UK wasn't prepared - and initially failed?

[Gunny]

This all comes down to mindsets. The psychology involved. Particularly - the perception held in my part of the world that ending the Iran nuke deal was an extremely bad move, and that Trump needs to do a 180 degree turn and re-institute it, pronto.

The EU (and to a degree, the UK) holds to the position that the deal needs to be saved. Whether from purely pragmatic motivations or out of an actual 'sympathy' for Iran, what all the powers in my region want is for things to be smoothed over, defused.

[We've seen sympathy-pieces on BBC News, detailing how the 'poor Iranians' are suffering, thanks to 'aggressive' sanctions they are a 'victim' of ....]

On the one hand, they can't view the seizure of the British tanker as something to take a tolerant view over. On the other, they're still scrambling around for diplomatic answers, because they hope that just to be seen doing that may get Tehran to see us more favourably.

In the UK's case, though .. I'm sure Iran views us as a more natural ally of the US, and weaker, therefore, ripe for picking on.

On the UK side - and, critically - we're hamstrung by our 'PC' climate, which has us forever finding ways to defer to other cultures and be 'enlightened' enough to be 'hyper-receptive' to what they'll say.

Our own psychology is, thanks to long-term social conditioning (from the Left !), disgustingly weak.

So here we are, in a political soup, driven to weakness, some of it entirely home-grown.

If, by some miracle, all of this IS resolved through diplomacy, will we be alert to future belligerence from Iran ? We'll be aware of the possibility of it, BUT, there'll be a lot of back-slapping congratulations because ours will be domestically seen as the 'far better, more civilised and decent' answer to a crisis. Precious few people are going to see our approach as weak, therefore, wrong-headed: indeed, we'll probably wonder why Trump can't 'be more civilised' and 'tolerant' of Iran in future.

This is what chiefly infuriates me ! We absolutely WILL NOT LEARN, UNLESS FORCED TO.

My opinion. I don't get why the EU/UK are so dead-set on living up to a one-sided deal that only slows down the process of Iran getting nukes. Is Chamberlain doing its thinking for it? The picture of "Peace in our time" is infamous; yet, pointless if the lesson isn't learned. THAT is stupid.

Iran is going to have to be dealt with. It isn't going away nor is there an "Abraham Lincoln" waiting in the wings to take over. It is going to have to be dealt with by force. I see zero reason to ensure they have armed themselves to the teeth and becoming a formidable opponent when they can be stopped NOW.

Other side of the coin: I was against and am still against Trump bullying so-called "allies" into who they can and cannot deal with. Trump pulled out of the deal and I'm completely fine with that. However, he/we/the US doesn't own the world. The whole point to all these useless organizations is to get a consensus that is best for everyone, not just one Nation. I don't like them either, but let's not pretend to be friends with these other countries if all we are going to do is tell them what to do.

F*ck Iran. And since I forgot earlier in the thread, REALLY f*ck France. That puss-hole probably would surrender to itself.

I am all for supporting the UK if it chooses to act. But the UK is going to have to choose and quit riding the fence because I'm not for saving Europe from itself. Again. They're already trying to get out of the EU.

This whole mess is a bunch of horseshit because our previous President. When one has the power to rule the world, one must use that power wisely. Not waste it kissing ass to a Nation of criminals just to go against everything the US stood for up to that point.

[Drummond]

My opinion. I don't get why the EU/UK are so dead-set on living up to a one-sided deal that only slows down the process of Iran getting nukes. Is Chamberlain doing its thinking for it? The picture of "Peace in our time" is infamous; yet, pointless if the lesson isn't learned. THAT is stupid.

Iran is going to have to be dealt with. It isn't going away nor is there an "Abraham Lincoln" waiting in the wings to take over. It is going to have to be dealt with by force. I see zero reason to ensure they have armed themselves to the teeth and becoming a formidable opponent when they can be stopped NOW.

Other side of the coin: I was against and am still against Trump bullying so-called "allies" into who they can and cannot deal with. Trump pulled out of the deal and I'm completely fine with that. However, he/we/the US doesn't own the world. The whole point to all these useless organizations is to get a consensus that is best for everyone, not just one Nation. I don't like them either, but let's not pretend to be friends with these other countries if all we are going to do is tell them what to do.

F*ck Iran. And since I forgot earlier in the thread, REALLY f*ck France. That puss-hole probably would surrender to itself.

I am all for supporting the UK if it chooses to act. But the UK is going to have to choose and quit riding the fence because I'm not for saving Europe from itself. Again. They're already trying to get out of the EU.

This whole mess is a bunch of horseshit because our previous President. When one has the power to rule the world, one must use that power wisely. Not waste it kissing ass to a Nation of criminals just to go against everything the US stood for up to that point.

I think it comes down to naivety, and the enormous damage the Left has done, over decades, to our thinking. They've made it a part of our culture to see others in a 'kind', 'deferential', so-called 'understanding' way .. often in complete defiance of commonsense.

Many people here have a misguided faith that Iran cannot be the 'villain' ... in the accepted sense. They think that talk of them being that is propagandist. We see very much the same thing in the way so many people see Islamic terrorists as 'extremists', in no way representative of 'more enlightened, mainstream' Islam. We could be nuked to hell and back by Muslim terrorists, but still, remarkably few people would see Islam as being at fault.

Tehran's regime will be seen as not being 'quite like us'. But talk of their being warmongers, wholesale terrorist enablers, belligerent in the extreme ... a lot of people take that with a pinch of salt. Always, you see, the equivocation arguments are seen to have weight to them. Have Trump sound off against the threat Iran poses ... and many here won't take it literally. They'll be seen to be the victims of Trump's hostility, with their 'poor people suffering' because of him.

When Obama rounded on the UK, both over the BP oil spill, and his insistence that we must remain in the EU or be put to the back of the queue for trade deals, the reactions were of sheer shock, both because of his arrogant judgmentality and his willingness to dictate to us from a position of hostility. People LIKED Obama here. Obama himself joked that he was better liked abroad than at home; I think he was right.

Trump's seen as the polar opposite to him, so, he's painted as extreme, bigoted, not to be automatically believed. Recent commentary has been united in condemnation for his 'racism' ... nobody sees any other side to the argument than that.

So with Iran: few here think the painting of Iran as being a great threat is accurate, and thinking here is that diplomacy is likely to work because, at heart, Iranian regime members are 'reasonable' thinkers, reacting to sanctions they're a 'victim' of.

We have a lot to learn. Leftie equivocation propaganda holds sway here, and I think we'll need to understand the truth of Iran's hostility the hard way. Jeremy Hunt is one figure who clearly needs to learn. I believe his 'extreme disappointment' with Iran over the tanker seizure isn't just diplomacy talking: he means what he says. He doesn't comprehend Iran as the enemy power it is.