136
yup (thelemmy.club)
submitted 6 days ago by to c/memes@hexbear.net
19 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

is there a better comm?

all 19 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 19 points 6 days ago (18 children)

I feel like the site is not properly dealing with the fact that the explicit Iranian strategy is to cause a big Dem wave election this year.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
    •
  • [–] 25 points 6 days ago (3 children)

    The Iranian strategy is to make Trump, the guy who pressed the big red war button, look stupid and to position themselves better and more aggressively, regardless of American domestic politics.

    Have we actually seen anything from the Iranian leadership claiming they want a blue wave in the midterms? If not I would quibble with your use of the word “explicitly”

    I think it’s a little America-centric to think they’re explicitly invested in the opposition party winning. Especially considering there are plenty of Democrats who thirst for Iranian blood. Whether the Dems win or not, the Iranians will be in a stronger negotiating position after the midterms. That’s the point of their strategy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 5 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
    •
  • [–] 3 points 5 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
    •
  • [–] 2 points 5 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
  • [–] 12 points 6 days ago (3 children)

    You just did the "People in Gaza were begging Americans to vote for Kamala" argument.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    I don’t really see that.

    I’m sure they’d probably prefer Trump to be gone but the Dems are not their friends. Most major Dems are saying they want the war to be prosecuted in a more responsible way, not that they want it to stop.

    I think Irans strategy is firmly centered on maintaining control of the strait of Hormuz and negotiating via facts on the ground rather than political dealings.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

    I don't think there's much hope for a change in strategy, even if the leadership was all dem, but they must be taking into account the fact that with the dems they could at least pretend to reach some sort of agreement, giving them a bit of breathing space

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent