# (Iranian) attempts to assassainate ambassadors **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 18, 2012, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262 "2012-02-18T18:29:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/21 "2012-02-18T19:26:37Z")
> [@BordelDeMerde](#): > > Israel is the most sanctioned country in the history of the UN, Is that because Israel is bad? Or is it because the UN has a lot of member states which hate Israel? > [@](#): > > If any country in the region is a terrorism sponsor, it is Israel. Ambassador killings “linked” to Iran are small potatoes. How many diplomats has Israel assassinated? If your answer is “zero,” what would you say is the worst incident of Israel-sponsored state terrorism in the last 12 months? ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/22 "2012-02-18T19:29:08Z")
> [@Spoke](#): > > As far as I am concerned, Israel and Iran are like two children fighting on the playground, Yes, assuming that one of the children (Iran) wants to kill the other child. And the other child (Israel) just wants to be left alone. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/23 "2012-02-18T19:32:51Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > If Iran confined itself to legitimate military targets, I would agree with you. I don’t think diplomats are legitimate military targets. But civilian scientists are ? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/24 "2012-02-18T19:33:02Z")
> [@Spoke](#): > > As far as I am concerned, Israel and Iran are like two children fighting on the playground, and the US should have no part in that fight, except to discourage its escalation. How, exactly, do you factor in the foiled assassination of the Saudi ambassador to the US? You also seem to have missed two questions on your position: 1. Would you uncritically accept any and all anonymous, unsourced, unverified reports from the US government? If not, why would you accept [the one you ust posted] and not others? In the future if someone posted a link to nameless US officials voicing unverified claims about Iran, would you cite it as gospel as you have done here with a similar report about Israel? Why or why not? 2. Do you not agree that nations have traditionally avoided attacking ambassadors and attacks on nuclear personnel represent a valid military target while attacks against ambassadors do not? Do you truly not understand why a reasonable response would include attacking Israeli military targets, but attacking civilians, and consular civilians to boot, is not in fact equivalent to attacking military targets? > [@Kobal2](#): > > But civilian scientists are ? :dubious: As the IAEA has certified that Iran’s nuclear program contains undeniable military aspects, the claim that its nuclear scientists are “civilian” targets is gainsaid. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/25 "2012-02-18T19:42:00Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > But civilian scientists are ? :dubious: I would say yes, if they are working for the military. As an example, suppose that it’s World War II and Japanese agents assassinate Richard Feynman. I wouldn’t condemn them any more for that than for attacking the naval base at Pearl Harbor. A civilian scientist working for the Manhattan project is a legitimate military target. ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/26 "2012-02-18T19:44:35Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > How, exactly, do you factor in the foiled assassination of the Saudi ambassador to the US? That sounds like a schoolyard fight between Iran and Saudi Arabia. It was foiled, and should never have been brought onto US soil. I think the US has responded appropriately (i.e., with restraint). ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/27 "2012-02-18T19:45:20Z")
Killing a diplomat seems like a more legitimate war target than a scientist. Or at least just as legitimate. Why are diplomats off-limits? ---
**Author:** ![Spoke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a88e57/32.png) [@Spoke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoke)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/28 "2012-02-18T19:49:02Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > As the IAEA has certified that Iran’s nuclear program contains undeniable military aspects, the claim that its nuclear scientists are “civilian” targets is gainsaid. [According to US intelligence, Iran has not yet decided to embark on a nuclear weapons program](http://www.aljazeera.com/video/americas/2012/02/20122170514625396.html). So yes, the scientists were civilian. