Iranian President to US: Just apologize and we're cool.

[jamil]

I'm not rooting for them. I'm asking why we wouldn't just leave them to their corner of the world and just keep to ours.

I'm kinda of the opinion that we should let them kill each other. However, I'm not all that convinced they'll stay in their corner.

 

[ghuns]

Maybe someone should stop kicking the dog.

That would require us to acknowledge that we have not always conducted foreign policy in a way that we can all be proud of.

You can draw a pretty straight line from...

Our role in the 1953 Iranian coup, that gave 40% of the Iranian oil industry to American oil companies...

To Norman Schwarzkopf's daddy starting up and training the agents of the SAVAK. An organization that was every bit the German Gestapo's equal...

To the 1979 revolution and hostage taking...

To the current batch she-it we are dealing with in that whole region.

We behaved badly. They behaved badly. But we kinda did start it.

 

[Jludo]

If this was a sincere negotiation with a sincere nation, things might be different, but look who you dealing with here. Hassan Rouhani is not asking for an apology to just heal our relationship with Iran. Iran is wanting an apology to prove guilt and to strengthen their position and views of the western world and to justify their aggression against the US and Israel. They have told us their intentions time and time again and yet, arrogantly, we think that they really don't mean what they are saying. Foreign policy is a lethal chess match and we should carefully study our opponets and their intentions before we engage in negotiations with them. To underestimate them and their intentions could have dire consequences in the future.

Prove our guilt? Ive got news for you, we're guilty, no one's withholding judgement until the us govt. Admits fault.

 

[jamil]

Prove our guilt? Ive got news for you, we're guilty, no one's withholding judgement until the us govt. Admits fault.

The Dick Cheney's of the world like to play silly games with other countries' leadership under the guise of "national security". I'd rather we have foreign policies that tend to mind our own business.

However, we're not the only ones, truth be told, and if there's a line forming for all the meddling nations to apologize to each other, we should certainly be in it. Let me know when and where the line forms. Until then, **** 'em.

 

[oldpink]

Prove our guilt? Ive got news for you, we're guilty, no one's withholding judgement until the us govt. Admits fault.

Right guilty in your jaundiced view.
All hail the Ayatollah!

 

[BugI02]

This. This is propaganda. You just have your head too far up Sean Hannity s backside to realize it apparently.

" a president who all but blows them"

"Our president dropping his pants and grabbing his ankles"

Yea that's the measured response of a clear headed adult.

By far the largest and strongest military in the world yet we project great weakness? Weakness and restraint aren't synonymous.

So are you advocating 'Peace with honor' or the more vintage 'Peace for our time'

 

[BugI02]

I'm not exactly sure why they should apologize for either.

Because an embassy is sovereign territory and an attack on one is an act of war?

 

[BugI02]

Just so I'm clear, you think nuking Iran is a good idea, and would make the world safer? Might I ask what criteria you have in determining when it is acceptable to employ nuclear weapons on another nation?.......since we're taking this serious and all.

How about the same criteria as the previous use - as the only way to bring a committed and implacable enemy to heel.

 

[BugI02]

Uh history? It was relayed to embassy staff, that if Shah received medical treatment in the U.S., and they remained, the embassy would be taken.

And somehow Shah receiving medical treatment in the U.S. equates to embassy staff actively seeking to undermine their revolution? In anyones mind but yours?

 

[printcraft]

 

[Jludo]

So are you advocating 'Peace with honor' or the more vintage 'Peace for our time'

Are you saying iran is a military rival on par with 20th century Germany?

 

[Jludo]

How about the same criteria as the previous use - as the only way to bring a committed and implacable enemy to heel.

We aren't at war with iran, they pose no threat to US mainland, haven't attacked us, they don't have a top tier military. Other than that yea I suppose the situations are identical.

 

[BugI02]

Are you saying iran is a military rival on par with 20th century Germany?

You are advocating appeasement. I'm just suggesting some possible slogans from previous 'successful' appeasement campaigns.

 

[Jludo]

You are advocating appeasement. I'm just suggesting some possible slogans from previous 'successful' appeasement campaigns.

Apologizing for past transgression isn't appeasement and iran isn't a military powerhouse like Germany was. There are literally zero similarities. But I suppose "Nazis" is always a compelling argument.

 

[oldpink]

You are advocating appeasement. I'm just suggesting some possible slogans from previous 'successful' appeasement campaigns.

He just gets an erection at the idea of the U.S. officially prostrating itself.

 

[Baditude]

Since we are taking this seriously, I would point out that, first, this does not actually cost us that by virtue of the fact that the money has long since been spend and we are not obligated to nor do we need to replace that bomb. After all, you only need enough of them to destroy the planet so many times over anyway.

Second, when you consider the damage to any system of currency that counterfeiting does, and that the Iranian national mint jockeys for position with the North Korean national mint with first and second places alternating for the world's leading counterfeiter of US currency, my guess is that Iran does more than $1.8M per year worth of damage to our economy with printing presses.

Third, I would venture to say that we spend more than $1.8M per year dealing with state-sponsored terrorism of which Iran is the sponsor.

Fourth, we have a constant threat of interference with the world oil market by way of shenanigans with the Strait of Hormuz. I would imagine that we spend more than $1.8M per year preventing this problem from manifesting.

Fifth, the drone that Iran hijacked cost a hell of a lot more than $1.8M.

Sixth, Iran caused more than $1.8M in additional damage and expense through its activities against our troops in Iraq, including but not limited to supplying munitions to people engaged in hostilities against our troops.

Seventh, and certainly not least, Iran has been very true to its word regarding the hostilities in which it would engage when afforded the opportunity, and has plainly declared its intention to eliminate Israel from the face of the planet, and has been very clear in holding us in the same regard. Apparently, Israel gets first priority by virtue of geographic proximity, but lighting up people who have made it clear that they intend to light us up the first chance they get would seem to come with its own reasonable argument.

I agree with a lot said plus we waste more than 1.8 mil / year perhaps a few more could be sent as "gifts" all they have to do is catch them

The flaws I see are possible environmental changes from the fallout drifting and repercussions with other countries in the world (namely our allies)

 

[7.62]

A single nuke costs us around $1.8M. What benefit would we get from nuking Iran that justifies that kind of taxpayer expense?

If that truly all it cost (which seems low) then that's chump change. Tomahawk Cruise missiles cost 1.41 million each and we set those off the the hundreds all the time.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Apparently many are under the assumption that only the United States has nuclear weapons. The idea of nuking a nation because we're butthurt is insane. I hate qualify it so coldly, but there simply hasn't been enough death and destruction, at the hands of Iran, to justify such a strike.

 

[Kutnupe14]

x

 

[KG1]

x

I agree.