Weatherman2020
Diamond Member
- Mar 3, 2013
- 94,648
- 66,622
Most Iranians are pro Western. Plenty can be done with just assistance.Has Iran paid back our embassy hostages yet? The victims of their state sponsored terrorism?1. I'm no fan of the Iranian government.
2. Not much of a fan of the UN either, but not as anti as some others here.
That said, I don't agree with barring this guy.
Unless we want further escalation diplomacy has to begin. We don't get there by barring diplomats.
And yes, I get this guy would use this as a stage to pillory the US. That's part of the process too. Let him talk. Let them talk. Who gives a shit what they say. It's what they do that matters.
If our intent was to send a message we've certainly done it. If that message was 'enough is enough of the proxy BS' then we have to have a dialogue even though I know the Iranians will be difficult to deal with and real yield will be low.
If that message is 'fuck you, let's get it on' and the real intent is war then that's a completely different matter and not a tangent I would support. We've seen enough of that shit, I would think.
We shouldn't be barring diplomats, IMO, regardless of the intended message or 'side'. There is no utility to it that I can see.
Nope.
Nope and they never will.
Iran sucks. I'm no fan.
More a pragmatist that would rather not see this escalate further.
Let em kick and stomp.
They attacked the contractors = we hit them back
They got pissed about that and stormed the embassy = we hit them harder
We can keep playing this game, and can undoubtedly 'win' by hitting them increasingly harder, as we have an ability to project whatever power we desire, but at some point you have to open the door to discussion unless we just want to say fuck it and break out the heavy hardware and put boots on the ground. I don't.