Well, it goes to show... There are so many possibilities as to why, but the result is learning that our second guessing capacities seem sadly inadedquate. Let's face facts: we don't understand, appreciate, or analyse Islamic cultures properly. If we start from the position they're humans first and then folk of a different religion after, perhaps we'll start to improve on our ignorance, and ascribe to them motives worthy of civilised but different human beings, as we should have been doing. They 'got the drop on us' in so many ways during this crisis that we're only now finding out just how badly we've lost the propaganda war. I know Islamic cultures seem alien and dissonant to our sensibilities, and they don't always seem to be consistant with (as we understand it) the higher ideals of Islam: but we fall short of our own ideals as well. Which is the mote and which the beam?
As an aside, during this crisis, I was more in favour of the typical 'gunboat diplomacy' of yore, because some of 'our chaps' were the captives and at risk. How wrong I was, and how graceless.
Jaw-jaw is better than war-war. At least in some circumstances.
I wasn't putting him much higher on the moral ground than us, but this has been done, and for (as I understand it) no advantage apart from the capturing of a position somewhat higher than our own.
I think Ahmadinejad feels smug enough to lecture us because...(complete in no more than fifty words, because to me it seems fairly obvious: but too much humble pie sticks in my craw, rather, as I suppose it must for some Islamic folk.)
"the capturing of a position somewhat higher than our own"
Which let's face it, is not quite elevated enough to provoke vertigo...
(My frequent remark about Bush and his cronies is that 'they're so low, they can freefall from a snake's arsehole'. His own perorations rang particularly hollow in response to this event.)
I think the iranians have succeeded in occupying the HMG in this, which is more acriticism of us than a congratulation of them...
Indeed. It does indicate however that there are times when overwhelming shows of strength don't count for as much as small amounts of reason. Dammit that it should have been Ahmadinejad (or more likely Ayatollah Ali Khamenei) showing us how to behave reasonably. Is that what is known as irony, m'dears?
In this case the Moral High Ground might actually be below ground level, but it just happens to be higher than the level where we'll find Bush. I guess it depends upon what the British were doing when they were captured.
Some of the most objectionable aspects of Iran's behavior seem to be the result of tying the state to a religion. Funny that that's what the Right seems to want over here. It didn't work the last 97 times -- it's sure to work this time!
In England the desire to seperate church and state (for they have been inextricably linked since Henry8 broke from Rome) is known as disestablishmentarianism and have existed since before Cromwell and the Commonwealth, and contibuted to the English Civil War. The folk that want to keep the status quo are therefore antidisestablishmentarianists. The thing about our church and state is that it's the good old fashioned Church of England (the Episcopalians to you chaps) and if you've got to have a religion attatched to a state, the good old lefty-liberal Church of England is the one you want. All the others are...a bit dogmatic, my dears, and don't like all sorts of things that normal people of the live and let live variety think of a reasonable and decent. (Even the church I was brought up in is a bit dodgy really.)
You don't mean that the blinkered creationist fucks on the other side are right because of the repressive superstition that they adhere to ? Using a non-existent entity as a reason for picking a fight is shit-fer-brains, whichever way you slice it.
I don't see Pres. A as having anything close to the moral high ground. I suspect he released the prisoners because otherwise amusingly violent things might happen, and he got scared. Or, else, the more reasoned members of the Tehran political tangle forced him to, also under fear of being carefully blown up.
Iran's got a lot of men under arms, and pretty up-to-date weaponry, and we're pretty extended in many theatres of operation. President A. for internal reasons, would quite like to have ratcheted up the ante (mainly to cut down on internal dissent). None of this is clear-cut, but I'm not certain that they wanted to avoid a limited confrontation, which could have been used as an internal propaganda 'driver'. But that could be said of a lot of countries.
True, but unless they'd have been used immediately and surgically they weren't of much use: and even then there would have been casualties. This way, it seems, in this limited diplomatic engagement, we didn't kill any of their chaps and they didn't kill any of ours. If one happened to be a general, I think one might just consider that a no score draw, which in reality translates to a win all round. And on top of that we get to rethink some of our opinions, & they get a bit of breathing space. Wariness is fine and understandable. But there may be better ways through our present sets of mess than the application of more guns to the equation. With the new developments between some Arab nations and Israel we might be able to find a way forward without stupid confrontation - but as with all these things, in order to achieve (and compromise) all sides have to moderate themselves and their opinions. I have a head start on you guys, because I've moved from the hard left, and I have maintained a certain (though erratic) momentum. If politics is about the art of the possible, surely this is what all sides should be doing - to find the place where we can all live with least discomfort and stepping on toes.
It's an interesting situation, to be sure. One difficulty is the distinct problem with the "voting public" getting info on the internal politics with anything close to be reliable. I've never really had any real insight into who's yanking Pres. A's strings and what motivates him.
They can go and attack the repressive military junta in Myanmar (Burma) which took control in 1990, putting their elected (lady) president - Aung San Suu Kyi - under house arrest, where she has remained ever since. That would be a useful 'restoration of democracy' that american forces could, and should, make. No clear links with Isreal, however. Sorry about that. On the positive side (from an american point of view), they do have oil...
No, with the U.S. rading Iranian liason offices in Iraq and holding diplomats prisoner, not to mention the whole Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib problem they clearly have the moral high-ground.
