Great reporting. Reading between the lines one can sense that people like Gordon either: sympathize with Iran, hate America, hate Israel and Jews, think Iran and America are morally equivalent, or are just so naive and really think if we are just nicer to our enemies than they will be nice back. Scary that Harris falls into the category of not understanding the enemy
Great reporting. Reading between the lines one can sense that people like Gordon either: sympathize with Iran, hate America, hate Israel and Jews, think Iran and America are morally equivalent, or are just so naive and really think if we are just nicer to our enemies than they will be nice back. Scary that Harris falls into the category of not understanding the enemy
What’s the proven template for dealing with enemies in your opinion, that’s actually worked (cost vs benefit) in the past, that we can carry into the future?
Neal gave a great answer. I think that number one you have to be strong when dealing with enemies. The Dems are just too anti-America to defend America. They sympathize with the enemy and our enemies know it.
It’s kinda silly to think there’s a single template for dealing with enemies. Every enemy has different strengths, weaknesses, constraints, and capabilities.
I think it’s easier to make cases about what doesn’t work. Our experience in the Middle East I think demonstrates that military-led forced regime change doesn’t lead to positive outcomes. I think every time we’ve tried to appease enemies it’s led to bigger problems down the line.
Regarding Iran, the motivations of the regime seem to sincerely be religious in nature: kill Jews and expand Islam. If nothing else, it’s hard for a regime to chant “Death to Israel, death to America” and then negotiate in good faith for mutual benefit while maintaining credibility at home.
Let’s spend the next 10 years ideating over solutions. That’ll really get us somewhere. Two simple things, restore the sanctions and make it clear to Iran about the cost if it continues process of acquiring a nuclear weapon.
Great reporting. Reading between the lines one can sense that people like Gordon either: sympathize with Iran, hate America, hate Israel and Jews, think Iran and America are morally equivalent, or are just so naive and really think if we are just nicer to our enemies than they will be nice back. Scary that Harris falls into the category of not understanding the enemy
When has Harris understood anything except going with the flow and saying what is necessary?
What’s the proven template for dealing with enemies in your opinion, that’s actually worked (cost vs benefit) in the past, that we can carry into the future?
Neal gave a great answer. I think that number one you have to be strong when dealing with enemies. The Dems are just too anti-America to defend America. They sympathize with the enemy and our enemies know it.
It’s kinda silly to think there’s a single template for dealing with enemies. Every enemy has different strengths, weaknesses, constraints, and capabilities.
I think it’s easier to make cases about what doesn’t work. Our experience in the Middle East I think demonstrates that military-led forced regime change doesn’t lead to positive outcomes. I think every time we’ve tried to appease enemies it’s led to bigger problems down the line.
Regarding Iran, the motivations of the regime seem to sincerely be religious in nature: kill Jews and expand Islam. If nothing else, it’s hard for a regime to chant “Death to Israel, death to America” and then negotiate in good faith for mutual benefit while maintaining credibility at home.
Yes, you nailed it, it’s easy to say what doesn’t work, and important to recognize. But moving forward requires productive solutions and ideating.
Let’s spend the next 10 years ideating over solutions. That’ll really get us somewhere. Two simple things, restore the sanctions and make it clear to Iran about the cost if it continues process of acquiring a nuclear weapon.