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/29 "2012-02-18T19:57:12Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Killing a diplomat seems like a more legitimate war target than a scientist. Or at least just as legitimate. Why are diplomats off-limits? It seems to me that diplomats are not part of the military nor are they directly supporting the military effort. Also, as a practical matter if diplomats were seen as legitimate military targets, wars would spill out all over the world. Let me ask you this: Let’s suppose that tomorrow, for whatever reason, Iran formally declares war against Israel. And let’s suppose that a week later, Mossad agents in New York City blow up Iran’s mission to the UN and kill Iran’s ambassador; Iran’s diplomatic personnel there; and all of its mission staff. And let’s suppose that a week after that, an IDF submarine launches a couple cruise missiles into downtown Bucharest, Romania and blows up the Iranian embassy there along with the Iranian ambassador and all of the embassy staff. Would you shrug these things off as attacks on legitimate military targets? Or would Israel’s conduct trouble you? ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/30 "2012-02-18T20:01:27Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > As the IAEA has certified that Iran’s nuclear program contains undeniable military aspects, the claim that its nuclear scientists are “civilian” targets is gainsaid. Were they wearing uniforms ? Did they say “sir yes sir” a lot ? Did they carry weapons ? No ? Then they’re civilians. It doesn’t matter what they’re working on - the workers at McDonnell Douglas’s Tomahawk factories are civilians too. ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/31 "2012-02-18T20:20:53Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Does this give the global community a bigger arm-twisting advantage? This is one of those issues where the nations or people that are still on the fence are either completely unaware or unconcerned. So I don’t see why there would be any leverage gained by these apparently Iranian-initiated assassinations/terrorist attacks. Even if perfect evidence was obtained that Iran did it, most nations on their side would simply respond by saying “Who cares?” and be done with it. > [@FinnAgain](#): > > “Institute the Additional Protocols or these sanctions might not be the worst things that gets lobbed at y’all…” Does it make actual military strikes against Iran or their nuclear facilities more likely (I’d wager not)? Anyone who is for air strikes will not be more for them. Anyone against them not be less opposed. The more I think about it, Israel and Iran have a lot of freedom to do this kind of stuff to each other without any threat of consequences because each has their major power willing to say “who cares?”. > [@FinnAgain](#): > > Does it, instead, have little to no effect as not many observers are particularly surprised that the Iranian government isn’t playing with a full deck? I am unimpressed with the Iranian ability to keep their important people alive and their enemy’s people dead. It would seem simple to blow somebody up but I guess it’s harder than I thought. I think it proves we have little to fear from them. > [@FinnAgain](#): > > What, if anything, is the international reaction from here on out? “Hey stop that!”. That’s it. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/32 "2012-02-18T20:22:51Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > How, exactly, do you factor in the foiled assassination of the Saudi ambassador to the US?.. You appear to be taking this particular accusation (fabrication) as Gospel, while in the real world its got more holes than Swiss cheese. [**The “very scary” Iranian Terror plot**](http://www.salon.com/2011/10/12/the_very_scary_iranian_terror_plot/) ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/33 "2012-02-18T20:28:19Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > It seems to me that diplomats are not part of the military nor are they directly supporting the military effort. I see what you’re saying. To me, the opposing government is the real enemy, not the military, per se. Although, the line between government and military can get blurry in the ME, I guess. > [@](#): > > Also, as a practical matter if diplomats were seen as legitimate military targets, wars would spill out all over the world. > > Let me ask you this: Let’s suppose that tomorrow, for whatever reason, Iran formally declares war against Israel. > > And let’s suppose that a week later, Mossad agents in New York City blow up Iran’s mission to the UN and kill Iran’s ambassador; Iran’s diplomatic personnel there; and all of its mission staff. > > And let’s suppose that a week after that, an IDF submarine launches a couple cruise missiles into downtown Bucharest, Romania and blows up the Iranian embassy there along with the Iranian ambassador and all of the embassy staff. > > Would you shrug these things off as attacks on legitimate military targets? Or would Israel’s conduct trouble you? I’m against conducting war missions in other people’s countries, if they’re not involved. I think in the case of Iran, aren’t they basically “at war” with anyone friends with the US, Europe, The West, Israel, etc? I can sort of see Iran considering Thailand to be guilty by association or something. No, I don’t morally agree with much of this, on either side. As far as the nuke stuff though, as long as the US, UK, France, Israel etc. still push nuclear energy/weaponry, I can’t blame anyone, or everyone else for pursuing it. