Page 1 of 7 1 2345 ... Last

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!)

Reply

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.

Reply

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.

Reply

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.

Reply

Thank you.

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

Reply

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.

Reply

Things aren't going very well for beardneck, Iran is probably more fragile than ever. Epic troll indeed, nominated for the golden panflute

Reply

A role we Americans already play for Cuba and North Korea. Sigh. We make a very good scapegoat.

I like your idea of flooding them with Western consumer goods and soap operas. Let their people watch some Jersey Shore, and the revolution will follow!

Then again, there already kinda was a revolution in '09, and the entrenched mullahs demonstrated they ere perfectly willing to kill, torture and crack heads to keep their power.

On the flip side, the Arab Spring brought nothing good for the mullahs. And the Green movement is not dead, it's only resting.

I see little role for the US in pushing this process forward, however. The more engaged we become, the more we play into the regime's scapegoating. Let's back off, send them Snooki and The Situation, and let things happen naturally.

Reply

The best strategy for dealing with Iran would be to cut ties with Israel.

Reply

'On the flip side, the Arab Spring brought nothing good for the mullahs.'

Que? Arabist spring turns islamist winter, especially in Egypt

Reply

Arab spring, an Arabist is someone who studies Arab culture and language, like your precious Hans Jansen.

I don't think they're afraid of that at all. To be fair, I think they see it as a possibility to "export" their Revolution. I'll come back to this later, as I have dinner waiting for me now, there's one thing I'd like to point out.


EDIT: At university, I had the honour to meet two Iranian girls, one of whom had lived in Iran up to three years ago and spoke English, whereas the other was raised in the Netherlands, speaks Dutch fluently and has been Iran several times. In any case, I spoke in length with them about several subjects, including the current state of affairs in Iran. So between the three of us, we came to several conclusions:

The first being that Ahmadinejad is a troll. We all know that, but what's even worse, and I guess this is something that many people don't know, he's a troll at home. He treats people like they're idiots, even his subjects. Parazit made a wonderful point out of this: check it out, it has English subtitles. So yeah, Ahmadinejad is something of a troll, but that's "just" his personality. It's kinda how Berlusconi is, to be honest.

However, he is also more than willing to try and see how far he can push the clergy; he is not a clergyman himself and has received no theological training, as far as I'm aware. In fact, I made a thread a couple of months back; and to be honest, it's interesting to see how far Ahmadinejad was was willing to go in antagonising Khamenei.

Secondly, Esfandiar Rahim-Mashaei, which is the man I mentioned earlier, appears to have a lot of influence on Ahmadinejad's policy-making; he appears to steer towards a line of pragmatism, both in domestic policy as well as in dealing with the west. Iranians themselves have pointed to the fact that if gradual change is desired, this is probably the best way to go.

Additionally, one of the girls I mentioned said that if Rahim-Mashaei was president and his policy was the main line in Iran, she'd be returning there immediately.

So basically, what I'm trying to say, when you look at the Iranian government right now, there are two things that should be kept in mind:

1) It is not representative for its people right now. I'm not a great fan of the "Ahmadinejad did fraud!" theory, because I believe his support in 2009 was large enough to have won. That doesn't mean it didn't happen. In any case, the government is not representative, because parliament and the judiciary being controlled by Khamenei's lackeys.

2) The Iranian government is very fractured; influential policy-makers and close allies of Rahim-Mashaei have been arrested for charges such as "witchcraft" and "invoking jinn" that should tell us enough about what's going on there. In any case, there are currently two factions within the government fighting for control and Ahmadinejad as somewhat of a charismatic leader, is caught inbetween. Let's see what happens.

Reply

In the latest trolling news, looks like Iran is jamming Al Jazeera. You know, keeping the liberal bias out. It's like a whole nation run by Fox News.

Iran is jamming broadcasts by Qatar-based news channel Al-Jazeera, satellite operator Arabsat said in a statement received on Tuesday.

“Al-Jazeera is affected… from two different locations in Iran,” near Tehran and near the northwestern city of Maragheh, it said, adding that the cause was located at the request of the pan-Arab news channel.

The satellite television on Sunday announced a new frequency for Arabsat viewers due to “continued interference.”

“Over the past few months, Al-Jazeera has faced sustained interference to our satellite transmissions,” it said in a statement.

“These occurrences will only strengthen our commitment to continue providing our award-winning coverage across the region 24 hours a day, seven days a week,” said the broadcaster.

The influential channel has been criticised by many Arab governments for its coverage of the anti-regime uprisings which have swept the region since the start of 2011.

Reply

Iran executing game developer.

Reply

Who served in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and has never been in Iran before, that is at least stupid

Reply

There's more than one way to skin a cat

A bomber on a motorcycle killed a scientist from Iran’s Natanz uranium enrichment site and his bodyguard-driver on Wednesday during the morning commute in Tehran, Iranian media reported, in an assassination that could further elevate international tensions over the Iranian nuclear program and stoke the country’s growing anti-Western belligerence.

