HarryLime comments on yup

[–] HarryLime@hexbear.net 3 points 3 days ago* (2 children)

You're ignoring history. The Iranian government went out of its way to undermine and humiliate Jimmy Carter in the first few years of its existence. Doing the same to Donald Trump would force every subsequent American president to factor in that aggression against Iran led to the political demise of two prior presidents, thus making them more secure. It's perfectly logical, and has nothing to do with whether the Democrats are better or not.

I think it’s a little America-centric to think they’re explicitly invested in the opposition party winning.

Dude, they're at war with America. Of course the internal politics of the country they're at war with are a factor in their strategic calculations. It would be malpractice for it not to be.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] LaBellaLotta@hexbear.net 3 points 3 days ago (1 child)

Ok but the last part here sounds like you’re still looking at this through the eyes of an American. They went out of their way to humiliate the CURRENT AMERICAN PRESIDENT AT THAT TIME. WHO he is or his political affiliation were secondary considerations.

Your response implies that Iran is making strategic calculation and triangulation based on the specific political terrain of the U.S. atleast the second part does.

I would argue that their goal is much more general upheaval of the U.S. political system. Every subsequent American president is going to factor in the Iranians ability to upend their political mandate regardless of party affiliation. They arguably already were until the current admin.

The Iranians want the most advantageous deal they can get. They do not care if they get it from a Republican or Democratic administration.

Forgive me if I’m misunderstanding you but your comment implies they are specifically pursuing a Democratic victory and i respectfully disagree. That may be the net effect, but that doesn’t mean that the intention is a Democratic landslide.

They want AMERICA to respect their national sovereignty, I’m sure they couldn’t care less whether it’s the red team or blue team that ultimately capitulates. It’s all Americans as far as they are concerned.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] HarryLime@hexbear.net 2 points 3 days ago

Ok but the last part here sounds like you’re still looking at this through the eyes of an American. They went out of their way to humiliate the CURRENT AMERICAN PRESIDENT AT THAT TIME. WHO he is or his political affiliation were secondary considerations.

That doesn't make any sense. They helped ensure that Carter would be replaced by someone from the other party, and even made secret deals with Reagan, who sold them weapons in return for hostages. But somehow, this...didn't matter? It didn't factor into their calculus that Carter would be humiliated by having someone from the other party come to power, and that that wouldn't factor into their calculations now?

Your response implies that Iran is making strategic calculation and triangulation based on the specific political terrain of the U.S. atleast the second part does.

I'm not implying it, I'm saying it outright.

I would argue that their goal is much more general upheaval of the U.S. political system. Every subsequent American president is going to factor in the Iranians ability to upend their political mandate regardless of party affiliation. They arguably already were until the current admin.

That doesn't contradict what I'm saying. They ensured that Carter and the Democrats would suffer a humiliating defeat and now they're doing the same to Trump and the Republicans. Every president after Trump is going to have to consider those consequences, regardless of what party they belong to. They are specifically encouraging a democratic party victory in this case, but would do the opposite if, say, Kamala were overseeing this war. It's not that hard to understand.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent