MetaFilter posts tagged with us and Iran

Everything you know about U.S. involvement in Iran is wrong

lenny70 — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:54:37 -0800

The Great Satan Myth. We have discussed the US supported coup of 1953 on MeFi before. Now, Abbas Milani, provides some more context to the complex relationship of the two countries.

Once, sure. Twice, Maybe. Three? Four!?!

Dillonlikescookies — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 17:51:56 -0800

Much of the Middle East has been without reliable internet access recently due to the somewhat suspicious cutting of four seperate underwater cables, in seperate locations, within a few days of each other. The problem has been alleviated by re-routing of traffic until ships can reach the cables to repair them, a process which may take several weeks. The problem was initially believed to be caused by anchors of passing ships, but that has since been retracted and deals have already been signed by several companies for new cables. Without knowledge of the complex infrastructure we can’t really ascertain how unlikely four separate cables having near simultaneous problems is – but many are treating it as suspicious considering recent news. Personally, I think things may have been blown out of proportion by the limited information we have, although it was believed that Iran had been isolated by a single disabled router this is plain untrue and given the redundancies inherent in internet infrastructure it would be difficult if not impossible to fully cut off a country, but that is not to understate the consequences of these problems. On a related note, Iran has recently announced plans to move to trade oil with the Euro rather than the US dollar, which will cause further devaluing of the greenback. Saddam Hussein was in the process of doing the same before the US invasion, a decision reversed by the occupying force. Some are interpreting this as signs of an “info war” and while I don’t subscribe to the analysis, I find it interesting to consider the idea that in an age where increasingly large amounts of money can be attributed to companies based on estimated worth of intangible assets such as human networks and brand identities, the idea that you have to physically invade a country to do it economic damage is becoming outdated. There has been a documented shift towards “proxy war and if one agrees on the existence of this trend then more abstract forms of conflict between powers seem to be a likely follow up. If you do buy into the “information war” analysis there is ample fodder in the media, but more interestingly rumours of a theoretical invasion plan hint at a sophisticated attack not necessarily limited to military action. Indeed, Several large governments, such as the US, are spending increasing amounts of their military budget on more abstract forms of warfare (pdf) Again, although I don’t subscribe to this view, I find it interesting to consider as a growing trend a shift from conventional war to proxy war to purely economic warfare as engaging in open hostilities with any country becomes increasingly risky from a game theory point of view. See Also.

"You will explode after two minutes".

nthdegx — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 01:01:30 -0800

"Video of Iran ‘attack’ on three US warships released by Pentagon"

All is forgiven, tout est oublie.

psmealey — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 11:28:47 -0800

Sarko l'Americain addresses US Congress. French President Nicolas Sarkozy has told the US Congress it can count on France's support against terrorism in Afghanistan and Iran's nuclear plan. [Full Text here PDF]. Here also, is a recent take on Franco-American relations From the French and Indian Wars, to the American Revolution, the French Revolution, the Louisiana Purchase, World War I, World War II, the Vietnam War<>, the Cold War and through de Gaulle, Giscard-d'Estaing, Mitterrand, Chirac and Freedom Fries, there has never been a dull moment in this long and complicated relationship between two of the world's great powers.

What next with Iran?

Dasein — Sun, 19 Nov 2006 12:38:03 -0800

Dealing with Iran after Rumsfeld. Seymour Hersh details the ongoing debate over how to deal with Iran's nuclear program. There's something here for everyone to worry about.

For sometime now I have been thinking

blacklite — Tue, 09 May 2006 15:58:54 -0800

Yesterday, the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, wrote a letter to the President of the United States of America, George W. Bush. Here it is. (Courtesy Le Monde, 8 page PDF, English.) The letter has been "dismissed by its recipients as a rambling philosophical treatise." (Times) Further coverage at NYT and Le Monde (French). The letter ends 27 years of diplomatic silence.

What are the US and Israel really afraid of in Iran?

y2karl — Wed, 06 Oct 2004 22:16:29 -0800

What are the US and Israel really afraid of in Iran?
From Political Theory Daily Review

The inertia of technology

four panels — Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:10:08 -0800

Was Iraq always about Iran? Iran turns toward the United States, again.

Persian, U.S. blogospheres come together

hoder — Thu, 01 May 2003 14:49:20 -0800

Persian, Amercian blogospheres come together after an Iranian blogger, Sina Motallebi, was detained by Iranian regime. OJR's Mark Glaser has the story. BTW, sign the "Release Sina" petition if you haven't.

Postroad — Sun, 21 Apr 2002 06:24:55 -0800

America Can Persuade Israel to Make a Just Peace An op-ed piece by former president Jimmy Carter that is going to get a lot of play in the media. Unfortunately, Mr. Carter seems to suggest a rather easy solution: give back the Palestinian lands and have the Palestinians recognize Israel's right to exist. Put the pressure on Israel by withhold financial aid till they do as we bid. Problem: Palestinians being subsidized by Iraq, Iran, EU and Syria. What about pressure on them? And: Palelstinian issues still in need of resolving: capital and Right of Return....with this left out, we are still not going to get peace. Does Carter simplify or is he on target? reg reqd.