Iran Situation

[Dill]

(01-03-2020, 04:03 PM)Au165 Wrote: ...he was also a general in another sovereign state's government. You keep failing to acknowledge that piece and how it makes things WAY different. Again, we are a terrorist organization per the designation Iran has assigned us an therefor if they attacked anything related to our military they would be doing so in the attempt to prevent a terrorist organization from carrying out terrorist attacks. Just deeming a part of a foreign government a terrorist group and pretending like that gives you cart blanche to do what you want isn't going to hold water with the international community as we have seen other countries coming out, even our allies, and saying they aren't backing this.

As I said, if Iran did this exact same thing to us we would call it an act of war. Only difference here is we are America and they aren't so we blindly back any violations of international sovereignty as us just doing what's best.

Substantial points, Au.

Since the Gulf War of 1991 the US has positioned itself in ME conflicts as the bearer of civilized standards (e.g., we don't torture prisoners or target civilians) and international law (respect the sovereignty of other nations!).  That is why, until now, it has mattered "what others thought of us." That other countries accepted (at least partially) this account of US intentions and actions was always one basis of the US' immense and unmatched diplomatic power--the kind of power evidenced in the Iran Deal, which brought Europe and three US adversaries to the table to sign an agreement now irrevocably undone by the Solemaini assassination.

That claimed high ground is one reason why the Trump administration is demanding that Iran behave like a "normal" nation. 

But this has also been a very troubled ground, since in practice the US regularly violates the civilized/international standards it claims to uphold, acting as an "exceptional" nation in the sense that the rules it wants others to uphold don't necessarily apply to the US.  Under Bush and Obama it was possible to explain US violations of international law as emanating from rogue elements of presidential administrations or the military itself, coloring out side the lines of command, so to speak. 

Under Trump, however, violations are openly embraced from the top down. It seems only the "deep state" has hindered plundering of other nations' property/resources and blocked actions which would make the US an international aggressor. Trump, like much of his base, appears to have little knowledge of the aforementioned standards and no interest in upholding them. The Base thinks in terms of "bad guys" and "good guys," not terms like "sovereignty," "international law," or "official representing a sovereign state."

The problem with the latter is that it has given us a president who, ignoring "what others think of us," cannot adequately forsee the consequences of his actions, in this case of violating the sovereignty of two states with one assassination--only the most recent in a pattern of actions currently driving us to another "endless" ME war.