limited military response?
And yet, there are strong indications that Iran is launching attacks at people who aren’t carrying out US policy. That does not speak well for “I’m not going to be bullied.” That’s more like, “I’m going to punch random people because I don’t like what some other guy is doing.”
It’s reckless, immoral, irresponsible, and dangerous. Guess bombing stuff is okay if you’re not named Trump.
No, not random people - again, you’re way wrong here. The US has compelled many, many countries to comply with sanctions even though they don’t necessarily want to, with the threat of punishing businesses that end up doing business with Iran.
I’m not saying it’s right, but Iran is telling the world that if you side with the United States in applying pressure against our regime and our people, we have options at our disposal. You may not like those options.
You really have no idea what you’re talking about because, let’s face it, you’re a brainwashed American who is probably in the position of helping the government carry out its threats. But the good news is, you have Asahi here to enlighten you and maybe spread the gospel.
How many issues are you going to conflate here? Maybe you could throw in China’s naval moves in the Pacific too.
FFS, how do you see it is as appropriate to bring up Iran’s problems with their neighbors when talking about whether or not American actions towards Iran constitute bullying? Is there even a name for that kind of argument technique? You seem aware that bullying usually involves a larger entity forcing a smaller entity, yet you wrote what you wrote, as if one cannot both bully and be bullied. Did you think that 8 year old playground bully told his father what to do at home? :dubious:
This is not at all an accurate accounting of the last 70 years of relations between the US and Iran. It’s not even accurate for the last 40 years, IMO.
Iran, in their opinion, has only ever been poking back at someone who pokes them.
IMO that is an understandable reaction. Not a provocation. Not an escalation.
Do you think Iran is mad at the US for no reason? If not, what reason(s) might they have to be mad at the US, in your opinion? How valid are any of those, to you?
If you were in their shoes, what would you do?
This is true; I keep saying Iran has no reason to capitulate to the US now. None at all. And lots of reasons not to.
Eh, for what very little it’s worth I essentially agree with Ravenman on this sentiment.
Doesn’t really matter if the grizzly bear is shitting on your windshield. Poking it with a stick to make it go away is still a really, really bad decision. Iran shouldn’t be shooting anything down unless it is flying directly over its land space, that that can be absolutely confirmed and only if you’re pretty damn sure you can recover the pieces. I might wait until it is over Tehran. Shooting at shit at the borders of territorial waters, whether it is inside or out, is idiotic.
This is not the place for performance art and insults. Dial it back.
[/moderating]
So what, in your opinion, would be a really, really good decision? Do nothing? Eventually there’s gonna be so much shit you’re drowning in it. What do you do?
How many Americans have been killed in the last couple of decades by the Taliban in Afghanistan and al-Qaeda and Islamic State in Iraq?
Saudi Arabia is one of the U.S.'s close allies and, under Trump, this relationship is closer than ever. So close, in fact, that the Trump-led U.S. will literally allow the Saudis to get away with murder (RIP Jamal Khashoggi).
Following 9/11, the Iranian and U.S. military forces cooperated with each other to overthrow the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Iran’s Quds Force helped US forces and Afghan rebels in the 2001 uprising in Herat. Then, in 2002, another Republican American president, in his wisdom, decided to announce to the world that Iran was part of an “Axis of Evil”.
Iran also played a crucial part in defeating ISIS. This from The American Conservative in 2018:
Iran is alleged to have offered support to Shi’ite militias in Iraq during the Iraq War, but without themselves directly participating in attacks on U.S. military. Let us remember that the Iraq War was an illegal war, based on incorrect information, for reasons that actually largely revolved around gaining control of oil production in order for certain American Republican politicians and their friends to get rich. If one tries to remove one’s bias, then one should understand why it’s reasonable to see why Iran would assist their fellow Shi’ites in a neighboring country in an insurgency against an invading force from the other side of the world, who had declared them as “evil”. It was certainly not in the Iranian strategic interest to have a U.S. puppet state next door to them. In any case, most of the American fighting in Iraq was against Sunnis, not Shi’as, and there was also civil war between Sunnis and Shi’as.