"No, with the U.S. rading Iranian spy offices in Iraq and holding spies prisoner, not to mention the whole POW camp and Abu Ghraib mess that got cleaned up they clearly have the moral high-ground."
Fixed that for you. Check both sides of the story next time.
No one believes the Iranians have the moral high ground, not even the people who support them. No one looks at Tehran and thinks "The Iranian government...now those are guys with virtue".
The only reason that anyone supports the Iranians is because they don't like us.
The only time the Iranians will have the moral high ground over us is for the 10 minutes between the President ordering the extermination of Iran and it occurring.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 11:01 am (UTC)There are so many possibilities as to why, but the result is learning that our second guessing capacities seem sadly inadedquate.
Let's face facts: we don't understand, appreciate, or analyse Islamic cultures properly.
If we start from the position they're humans first and then folk of a different religion after, perhaps we'll start to improve on our ignorance, and ascribe to them motives worthy of civilised but different human beings, as we should have been doing.
They 'got the drop on us' in so many ways during this crisis that we're only now finding out just how badly we've lost the propaganda war.
I know Islamic cultures seem alien and dissonant to our sensibilities, and they don't always seem to be consistant with (as we understand it) the higher ideals of Islam: but we fall short of our own ideals as well.
Which is the mote and which the beam?
As an aside, during this crisis, I was more in favour of the typical 'gunboat diplomacy' of yore, because some of 'our chaps' were the captives and at risk. How wrong I was, and how graceless.
Jaw-jaw is better than war-war. At least in some circumstances.
no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 11:15 am (UTC)I think Ahmadinejad feels smug enough to lecture us because...(complete in no more than fifty words, because to me it seems fairly obvious: but too much humble pie sticks in my craw, rather, as I suppose it must for some Islamic folk.)
Right enough
Which let's face it, is not quite elevated enough to provoke vertigo...
(My frequent remark about Bush and his cronies is that 'they're so low, they can freefall from a snake's arsehole'. His own perorations rang particularly hollow in response to this event.)
I think the iranians have succeeded in occupying the HMG in this, which is more acriticism of us than a congratulation of them...
Re: Right enough
Date: 2007-04-05 01:15 pm (UTC)It does indicate however that there are times when overwhelming shows of strength don't count for as much as small amounts of reason.
Dammit that it should have been Ahmadinejad (or more likely Ayatollah Ali Khamenei) showing us how to behave reasonably. Is that what is known as irony, m'dears?
no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 02:01 pm (UTC)Some of the most objectionable aspects of Iran's behavior seem to be the result of tying the state to a religion. Funny that that's what the Right seems to want over here. It didn't work the last 97 times -- it's sure to work this time!
no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 02:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 04:28 pm (UTC)The thing about our church and state is that it's the good old fashioned Church of England (the Episcopalians to you chaps) and if you've got to have a religion attatched to a state, the good old lefty-liberal Church of England is the one you want. All the others are...a bit dogmatic, my dears, and don't like all sorts of things that normal people of the live and let live variety think of a reasonable and decent. (Even the church I was brought up in is a bit dodgy really.)
no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 09:01 pm (UTC)Wrong religion ?
Date: 2007-04-05 09:11 pm (UTC)Where do you come from ?
Texas ?
Re: Wrong religion ?
Date: 2007-04-06 03:38 pm (UTC)calm down.
Ooops !
Date: 2007-04-06 04:47 pm (UTC)I beg your pardon.
no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 02:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 02:17 pm (UTC)None of this is clear-cut, but I'm not certain that they wanted to avoid a limited confrontation, which could have been used as an internal propaganda 'driver'.
But that could be said of a lot of countries.
no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 05:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 06:21 pm (UTC)This way, it seems, in this limited diplomatic engagement, we didn't kill any of their chaps and they didn't kill any of ours.
If one happened to be a general, I think one might just consider that a no score draw, which in reality translates to a win all round.
And on top of that we get to rethink some of our opinions, & they get a bit of breathing space.
Wariness is fine and understandable. But there may be better ways through our present sets of mess than the application of more guns to the equation.
With the new developments between some Arab nations and Israel we might be able to find a way forward without stupid confrontation - but as with all these things, in order to achieve (and compromise) all sides have to moderate themselves and their opinions.
I have a head start on you guys, because I've moved from the hard left, and I have maintained a certain (though erratic) momentum.
If politics is about the art of the possible, surely this is what all sides should be doing - to find the place where we can all live with least discomfort and stepping on toes.
no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 10:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-04-07 06:44 am (UTC)Our Navy and Air Force need something to do while the Army and Marine Corps do most of the work in Iraq.
In that case...
Re: In that case...
Date: 2007-04-07 07:06 am (UTC)Our regime replacement capabilities, without ground troops, however, are next to nil.
no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 04:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 05:25 pm (UTC)Fixed that for you. Check both sides of the story next time.
no subject
Date: 2007-04-05 05:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-04-07 07:07 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-04-07 07:18 pm (UTC)"Too bad they made us look like fools by capturing the moral high ground"
no subject
Date: 2007-04-07 10:49 pm (UTC)The only reason that anyone supports the Iranians is because they don't like us.
The only time the Iranians will have the moral high ground over us is for the 10 minutes between the President ordering the extermination of Iran and it occurring.