Sure, why not.

Standing up golf clap to submitter.

FTFA: He says he "welcomes any move to expand ties."

Hrm.

Many Bothans died to bring us this headline.

hmmmmmm
couldnt we build the thing
fill it will like 100 nukes
put a dead man trigger on it
send all the staffers on vacation

"this is our embassy, attacking it is an act of war"
"BOOOOOOOOM"
"we told you so"

GaryPDX:Sure, why not.

Agreed. And with GaryPDX, at that!

easier to have a base of operations for our spies.

These people have some reservations about the idea...

Ed Willy:These people have some reservations about the idea...

I didn't RTFA, but I would see Bush opening one up because he thinks it would be attacked and then there would be war.

Remember "There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again."

namatad:hmmmmmm
couldnt we build the thing
fill it will like 100 nukes
put a dead man trigger on it
send all the staffers on vacation

"this is our embassy, attacking it is an act of war"
"BOOOOOOOOM"
"we told you so"

Nope, just one H-Bomb would be sufficient...and someone would have to play diplomat/bait, like Bruce Willis.

/we win, Gracie!

KABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM

Ed Willy:These people have some reservations about the idea...

I've heard, I might be wrong, that when the hostages were taken, the new Iranian government was like "You did WHAT? Now what do we do with them?"

I doubt that would happen a second time.

Iran: We have missiles and can blow up your embassies if you attack us. See heres pictures.
US: Um whys that one look funny? It looks kind of like that one there. Is this fake?
Iran: ....
US: Yeah ok then, we aren't too worried. We don't think you can reach us.
Iran: Would you be interested in building an embassy in our country?

NickelP:Iran: We have missiles and can blow up your embassies if you attack us. See heres pictures.
US: Um whys that one look funny? It looks kind of like that one there. Is this fake?
Iran: ....
US: Yeah ok then, we aren't too worried. We don't think you can reach us.
Iran: Would you be interested in building an embassy in our country?

Is this a Monty Python sketch?

Recorded by a secret CIA wiretap inside the Iranian Goverment offices:

'The Zionist lapdog's diplomats will be bomb shields, Akbar. The Satanists will dare not bomb us then! They didn't bomb us in 1979 when we did this last time! They will not bomb us now!'

'Excellent idea, Akmed! Let us make friendly overtures to the infidels. They have short memories and will fall for our perfidious trap! We will even consult with our Russian neughbors on how to spy on them'

/"I Kill You!"

CyranoJones:namatad:hmmmmmm
couldnt we build the thing
fill it will like 100 nukes
put a dead man trigger on it
send all the staffers on vacation

"this is our embassy, attacking it is an act of war"
"BOOOOOOOOM"
"we told you so"

Nope, just one H-Bomb would be sufficient...and someone would have to play diplomat/bait, like Bruce Willis.

/we win, Gracie!

Well, that would be suicidal for anyone willing to take the job.

It would be like an American... suicide... bomb...

"I can haz base now?"

//Mr.Wilber, organizer of Operation "Drop Your Pants and Feel My Democracy", Iran 1953.

Bet Halliburton gets the no-bid contract to build it!

Complete with electrified showers!

alienated:Standing up golf clap to submitter.

Gee, my first golf clap (out of 20 greens). I'd like to thank the Academy, my agent and, of course, Admiral Ackbar for inspiring generations with his trap detection wisdom. It's his only job, but he does it so well.

wah wah wah. I'd farking work there

I was really looking forward to this guy turning Kruschev-style crazy into a novelty. He's seemed to cool down over the past few months, and now I'm disappointed.

Were I an employee of the State Dept, I think that is one of the jobs I would pass on.


/"We can't repel extremists of that magnitude..."

67 Beetle:Were I an employee of the State Dept, I think that is one of the jobs I would pass on.

There's a bunch of people that work there that wouldn't pass on this. They've been to Iran. They know Iranians.

They are career diplomats and they understand the importance of diplomacy.

remus:alienated:Standing up golf clap to submitter.

Gee, my first golf clap (out of 20 greens). I'd like to thank the Academy, my agent and, of course, Admiral Ackbar for inspiring generations with his trap detection wisdom. It's his only job, but he does it so well.

Well, he also Redirects Firepower very well. :P

Persepolis:"There's a bunch of people that work there that wouldn't pass on this...They are career diplomats and they understand the importance of diplomacy."

Yeah. I know a couple of State Dept. employees -- one is in Iraq and one is in one of the "-stans" (I forget which). They can have it. I'd prefer something with a little bit less risk of kidnapping/car bombing/sprayed with gunfire.

Maybe Iceland... or Luxembourg.


/but that's just me.

Persepolis:67 Beetle:Were I an employee of the State Dept, I think that is one of the jobs I would pass on.

There's a bunch of people that work there that wouldn't pass on this. They've been to Iran. They know Iranians.

They are career diplomats and they understand the importance of diplomacy.

It certianly looks like now that all countries have done thier Penis-Salute hand-shakes, they're ready to sit down and talk seriously. This kind of backs up everything you've been saying pretty nicely.

I don't think we need to worry about the Embassy with troops accross the borders; something like that happens and Maliki wouldn't have a choice but to let us launch from there.

67 Beetle:Yeah. I know a couple of State Dept. employees -- one is in Iraq and one is in one of the "-stans" (I forget which). They can have it. I'd prefer something with a little bit less risk of kidnapping/car bombing/sprayed with gunfire.

I'd much rather be in Iran than Iraq or Afghanistan. That's for damn sure.

Ed Willy:These people have some reservations about the idea...

How do you know?

CanisNoir:It certianly looks like now that all countries have done thier Penis-Salute hand-shakes, they're ready to sit down and talk seriously. This kind of backs up everything you've been saying pretty nicely.


$400 Million dollars (new window) in covert operations funding at the end of 2007 and things are just going to quiet down?

Hopefully, but I have doubts.

FTFA: 'the U.S. hasn't had any diplomatic presence in Tehran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution and hostage-taking at the U.S. Embassy there.'

If that POS Carter had the gonads God gave him he would have told
those terrorists that if they did not release the hostages bombing
would commence in 30 minutes.

And Obama is nothing more than Jimmy Carter, Jr.

Why are there no suicide bombings in Iran?

Bloody William:
It would be like an American... suicide... bomb...

But would Fox News call it an American homicide bomb?

==============================

that_other_internet:$400 Million dollars in covert operations funding at the end of 2007 and things are just going to quiet down?

Hopefully, but I have doubts.

Yeah, that pisses me off to no end too-- Bush is actually giving taxpayer money and supplies to widely recognized TERRORIST organizations!

In other words, to make life a little more difficult for Iran, we are now doing EXACTLY what we're accusing the Iranians of doing.

As a result, innocent Iranian civilians are getting killed by U.S. sponsored terrorist attacks.

As far as evil things Bush has done goes, I think funding terrorist attacks against Iranian civilians is right up there with his pro-torture policy.

=====================

mfaby:If that POS Carter had the gonads God gave him he would have told
those terrorists that if they did not release the hostages bombing
would commence in 30 minutes.

It's amazing to see that there are people who are so amazingly stupid they would gladly start a war over 52 hostages.

And not some minor skirmish, either. We're talking a major war killing hundreds of thousands if not millions of people. A major war disrupting much of the world's oil supply causing global chaos. A major war that would probably gotten the Soviets involved and maybe started WWIII. A major war just after Vietnam, when our army and navy were at its lowest point of morale and readiness ever.

All over 52 hostages that were eventually released unharmed anyway.


Now THAT takes a special kind of stupid.

Persepolis:67 Beetle:Were I an employee of the State Dept, I think that is one of the jobs I would pass on.

There's a bunch of people that work there that wouldn't pass on this. They've been to Iran. They know Iranians.

They are career diplomats and they understand the importance of diplomacy.

I wouldn't pass on it. It's one of the reasons I started taking Farsi classes, in case something like this would happen. I'd feel safer in Iran than I would in Turkey, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, or Jordan.

FTA: Iranian state TV is quoting President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as saying Iran would welcome the idea of setting up a U.S. diplomatic office in Tehran.

He can want it all he wants, but it's not his decision there. In fact, the only things he decides are what comes out of his mouth.

mfaby:If that POS Carter had the gonads God gave him he would have told
those terrorists that if they did not release the hostages bombing
would commence in 30 minutes.

And the hostages might have died.

Yeah, huff-huff, time to talk like a badass when it comes to diplomacy!

Riche:
My good lord man, have you know decency? How dare you trouble us good Americans with the facts of United States government sponsored terror.

I don't dare worry my beautiful mind about the women and children we are killing to provoke a war, you shouldn't either.

mfaby: FTFA: 'the U.S. hasn't had any diplomatic presence in Tehran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution and hostage-taking at the U.S. Embassy there.'

