Iran, Epic Troll

[Lemur]

Since ACIN and Don C are going on about Iran in the GOP thread, I thought it might be wise to start up an Iranian love-in on its own terms.

So, what do you do with a bitter, entrenched, trolling rogue state like Iran? (Besides watch their excellent movies?)

Both Bush II and Obama went with international isolation, for which there is a good argument.

[T]he Obama administration's hopes are more ambitious. They want the sanctions to be so crippling that Khamenei's ultimate authority comes under challenge, to the point where factional divisions open up space for a substantive change in the regime.

This might work, but I'd put the odds of this happening at less than 1 in 3. Still, this is the thing about instances in which economic sanctions are deployed. Even if their prospects don't look great, they're usually employed because the other options have even worse odds. For the next, say, six months, pursuing this course of action makes sense. It weakens Iran at a key moment in the Middle East, and it might lead to some positive developments down the road. That said, even if the sanctions work in crippling Iran's economy, they likely won't work at altering Iran's objectionable nuclear policies -- the expectations of future conflict are too great. At that point, the United States is going to need to consider whether it's prepared to pursue a longer-term containment strategy or alter course.

There's an equally good argument that isolation through sanctions and pressure will not work.

The nuclear issue is a popular policy. What the United States should say is we are going to impose sanctions until you hold free elections, respect human rights….This would have much force within Iran and with a change in regime, then the nuclear issue could be better resolved. The issue the US has picked (the nuclear issue) will not rally the people against the regime. Sanctions are aimed at hurting the government and forcing the regime to change its policies, or squeezing the average citizen to turn against the regime. It hurts the average person. This is sad, but inevitable, fallout of sanctions that cannot be helped.

So, in the next 48 hours, I expect the Backroom to solve this whole Iranian trolling business. (Did you like the one where they threatened to close the Straits of Hormuz? That was a knee-slapper, given their naval capability. Epic troll!)

[a completely inoffensive name]

Well, to be fair it was GC that really brought up the bulk of what I said to Don in my post. He deserves credit for bringing up what I stated first and removing my internet anxiety from regurgitating everything he said.

But as to the OT. Iran is a joke. It isn't Nazi Germany. It's not a threat. It is a power hungry theocracy that uses religion to control the rural areas and is making a nuke to maintain power in the region, not to send off to terrorists.

Israel can handle itself, otherwise what is the point of giving them our weapons and money? The Iranian regime is scared of a couple things:
A. Israel
B. Saudi Arabia (which is very powerful to due to holding hands with US presidents)
C. A Western backed Iraqi/Afghanistani government.

With these three factors in play, Iran feels literally surrounded and has good reason to worry about an invasion toppling the kushy spots all the Islamic leaders have. So they want a trump card. Same reason why North Korea wants to build a nuke. They really don't want to use it, they need leverage to get food from the UN.

Lemur is 100%. Stop feeding the troll our American money with costly military exercises.

[Lemur]

I think a key question when dealing with lying scum like the Iranian government is "What endgame is acceptable? And what price are we willing to pay to get to that state?"

Hyperventilating about what a huge threat they are to us and their neighbors kinda plays into their trolling. Cold calculation is called for, not Cheney-esque paranoia and panic.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I think a key question when dealing with lying scum like the Iranian government is "What endgame is acceptable? And what price are we willing to pay to get to that state?"

Hyperventilating about what a huge threat they are to us and their neighbors kinda plays into their trolling. Cold calculation is called for, not Cheney-esque paranoia and panic.

If it was up to me, I would take a hands off approach. But I would say publicly that if they cross over the line, we would carpet bomb every inch of the state and allow the neighboring states that Iran's land is up for grabs if they join our coalition. We tell them to that if their troops secure it, it is theirs and we will bomb as much as they want beforehand.

Rouge states like to play on the fact that US won't annihilate an entire country due to our principles but if we give the ball in the hands of their middle eastern competitors, then the stakes are raised substantially for them.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Muchos gracias ACIN, for taking the time to draft a more coherent version of what I was trying to say. That post in the other thread was fantastic.

Thank you.

For the price of the War on Terror alone, we could have nation-wide high-speed public rail.

Oh man, I am having manly secretions right now just thinking about high speed rail everywhere. Going from LA to San Fran in 3 hours? UUUUGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[rory_20_uk]

The phrase "stop feeding the troll" is exactly right. Iran has a vast number of problems. What it needs is someone to blame for everything that is wrong, and also for the repression that takes place. The only things that unify the populace is hatred of Israel and America. The former is nigh on impossible to change, but the latter can be.

They happily state that they are setting up new facilities for enriching Uranium and even where they are. Why? Are they angling for more hostility from the West? If they wanted a covert bomb, why not get Pakistan to enrich some and transport it across the border - no easy task by any means but that might be covert with the ability to say that there is a nuke on a medium range missile somewhere in Iran. As it stands they are bragging that in 5-10 years they might have the bits required, just in case Obama wants to look tough on foreign policy in an election year.

The best way to get change would be to stop sanctions, to as far as possible open Iran up. People don't revolt when they've nothing to loose, they do so when they see they've something to gain.

I don't really see what the problem of Iran having a nuke is. We've nutters in North Korea and Pakistan with them and that is apparently fine. If the aim was casualties, then biological and / or chemical weapons are quick, cheap and equally deadly - yet they've apparently not tried to use one (or else the West and Israel has an astounding track record of getting them all). The aim must be defensive - that any massive fleet might be vaporised.

So, get trading with them. Get them access to stuff. Show them that fear of the West is not justified - ideally by not having hostile troops on 3 our of 4 sides. It won't be flicking a switch, but I think that kicking the Islamic hornet's nests in the Middle East isn't working.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I wish they had kidnapped him rather than blow him up. The intel he could have provided would have been worth it, not to mention that the death of anybody smart enough to work on nuclear physics is a tragedy to an extent in my eyes.

[Vladimir]

Thanks GC. I was AWOL from the thread again.