Yep.
Here’s the thing - catch a spy plane/drone unequivocally DEEP in your air space and you can shoot it down and come out of it fine. The international community will back you and the intruder might huff and puff a bit, but there is very little they can say to justify a retaliation. They’re in the wrong by anyone’s definition. Doesn’t mean they won’t, but the political cost is much higher.
Shoot down a spy on the edge of your territory and the intruder has plausible deniability and the political cover for armed retaliation. Especially if the intruder is a super-belligerent 800 lb gorilla called the United States. In this circumstance it is provocative, dangerous and dumb. Mostly the latter two, because the balance of power is so hugely asymmetrical. There is literally 0% chance Iran can come out ahead in an armed confrontation and its civilian populace is a lot more likely to suffer.
So what do you do when the U.S. is bullying you( and I disagree with Ravenman here, “bully” is perfectly appropriate ). Keep your goddamn head down and avoid being drawn into a fight you cannot win. Quietly work to circumvent sanctions as best you can by being the “good guy” in the scenario and get other countries to ignore them. Play the long game. Yeah, it’s a shitty choice and you’re going to suffer. But not as much as you will if a couple hundred Tomahawk missiles hit key installations.
That is not likely happen though, because Iran isn’t much of a good guy. They’re in fact a pretty shitty theocracy, with a big diplomatic chip on their shoulder. So we get this unfortunate situation instead.
Wasn’t Iran playing the long game with the JCPOA? How long is long enough for the long game? Remember: you can’t do it forever because you’re gonna drown in shit. With those sanctions the US imposed in the spring, the shit got piled up to the middle of the windows at least. And the shitting grizzly bear is threatening anyone who might come to your aid. What do you do? Doing nothing will lead to death. What do you do?
Again in this context, nothing. There is literally nothing to be done about drones skirting your air space and playing “I’m not touching you.” There is no scenario here where Iran comes out ahead. The only choices are less bad ones. Shooting down a drone over the Persian Gulf is a bad decision. The less bad one is to not do that.
Do you honestly think this action leads to any path where sanctions on Iran are relaxed? So far it has just made them worse. And if you do believe Iran making a token show of force( whether you want to label it defensive or aggressive )is going to improve the situation, all I can say is I strongly disagree and leave it at that.
Oh how long of a long game, if I were Iran? I might suggest at the very, very least until a dangerously reactive president is out of power.
So you would die? That was a part of my question: doing nothing leads to death. Without that bit in there, you aren’t answering my question, you’re answering a different question that isn’t really germane IMO because it’s far too hypothetical.
They don’t have that long. How long should they wait?
How ? I mean, how do you “unequivocally” prove that to the international community ? The US will always claim the drone was eleventy miles off the coast, the wreckage is made up, the radar feed video is a fake and so on. And maybe it’ll even be true, because Iran has done stuff like that in the past. It’s always going to be a case of he says, he says but with a beard.
And if the US wants to use such an event as a casus belli, even in the full knowledge that the drone was actually unequivocally DEEP in Iranian airspace, but feigning innocence to put a hundred Tomahawks in the air ; then it’s going to do that. Because the US has done stuff like that in the past (by the way, props to **manson1972 **for that WMD line, that got a bona fide chuckle out of me). And just like the invasion of Iraq, the international community might tut-tut and object and know full well the US is full of shit and instigating… but that didn’t really help Iraq, did it ? Nor did it get the US sanctioned or made a pariah on the international stage or anything of the sort ; despite aaaaall of the terrible crap that’s happened and keeps happening in the wake of Dubya’s war.
Bullshit. Period.
Less heatedly, again what better outcome do you expect here? Do you think a war + sanctions is better than just sanctions?
It certainly did not. Than again, Iraq was a deeply shitty regime nobody gave a damn about. Iran is only marginally less shitty, which is a real problem for Iran.
But they just don’t have many options, do they? If you’re going to a be a shitty regime, don’t go starting fights with the much bigger bullies.