[vorpalhex]

It's not bullying to take out someone who has repeatedly and consistently attacked you and your troops while hiding behind thinly veiled militias. Do stupid things, win stupid prizes.

Given that the rate of attacks was increasing and provocations were growing more brazen, a punch on the nose to back off hardly seems an unfair response.

[curiousgal]

I wasn't reffering to the assassination as much as the constant escalation and the targeting of cultural sites.

Whatever mess is happening in the Middle East, it's hard to deny the U.S.' role in creating it so it's not really as simple as "We're good, they're bad". In fact one could argue that it's the opposite of that.

[vorpalhex]

Anytime we're discussing geopolitical issues, "Good" and "bad" are right out the window. As the old saying goes, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".

Iran views us as a foreign power meddling in their backyard and neighborhood, and would like us to stop so they can continue their plan of instituting their customs and government structure on their neighbors through unconventional means (what we call terrorism).

We view Iran as a constant threat whose goal is to wage proxy wars on our allies, control their immediate neighbors and generally attack Democracy and replace it with religious rule which isn't super pro-human rights.

That doesn't mean every conflict the US has waged is "good". Yes, the 1953 coup was generally best described as naked self interest amongst the UK and the US. Likewise, the US targeting cultural sites would be abhorrent behavior. However given the choice between the US sometimes doing stupid things and Iran being unchecked, I'll take the occasional stupidity.

[mirimir]

> Iran views us as a foreign power meddling in their backyard and neighborhood, and would like us to stop so they can continue their plan of instituting their customs and government structure on their neighbors through unconventional means (what we call terrorism).

Which neighbors?

[vorpalhex]

Iraq, UAE and Saudi Arabia are the ones I'm aware of, with the situation between Iran and Iraq being complicated but not directly hostile.

[mirimir]

It's all complicated.

Iran is the remnant of the Persian Empire, and Turkey is the remnant of its ancient rival, the Ottoman Empire. Much of the northern Middle East (along with a decent chunk of Europe) was part of the Ottoman Empire until ~1900. And countries there were largely fictions of European conquest and ~colonization.

As I understand it, the Persian vs Ottoman conflict survives more or less as Shia vs Sunni. But all of them hate intervention by outsiders.

There's aren't that many Shia in UAE and Saudi Arabia, and I doubt that Iran plans their conquest. However, Iran does work with groups throughout the Middle East who are fighting against outside intervention. Even Sunni groups. But not, I gather, ISIS.

Anyway, this seems a decent overview:

https://thehill.com/opinion/international/472657-beyond-the-...

Israel

US-USSR

[mirimir]

Oops, I left some artifacts there.

[guerrilla]

> attacked you and your troops while hiding behind thinly veiled militias.

> Do stupid things, win stupid prizes.

Stupid things like overthrowing Iran's government and installing a puppet monarchy?

> In August 1953, the Shah finally agreed to Mossadegh's overthrow, after Roosevelt said that the United States would proceed with or without him,[64] and formally dismissed the prime minister in a written decree, an act that had been made part of the constitution during the Constitution Assembly of 1949, convened under martial law, at which time the power of the monarchy was increased in various ways by the Shah himself.[65] As a precautionary measure, he flew to Baghdad and from there hid safely in Rome. He actually signed two decrees, one dismissing Mosaddegh and the other nominating the CIA's choice, General Fazlollah Zahedi, as Prime Minister. These decrees, called Farmāns, were specifically written as dictated by Donald Wilber, the CIA architect of the plan, and were designed as a major part of Wilber's strategy to give legitimacy to the coup, as can be read in the declassified plan itself, which bears his name.

> Soon, massive popular protests, aided by Roosevelt's team, took place across the city and elsewhere with tribesmen at the ready to assist the coup. Anti- and pro-monarchy protesters, both paid by Roosevelt,[64] violently clashed in the streets, looting and burning mosques and newspapers, leaving almost 300 dead. The pro-monarchy leadership, chosen, hidden and finally unleashed at the right moment by the CIA team, led by retired army General and former Minister of Interior in Mosaddegh's cabinet, Fazlollah Zahedi joined with underground figures such as the Rashidian brothers and local strongman Shaban Jafari,[66] to gain the upper hand on 19 August 1953 (28 Mordad). The military joined on cue: pro-Shah tank regiments stormed the capital and bombarded the prime minister's official residence, on Roosevelt's cue, according to his book. Mosaddegh managed to flee from the mob that set in to ransack his house, and, the following day, surrendered to General Zahedi, who was meanwhile set up by the CIA with makeshift headquarters at the Officers' Club. Mosaddegh was arrested at the Officers' Club and transferred to a military jail shortly after.[67] On 22 August, the Shah returned from Rome.

Stupid things like shooting down Iran Air Flight 655 and killing 290 civillians?

Or maybe invading Iran's largest neighbors and installing puppets? Or doing so in every other country they can get away with it in so as to be completely untrustworthy? Or did you mean droning thousands of civilians in the region?

https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/us_atrociti...