If that POS Carter had the gonads God gave him he would have told
those terrorists that if they did not release the hostages bombing
would commence in 30 minutes.

And Obama is nothing more than the next President

methinks one knows not his history.

/Iran Contra was orchestrated by the Democratic Congress, correct?

Devil Slide Wolf: /Iran Contra was orchestrated by the Democratic Congress, correct?

Seriously? You're saying Congress orchestrate covert military action, and not the commander in chief?

/I could be wrong, but I always thought that was the Pentagon's dealie.

Persepolis: Devil Slide Wolf: /Iran Contra was orchestrated by the Democratic Congress, correct?

Seriously? You're saying Congress orchestrate covert military action, and not the commander in chief?

/I could be wrong, but I always thought that was the Pentagon's dealie.

Yup, that was certianly a Pentagon deal.

As for the 400 Million; I'm not too pleased with money going to the one group mentioned in the link, but I don't think it surprises anyone that we support and work activly for a Regime Change internally. They send Quds over, we go over and grab Quds, I don't think that will endanger anything at this point.

They wouldn't.
Would they?
Probably.

CanisNoir: but I don't think it surprises anyone that we support and work activly for a Regime Change internally.

Well I do have two qualms with it.

First off, meaningful regime change MUST come from within. That means we can make the situation conducive to regime change, but oncee we get more involved that that, then the whole thing is ruined. It'll be like the Shah all over again.

Secondly, we lose the moral high ground. It would make our disapproval of their funding of proxies hypocritical.

CanisNoir: I don't think it surprises anyone that we support and work activly for a Regime Change internally.

I cannot believe our leaders are stupid enough to publicly disclose that we are funding all sorts of groups in Iran. I can't help but think that thousands of people were arrested in Iran because of this information, some of whom won't ever be seen again.

wolvernova: CanisNoir: I don't think it surprises anyone that we support and work activly for a Regime Change internally.

I cannot believe our leaders are stupid enough to publicly disclose that we are funding all sorts of groups in Iran. I can't help but think that thousands of people were arrested in Iran because of this information, some of whom won't ever be seen again.

I doubt the administration wanted this information public; it doesn't look good for them and as Persepolis pointed out it makes our presence there obvious.

Persepolis
True, we can't be seen to be putting a puppet regime in place, but I don't think its a surprise nor a game-loser that we're giving aid in the form of money to certian groups.

/I'm not to pleased with the fact that one of those groups might have ties to Al Queda though.

CanisNoir: As for the 400 Million; I'm not too pleased with money going to the one group mentioned in the link, but I don't think it surprises anyone that we support and work activly for a Regime Change internally. They send Quds over, we go over and grab Quds, I don't think that will endanger anything at this point.

Well, some may see this as hypocritical as far as the stated purpose of the US foreign policy in Iran. The US takes a hardline stance against Iran because of its potential to provide substantial aid and support to terrorist organizations. Meanwhile, the US is providing substantial support to terrorist organizations within Iran.

Alone, this would be disturbing, but in conjunction with the known and documented history of covert operations sponsored by the US within Iran, it would represent something far more sinister and difficult to justify.

Operation Ajax in 1953 appeared to the public to be very similar to the buildup in tensions we are seeing today. Collusion between the media (BBC) propaganda and the CIA/MI6's support/execution of violent operations against the Iranian populace combined to create a very powerful influence on public opinion. Again, this is only what was released by the government itself. There is the potential that the extent of operations contained far worse offenses against what most would consider basic morality and respect for life.

The parallels shouldn't be ignored or dismissed especially with the young monarch of Iran making a play for attention. I think that's very serious. The last time a monarch was used to depose a democratically elected leader in Iran there was serious blowback in the form of an anti-American Islamic fundamentalist Ayatollah.

The stakes seem to be even higher now. The US owes a trillion dollars in debt to China, the inevitably rising economic superpower. On the one hand, it is vital to secure all oil resources because the US dollar and economy is no longer a valid assurance of US' ability to pay their debts. That's a matter of self preservation that although blatantly immoral is understandable. On the other hand, China would likely not allow the US to have such control over its economic interests. Without oil, China's ownership of 1 trillion dollars in US debt will mean nothing if the US can influence the supply of oil. China may not take all of this sitting down.

CanisNoir: but I don't think its a surprise nor a game-loser that we're giving aid in the form of money to certian groups.

All I'm saying is look at our track record for giving aid in the form of money to certain groups in the middle east for short term, quick fixes.

that_other_internet said exactly what I was trying to say.

But, in much better form.