Let's go to war or not: Iran Edition

[Bcharles123]

Your lifetime? This event does seem dubious as you say. I’m just learning details. But not necessarily part of a policy. Which might be the problem.

Foreign policy is always judged in hindsight. That’s the nature of it. For example, the NK policy of the 1990s, giving them reactor technology and lots of cash, didn’t work out. It was a policy of appeasement based on the “certainty” that they would not survive much longer. No blame. It was reasonable at the time. But pretty much an extraordinary failure with extraordinary consequences. You were around for that.

And what was the fallout from that decision? What has N. Korea actually done to harm US interests? They are a sideshow at best. N. Korea is a regional problem will always will be China's biggest problem on the world stage. I will say it before and will say it again: a nation only becomes sovereign when it develops nuclear weapons and a weapon system to deliver them. It is the only insurance a foreign power (like the US) will not invade/bomb it for 'reasons'.

I wasn’t pointing out that it is a problem (although it is). I was pointing out it was an explicit failure of policy. In contrast to our Cold
War policies, as you point out. Just examples of policies that are well defined.

I’m not seeing it in the modern era. Obama and Trump.

[JonA]

I'm not sure I'd put this even in the top 3 worst foreign policy decisions in the last 40 yrs for Iran alone, much less the rest of the world. We've done some really stupid things. I mean, really. How does this even compare to shooting down an Iranian civilian airliner?

[aurelius]

I'm not sure I'd put this even in the top 3 worst foreign policy decisions in the last 40 yrs for Iran alone, much less the rest of the world. We've done some really stupid things. I mean, really. How does this even compare to shooting down an Iranian civilian airliner?

Not worst ever. And I agree, not even with Iran. Which is ENTIRELY a self made problem. But that all happened in the 70’s. Before I was alive. I guess you could lump the entire approach towards Iran as terrible policy.

What you describe was an accident based on poor intelligence (misidentified an aircraft) by the US military in a combat theater. And not an intentional action of a President as foreign policy. And Iran was not a threat to the US and its interests in nearly the same as it is now.

[aurelius]

War policies, as you point out. Just examples of policies that are well defined.

I’m not seeing it in the modern era. Obama and Trump.

Minor quibble. Obama's policy was letting the free market work. That was his goal with Cuba and Iran.

The argument against that policy is the recent example of China. The inclusion into the global market in the 90's has only emboldened China to be more aggressive.

[5hout]

For a more nuanced, or at least lengthier, analysis of some of the potential upsides:

http://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/ ... rdice.html

[JonA]

But that all happened in the 70’s. Before I was alive. I guess you could lump the entire approach towards Iran as terrible policy.

It was 1988.

I'd put Iran Contra up there as well. As well as arming Saddam Hussein with nasty weapons in order to fight Iran.

The Iran nuclear agreement wasn't all that great either.

[Bcharles123]

It was 1988.

I'd put Iran Contra up there as well. As well as arming Saddam Hussein with nasty weapons in order to fight Iran.

The Iran nuclear agreement wasn't all that great either.

These are great examples of actions that followed policy. I’m not being nit picky but I have been reading more policy documents the last few years.

It’s weird but some are very explicit with actionable statements. Others are so vague, they are more like the ridiculous vision statements we all do at work. There really doesn’t seem to be a standard.

[BostonRugger]

For a more nuanced, or at least lengthier, analysis of some of the potential upsides:

http://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/ ... rdice.html

It’s depressing that there’s someone taking the time to write that.

[Bcharles123]

For a more nuanced, or at least lengthier, analysis of some of the potential upsides:

http://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/ ... rdice.html

Whatever happens, moving forward, DO NOT let Aurelius read that article. He will swallow his own tongue like Miggs.

[oldguy]

For a more nuanced, or at least lengthier, analysis of some of the potential upsides:

http://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/ ... rdice.html

Nuanced - LOL.

[5hout]

Nuanced - LOL.

Hey , I included the caveat that it could be just lengthier. It's the highbrow version of "lul get fuked Iran".

[simonrest]

China.

you're getting warmer....

[Hanley]

Apparently, Iranian Intel has taken over AOC's Twitter account.

[Skander]

Apparently, Iranian Intel has taken over AOC's Twitter account.

And made her post pretty basic anti-war sentiments and statements that attacking civilian cultural sites is a war crime? Maybe I'm not that good with Twitter but not sure what you're going for here.

[mbasic]

But seriously....

After reading more about the Solemi (i'm not going to even bother to learn how to spell it right) dude, that guy needed to die.
I think if trump wasn't such a douche bag up to this point, the whole thing would've gone over much better here in the US and abroad.
So that's why you don't act like a pompous douche bag, as a president.

Also, does anyone else here think it really wasn't just trump's sole decision?
I mean, they were tracking him and shit all up to this point, "top terrorist list", etc.
So curious, when a book/"tell all" come's out year's down the road from now how this went down.
How many of these decisions do you think its up to them?

Also, Iran is in a bad place internally itself.

[Bcharles123]

But seriously....

The Clintons also killed Vince Foster and Ron Brown.

Does a president ever make a decision that everyone disagrees with? I don’t think it’s likely. Perhaps there is not a majority consensus, but I believe there are always options with analysis.

Ultimately, by policy and law, the president has final decision on many things. There are also many things that are explicitly delegated.

You are right that Trump suffers from his reputation. There is a slight chance, this is intentional, but probably a personality disorder.

[Hanley]

attacking civilian cultural sites

Oh, shit, you and AOC have good info.

[Skander]

attacking civilian cultural sites

Oh, shit, you and AOC have good info.

You realize that minarets aren't actually missiles, right?

What's a military cultural site exactly? The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier? Even that's probably off limits...

[mbasic]

attacking civilian cultural sites

Oh, shit, you and AOC have good info.

I'll admit, not up on the current trump outrage today.

But lemme take a wild guess:
Is this LIKE the thing where in the GulfWar I&2 the Iraq's put their air-defense sites up ontop of hospitals, and hid scuds inside mosques?
And those were off limits.... like "base" when you played tag as a 6 year old.

[Hanley]

You realize that minarets aren't actually missiles, right?

Okay, so you're not talking about the shabab-3 display that framed the Supreme Leader's portrait?

Thanks for clarifying.