It was the fourth such attack reported in two years and, as after the previous episodes, Iran accused the United States and Israel of responsibility. The White House condemned the attack and denied any responsibility. The official reaction in Israel appeared to be more cryptic.

Iranian news accounts said the suspected assassin had attached a magnetized explosive device to the scientist’s car and escaped during the rush hour in northern Tehran. News photographs from the scene showed a car, a Peugeot 405, draped in a pale blue tarp being lifted onto a truck. Some photographs published by Iran’s official Islamic Republic News Agency showed what it said was the body of the scientist still inside the car. The head was covered with a white cloth.

Reply

So this isn't a act of war or terrorism?

We would think this is a normal diplomatic overture if Western scientists where culled by Taliban, Iran, North Korea or Phelps feeling it is punishment for gays in the military?

Surely our reaction would to bomb them into the stone age. So can't Iran respond in kind?

Reply

Not really relevant, given that they don't have the ability. Then again not so that long ago there were all these stories about Iran plotting murders on US soil by Mexican drug cartel proxy. Anyway, the bumping off of vaguely strategically important figures is not exactly new -- the inclusion of (nuclear) scientists as targets isn't exactly new either.

Reply

No. They lack the capabilities to do so; however, as a sovereign state they are allowed to take action against those targeting their national assets (people). Of course, that assumes they know who did it. Blame the U.S. is only good for pacifying the locals.

I'm sure the regime has and/or will kill and detain as many people as it wants to in retaliation.

Reply

I don't see how you can call it terrorism; the goal was not to spread chaos and terror, but rather to deny the Iranian state a specific asset. So it's an act of war. Or even more specifically, assassination.

I would not be surprised to learn that Israel green-lighted and directed this attack.

Reply

Personally, I dont think it was the US, when I think of american assassins I think snipers and poison, not car bombs. I could be wrong though, but if the americans wanted someone dead I would think they would kill him off quietly.

Reply

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.

Reply

it would be an act of war if it can be proven...but the Mossad will have taken precautions.

as for retaliation....well...if they can they can...if they can´t they can´t...that's how it works normally.

Reply

It might just as well not have been Israel, could have been the Mujahideen of Iran. I think they were outlawed by Khomeini and have been fighting the regime ever since.

Reply

Exactly. It's sad to hear educated Westerners default to the Iranian party line. There are many groups in Iran itself that have good reason to kill government officials.

Reply

The Iranian party line is to say, "this was those Israelis...damn them"
I´m saying "it was probably the Israelis....right on"

Reply

Oh, we've used our share of bombs, but American human resources in Iran are always low. Whenever an intelligence briefing leaks or is declassified, you always hear Langley complaining that we've got too few feet on the ground in Iran. That's why I suspect this attack was not originated by the USA. Also, it seems rather too precise and strategic to be the work of the mujahedeen, who are more likely to strike soft targets and spread the classical form of terrorism.

So the most likely perp is Israel, which has excellent humint, capabilities to spare, and is perfectly capable of making a reliable magnetic bomb. (Also note the methodical nature of the assassinations; four nuclear scientists over two years. That speaks to a strategic initiative, not to opportunistic mujahedeen.)

I feel for the scientist and his family. But I have no sympathy for the Iranian regime and their nuclear ambitions.

Reply

Nope. That scientist wasn't even a scientist

Reply

Guessing the culprit without actionable intel is is like arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It won't lead to anything....

Sure, Israel has the capability and a strong motive. They would have to be included in any list of likely suspects.

But as others have mentioned, it could be insurgents working within Iran, though I tend to agree with Lemur on this one... that sort of timing and coordination is not usually practiced by guerilla groups.

It could have been the Saudis. The Iranians had plans to kill at least one of their diplomats last year. Saudi Arabia is arguably more afraid of a nuclear Iran than Israel is. Actually, scratch the arguably... they don't have a bomb of their own to lob back.

It could have been the Russians. That would be rather Putinesque to try to keep them right on the hairy edge... making enough progress to continue paying the Russians for their help in developing but never quite wanting to see it happen.

It could have been elements within Iranian heirarchy itself. Not rebels, so much as groups within Iranian military or intelligence communities that don't want Iran to become nuclear armed. (There will be a price to be paid).

And I'm not even a foreign policy wonk. I'm sure those that spend time reading Foreign Affairs Journal could add a dozen more to my list without even trying.

And unless Iran has some intel on it, they'll have to be pretty careful about retaliation. Retaliating against the wrong group can bring a lot of hardship.

Reply

Extremely unlikely. The nuclear program is very, very popular in Iran, at nearly all levels of society. Not impossible, but the least likely scenario I've heard.

Reply

Not laying blame, just wish we reflected more in Iran's complexities. ;-)

Reply

Page 1 of 7 1 2345 ... Last