Iranian idiocy has touched me personally

[danmand]

I'm stating that the ones I've spoken with were over the moon for joy.

I am not surprised. In your view, everybody in every country the US has invaded
are over the moon for joy. I suppose you make an exception for the ones that
have been killed during these joyous events.

But you elegantly missed my point, as has been your habit recently:

The mighty USA specializing in invading defenceless countries, as
Panama, Grenada, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Coiuntries with an air force (Iran) or Nuclear weapons (North Korea) appears safe from the US military.

 

[Rockslinger]

I am not surprised. In your view, everybody in every country the US has invaded are over the moon for joy.

If everybody is not jumping over the moon with joy (or even if they are), good enough reason not to interfere in Iran. They will have to sort it out themselves, just like they did with the shah.

My vote is to stay out of Iran and bring our brave troops home fom Afghany. We should concentrate our resources on building more subways and hockey rinks for girls in Canada.

 

[themexi]

Made it clear you just never want to get involved.

In FOREIGN affairs... Just because I don't feel the need to police the world & make everywhere else like here doesn't mean I'd rather live like a slave....

it means I'd rather let others fight for their own way in life...


Seriously how did you confuse that?


You really do only hear what reinforces your own little views on things don't you? I mean, did NOTHING in the other 90% of the content of my post even register as seen to your eyes? Or do you have some willfull ignorance filter that just deletes it from what pases for your mind?


Just out of curiosity... what colour is the sky in your world??

 

[Rockslinger]

it means I'd rather let others fight for their own way in life...

Totally agree. In the famous words of Captain James T. Kirk of the Starship Enterprise: "Do not interfere with alien life." Let them sort out what kind of society they want. The Iranians didn't like the shah so they got rid of him. Now it is up to them to decide what they (not us) will do to the murderous Islamic Iranian mullahs.

 

[slowpoke]

Have you ever spoken to anyone from Panama or Grenada about this? I have and they don't seem to have the same viewpoint you do.

However, that doesn't change the point I was actually raising which is that a fair number of people on the left of the political spectrum both in Canada and the U.S. were gung-ho on a military solution in Darfur, Somalia, and Kosovo, I'm curious why there hasn't been much chatter about Iran. I agree that it likely is because many believe that it would involve an actual war.

However, I wonder if there aren't other factors involved.

One of those other factors is pragmatism. The US is already bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan and up to her eyebrows in debt. Most sane people would prefer not to see the US get entangled in yet another optional war - especially one with a country as large and possibly formidable as Iran. The US' reputation is already in tatters after all those flimsy excuses about WMD in Iraq. And a diplomatic solution may still be possible with Iran, in spite of the bogus elections and the odious regime. People are just plain weary of these endless military solutions in extremist Islamic shitholes.

Having said that, Darfur and Somalia seem almost defenceless compared to Iraq, Iran or Afghanistan so people are naturally tempted to send in enough UN troops to prevent further chaos and genocide etc. Many still want the UN to act as a world police force in situations like this. The failures in Rwanda didn't have to happen and the more optimistic among us probably see Darfur and Somalia as small enough that we "should" be able to do something constructive. This apparent feasibility is probably an illusion but I think it is part of the reason people want to intervene there instead of in more "strategic" places like Iran.