Well…actually, I think between the US and Iran I’d have to go with the US. You’d have to be either pretty ignorant or seriously biased to think that Iran would be the more trustworthy of the two. I don’t think this is a matter of good guys and bad guys so much as super power (with all of the baggage and shit that comes with that) and evil, nasty fundamentalist dictatorship. This is sort of like the CCP to the US comparison…I mean, you have to keep it real and make it challenging. It’s like comparing the US verse Canada or Australia or most Western European nations wrt lying or pulling bad shit…there really isn’t much of a comparison there. This is more like comparing the British Empire with Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union…yeah, the British Empire did some bad shit, but not in the same league, especially trustworthiness wise, to the other two.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out wrt the Iranian’s seizing a UK freighter. It’s really not comparable to the UK seizure in Gibraltar, but it will be fun to see some 'dopers try and spin it that way. What won’t be fun is how close to the edge we now are in all of this…that isn’t fun at all. This could all easily spin out of control (in fact, I think we might be there already and we just haven’t figured out that we are over the cliff and headed towards that sudden impact at the bottom yet).
So your complaint is that I didn’t totally nail the exact flavor of your rejection of reality, and I should have been more precise?
Objection noted.
ETA: and let’s keep in mind that the Iranians are proclaiming that they did it; you’re turning this into an issue of whether to deny Iran’s claim of responsibility because the U.S. is the suxxor.
I think that there are many people that see the world in a binary fashion: that there are “good guys”, that includes their “side” obviously, that always do good things, and “bad guys”, such as Iran, that always do bad things (“evil-doers”). This is usually regardless of what the underlying facts of the matter are.
Many, though, think that geopolitical issues tend to be more complicated than this, and that it’s not always as simple as “good guys” vs “bad guys”. This current situation is one of those times. While many would consider Iran to be a bad actor, in this recent chain of events - triggered by Trump’s pull-out from the deal and sanctions - I think most of the world believes the U.S. to be in the wrong.
This is what America’s traditional close European allies think (from the article I quoted in the other thread):
So this is is a bit like the Golden Raspberry Awards for bad actors, and the U.S. and Iran are both competing for the “Worst Actor” award, but this year the U.S. wins in a near-unanimous vote by the watching jury.
Wtf? No, you made the amusing joke that people here would deny Iranian responsibility for something they claim credit for, because we are all so America hating.
You’re the one who posted the miniscreed about the Iraq war (which I opposed strongly, go search my posts) and US credibility in response to Iranians announcing they seized a tanker.
As though it was relevant to… something. Now you’re claiming it’s a non sequtir. Which is a great series of arguments to win the thread, I guess.
I don’t remember an Iraq war miniscreed. I posted that the lies and the invasion itself is a reason not to trust American officials on Middle East issues, is that what you mean?
Look, you’re the one who comes barging in and reviving an old thread with news about Iran commandeering a ship, which to my knowledge nobody has denied. You then posted drivel in which you satirically seem to suggest that we’ve already deemed it fake news when in fact nobody has said a fucking thing.
The way I read CK’s post wasn’t so much denying that Iran has hijacked vessels, but rather a response within the greater context of the thread discussion. I didn’t see anything controversial about his reminding you that we shouldn’t just trust whatever “facts” we’re getting from US sources, and it’s not to say we should necessarily trust “facts” from Iranian sources either.
I think he thought the seizing of the oil tanker was a Scooby Doo “gotcha” moment, that proved that the Iranians were the “bad guys” all along - and the U.S. were therefore the “good guys” - and was perhaps made with ignorance of the fact that the British had seized an Iranian oil tanker a few weeks ago.
But that’s the typical hawk mentality. Either you’re with us, or against us. I don’t trust American officials so therefore I am entranced by the Iranian narrative. And a conspiracy theorist. And other bad stupid stuff too.
Yeah… no, sorry but from what I’m standing both seem equally untrustworthy, and to my knowledge Iran has not invaded any coutry under false pretenses in the last 2 centuries.
Okay… So we have you on record as being more willing to accept the word of a religious dictatorship that murders gay people, oppresses women, sponsors terrorism, is virulently anti-semitic, and persecutes people for thought crime, over the U.S., because the US is just worse.
The US isn’t necessarily worse but it has a history of playing loose with the facts in order to justify militarist intervention. It’s not necessary to establish which regime is “worse.”
I’m glad you’ll take everything Trump says at straight face value. Most people blessed with critical thinking skills are less likely to blindly trust someone who had to have an entirely new category of lying created to describe his “inaccurate” statements.
Mostly delusions of aging Iranian expats & western think tanks I am afraid.
You don’t like Trump or the GOP. Or specific policies
Would you want a foreign supported revolution to overthrow the whole Government?
I mean did we not learn anything from the Iraq adventure? Probably 2/3 or 3/4 of the country hated Saddam’s guts, yet when we invaded they pretty much told us: “Thanks for the overthrow, now get the fuck out, please.”
I know, I know – this time we’ll just leave and let the people of Iran rebuild their country with our assistance. Riiiiiiiight, because that’s just how it will work out. :rolleyes: There won’t be ISIS or other radical Shi’ite elements taking control of whatever’s left and potentially setting up piracy operations that threaten the Strait of Hormuz. Just the conflict between the US and Iran itself - any conflict - threatens global trade that goes through that region.
I think anyone who thinks there is even a 1% chance of a full-on US invasion of Iran has no clue what they are talking about.
Stupid, reckless, and costly air war to pummel Iran at probably a high cost? Oh yeah, that could happen. Occupation of Iran? Zero point zero zero zero chance.
I agree the chances are small, but I’m not sure they are THAT small.
What if Iran reacts during the air war in some way that truly triggers the USA’s anger?
What if they close the straits and the only way to keep them open is to ocuppy certain coastal areas of Iran?.
What if there is some uprising in in any area of Iran and they ask the USA for help?.
So, you base Iran trustworthiness on invasion? That’s the criteria you use?? :smack: Ok then. I guess China is a very trustworthy nation as well in your book. And North Korea has been extremely trustworthy since the early 50’s!
What do you base that on? It’s trivially easy to look up mass protests in Iran…in fact, here is a wiki article on just that. All that just made up lies? Just ‘Mostly delusions of aging Iranian expats & western think tanks’?? :dubious:
I don’t like Trump or the GOP, that’s true enough. No, I wouldn’t support a foreign government trying to overthrow the whole government. Not sure how that relates to what I wrote though. I was asking about resentment of the Theocracy in Iran among the population, and who represents that unrest wrt the population. I wasn’t asking anything about how the average Iranian would support a foreign government attacking them. I would assume that the average Iranian wouldn’t support some sort of external overthrow.
Pretty much this. There is a nearly zero chance of an invasion. There is a fair chance, IMHO, of US air strikes and Iranian retaliation, and a fair to good (hell a ‘might have already happened’) chance of Iranian attacks, especially proxy attacks prompting US retaliation. There is also a fair chance of some country trying to frame Iran to prompt a US retaliatory strike on Iran from several different actors or nation states who would benefit from this.