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/34 "2012-02-18T20:28:43Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > It seems to me that diplomats are not part of the military nor are they directly supporting the military effort. > > Also, as a practical matter if diplomats were seen as legitimate military targets, wars would spill out all over the world. > > Let me ask you this: Let’s suppose that tomorrow, for whatever reason, Iran formally declares war against Israel. > > And let’s suppose that a week later, Mossad agents in New York City blow up Iran’s mission to the UN and kill Iran’s ambassador; Iran’s diplomatic personnel there; and all of its mission staff. > > And let’s suppose that a week after that, an IDF submarine launches a couple cruise missiles into downtown Bucharest, Romania and blows up the Iranian embassy there along with the Iranian ambassador and all of the embassy staff. > > Would you shrug these things off as attacks on legitimate military targets? Or would Israel’s conduct trouble you? Or how about this? [**Atlanta Jewish Times Owner Calls for Assassination of Obama to Protect Israel**](http://vitamindan.wordpress.com/2012/01/22/atlanta-jewish-times-owner-calls-for-assassination-of-obama-to-protect-israel/) Not as hypothetical as your scenario, but just a tad more troubling is it not? ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/35 "2012-02-18T20:30:29Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > I agree, but it’s not a valid excuse for their actions. The weaker side in a war is not excused from its moral obligations. True, but generally speaking it is those with power that write the rules. Looking at it dispassionately, I don’t see anything morally worse about attacking diplomats than civilian scientists. > [@FinnAgain](#): > > Is this an cogently and consistently held position, or a rationalization? Rationalization. > [@FinnAgain](#): > > If a nation created a casus belli and their target nation did not feel secure in its ability to retaliate militarily, would you support civilian-targeted killings there, too? Or is this situation somehow different? Why or why not? No, of course not. This is different because it’s Da Jooz being killed. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/36 "2012-02-18T20:36:34Z")
> [@treis](#): > > True, but generally speaking it is those with power that write the rules. Well what do you think the rules should be? If two countries are at war, should there be any moral limit on the kinds of attacks each side can engage in? Or is it pretty much all the same to you? You do realize, don’t you, that Israel could easily just push a button and end this problem at the cost of 50 million Iranian lives? > [@](#): > > Looking at it dispassionately, I don’t see anything morally worse about attacking diplomats than civilian scientists. In that case, do you have a problem if next week Mossad agents blow up Iran’s mission to the UN in New York City and kill the Iranian ambassador and the entire diplomatic staff? And if the week after that, an IDF launches a similar attack by way of cruise missile against the Iranian embassy in Bucharest? ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/37 "2012-02-18T20:37:13Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > (fabrication) Readers will note that you have provided absolutely zero evidence that the assassination plot was “fabricated”. They will also note that you have provided nothing but a link and have provided zero quotation or analysis, at all. Readers will also note that j[ust recently](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14776468&postcount=467) you also linked to a cite claiming that the substantiated Iranian assassination attempts were likewise ‘full of holes’ and were likely a “false flag” operation. Readers would be wise to note that your metric for determining “holes” in a story and its correlation with the factuality of the story is perhaps not totally reliable. > [@levdrakon](#): > > Killing a diplomat seems like a more legitimate war target than a scientist. Cite the appropriate manual on international law where it states that consular agents are legitimate targets. Or retract. > [@Kobal2](#): > > Were they wearing uniforms ? Did they say “sir yes sir” a lot ? Did they carry weapons ? No ? Then they’re civilians This is oversimplified to the point of factual error. It does indeed "matter what they’re working on " Citizens working on military projects are valid military targets according to the [Fourth Geneva Convention](http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/full/380). > [@](#): > > Art. 15. Any Party to the conflict may, either direct or through a neutral State or some humanitarian organization, propose to the adverse Party to establish, in the regions where fighting is taking place, neutralized zones intended to shelter from the effects of war the following persons, without > distinction: > > (a) wounded and sick combatants or non-combatants; > (b) civilian persons who take no part in hostilities, and who, while they reside in the zones, perform no work of a military character. Precedent has long held that dual-use work still qualifies under “military character”. Likewise, removing the capability for wage nuclear war obviously falls under [Protocol 1, Article 52](http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/full/470?opendocument): > [@](#): > > 1. Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage. > [@Spoke](#): > > a schoolyard fight So noted by your silence, you have absolutely no answer as to why you will uncritically cite anonymous, unve rified reports from US officials when they are negative to Israel but no reason why you will not uncritically accept all other such anonymous, unverified reports from US officials. > [@Spoke](#): > > [According to US intelligence, Iran has not yet decided to embark on a nuclear weapons program](http://www.aljazeera.com/video/americas/2012/02/20122170514625396.html). Yet again, will you uncritically accept all reports coming out of the US intelligence community, or only those which you find favorable? Likewise, you are distorting what was actually said. The quote is that Iran had not “made the decision to proceed with developing a nuclear weapon.” Not that they had not decided to “embark” on one. How do you reconcile your selective citations with the fact that the 2007 NIE certified that Iran had indeed embarked on a nuclear weapons program but had probably held it in reserve after a halt in 2003? How do you reconcile your distortion of Panetta’s words with the actual intelligence estimates that have been conducted by the US? How do you reconcile even the correct statement from Panetta with the fact that [there is divergence within the US intelligence community on the status of Iran’s nuclear program?](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303661904576453800512114910.html) > [@treis](#): > > No, of course not. This is different because it’s Da Jooz being killed. So noted, you have no actual answer to the logical inconsistency in your position (or you actually have no inconsistency and do support civilian-targeted military actions) and will only respond with nonsense about “Da Jooz”. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/38 "2012-02-18T20:41:40Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Well what do you think the rules should be? If two countries are at war, should there be any moral limit on the kinds of attacks each side can engage in? Or is it pretty much all the same to you? > > You do realize, don’t you, that Israel could easily just push a button and end this problem at the cost of 50 million Iranian lives? I don’t think there are black and white rules. It depends on the justification for the war and how horrendous the acts are. > [@brazil84](#): > > In that case, do you have a problem if next week Mossad agents blow up Iran’s mission to the UN in New York City and kill the Iranian ambassador and the entire diplomatic staff? And if the week after that, an IDF launches a similar attack by way of cruise missile against the Iranian embassy in Bucharest? I’d prefer they not blow up part of my country. Let me ask you, are the Iranians justified in attacking workers and facilities in the U.S. providing weapons to Israel? ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/39 "2012-02-18T20:43:06Z")
The view that Iran and Israel are just having a playground squabble and the U.S. should but out (apart from wringing its hands and asking the combatants to play nice) overlooks not just our strategic concerns in the region, but the fears of other nations in the area, including some who are still our close allies. There’s a great deal of [historic suspicion and enmity](http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/why-arab-leaders-worry-about-irans-nuclear-program) of other Arab nations towards Iran and its ambitions. _“The centuries of acrimony have led to a healthy distrust of Iranian intentions–especially when it comes to the safety and security of Iran’s nuclear facilities. Tehran’s nuclear program relies on Russian technology, and its Arab neighbors fear another Chernobyl. Therefore, the location of the Bushehr nuclear reactor, less than 2 miles from the Persian Gulf and closer to six Arab capitals (Kuwait, Riyadh, Manama, Doha, Abu Dhabi and Muscat) than it is to Tehran, is a serious problem. Any nuclear accident would be an ecological disaster. The Persian Gulf, the only source of water for Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, would be contaminated, leaving those countries without drinking water.”_ Recent disclosures suggest Iran’s Arab neighbors [would not be displeased](http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,731877,00.html) if its nuclear program got derailed. This does not mean that a military attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities is now justified, but retreating into isolationism on this issue would be at least as foolish. ---
**Author:** ![PrettyVacant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/49beb7/32.png) [@PrettyVacant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PrettyVacant)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262/40 "2012-02-18T20:43:52Z")
Iran booooo, hisssssss! LOL. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iranian-attempts-to-assassainate-ambassadors/613262.md?page=3)