You just knew it was coming...

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Taz_786, Mar 16, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. It's deja vu all over again. :D

    It's a lot easier for them this way. All they have to do is get the transcripts of the speeches from 3 1/2 years ago and change the odd Q to an N.

    While I would agree that there is a chance that there's something dodgier than a 3 week old curry going on in Iran, I am absolutely convinced that the thinly veiled threats that have been leveled against them by the US does absolutely nothing but drive the Iranians in the other direction. It does nothing but steel Iranian public opinion against the West, further diminishing the prospects for meaningful reform from within, and it helps give the Iranian government cause to actually pursue nuclear weapons as quickly as possible. They only have to look at the mishandling of the North Korean problem to learn the important lesson there- you get tooled up and the American threats will stop. THAT becomes the rational course of action if you're the Iranian government.

    As an aside, it will be interesting to see if Bolton survives after the November elections, his appointment still needs to be confirmed. My first hunch is that the answer will be yes, but if the senate changes hands, or even if the balance shifts even slightly there is a chance that he can be out on his arrse.
  2. The Americans have to talk in a way that their own people will endorse just as much as the Iranians have to talk to please their people. If either side were to back-off in the pugnacity of their terms and conditions, they would lose popular support from their people.
    The public pronouncements will continue to be on the play-ground level because of this. It is to be hoped that there are under-cover debates at a more rational level.
  3. I just love this double standard.

    Iranian "politician" (er, dictator) publicly says "America is the Great Satan, they should fear our wrath and while I'm at it I want to nuke Israel into burning atomic ash! Mwuhahahahhaaa!!"

    Liberal commentators stroke their beards and say, "Hmmm, calm down, hyperbole is a core part of their oratory, and they are talking to their own people. Nothing in it."

    US politician says "Iran should consider the consequences of their actions in continuing to defy the legitimate will of the international community."

    Liberal commentators froth at the mouth, start eating their Birkenstocks and howl about the Nazi NeoCon conspiracy and how America is the most dangerous country in the world (etc).

    Am I missing something?
  4. With Bush currently enjoying a job approval rating of 34%, I think such talk is no longer working at home either. :?
  5. Umm, the total inability of Iran to strike against the United States and the absence of credible evidence that they have any pretentions towards a nuclear weapons programme while the United States has spent the last 5 years shoring up its presence in the Persian Gulf region, Afghanistan and Central Asia?

    If you were running Iran, how would the American posture look to you?

    And yes, cultural, linguistic, rhetorical and oratorical factors are significant. If greater attention was paid to it, there'd be an awful lot less confusion.
  6. I don't know. Presumably I'd be too busy subjugating women, rigging elections and cracking down on bloggers trying to exercise free speech.


    You honestly think, in the age of asymmetrical warfare, that Iran poses no potential threat to US interests at home and abroad?
  7. I don't believe that Iran would use nuclear power for peaceful applications. Iran might not be able to strike the USA but it would try to strike Israel.

    Liberals don't live in the real world and will always give in to lunatics.

    I think it's all a moot point, Israel will not let Iran have a nuke strike capability.
  8. Interesting that you mention asymmetry:

    So, from the Martian perspective, which is the more imposing at the strategic level, the above mentioned set-up or the possibility of the odd car bomb?

    What frustrates liberals is simply that at no point since 9/11(TM) has anybody, Republican or Democrat, sat down and seriously considered the question "Why do they hate us?" Everyone has simply reached for the most convenient "cookie cutter" approach, from "they hate our freedom" to "The Clash of Civilizations" and all the others we've heard ad nauseum.

    My essential point is this- the overwhelming majority of Iranians, like Americans, Brits and everyone else, want no part of any sort of confrontation. However, the inflammitory rhetoric (from both sides, I'll grant you) makes it hard to avoid polarising opinion. The broader issues at stake are not black and white- they're grey. Threatening war will effectively kill the opportunity for any kind of progress in Iran because of this polarisation, but it will also give the government license to clamp down further on dissent. You only have to see the effects of 9/11(TM) and the Iraq war on opposition to the Administration in the US for an example of that.
  9. Crabs, we all want love and peace.

    Problem is that the modern liberal paradigm pre-supposes that everybody has the ability to be as reasonable as they are.

    Theocracies and Dictatorships, generally, are not. They have an unambiguous higher authority to answer to, be it The Chairman or God. It's like the scientists from 1950's sci-fi always trying to reason with the giant killer robots and crying with frustration at the unfairness of it all as the lazer beam rips them in two.

    Personally I think that the US will try to forment some sort of slow-burn regime change in Iran. I hope it is successful, from what I've seen and read the Iranian people are well-educated, decent and hungry for more open government.

    I cannot say the same for their leaders.
  10. The problem with beliefs is that they tend to obfuscate rational thought. You can believe in the boogy man and spend a lifetime jumping at shadows, despite all evidence pointing to the fact that he doesn't exist.

    As has been pointed out my myself and others on other threads, there is fcuk all Israel can do about it from a military perspective. Iran is too big, too far away and Israel doesn't have the toys to do it. Any intervention will have to be led by the US.
  11. Flying planes with IDF markings.
  12. I generally agree with you there, Veg. I'm saying that the current direction of policy shreds any chance reasonable people in Iran have of getting shot of the theocrats and dictators. Everyone knows that war and bellicosity can be a very convenient tool for supressing domestic dissent.

    A slow burn approach would be effective, but it'll be tricky to maintain the appropriate balance. I just don't know if the John Boltons and Donald Rumsfelds of this world have the diplomatic (or even linguistic) skills to walk that fine line. Rice might be able to handle it, but everyone will be fcuked if Rummy sticks his oar in- even I can't understand WTF he's talking about most of the time.

    I just can't wait for Bush to try to pronunce "Mahmoud Ahmadinejad". :)
  13. It'd take a very brave US airman to pretend to be Israeli and fly to Iran. If ever there was a member of a nation who would be treated worse on capture than an American... 8O
  14. Well, I was sort of going by what Condi was saying, as per the link in this thread.