What do you think about Iran conflict?

[Eric7]

It made me annoyed, frustrated, and embarrassed. I didn’t laugh, but of course I’ve got a different passport than you do I believe.

My passports(!) aren't much less embarrassing.

It's hard to think of a western leader that hasn't made a complete mess of everything, with the noteable exceptions of Orban & Fico.
They are of course utterly demonised in the media.

[john_b]

Strange how ‘not making a mess’ seems to involve cosying up to Putin while undermining Ukraine’s right to exist.

If that’s the benchmark, the bar’s on the floor.

Hmmmmm.

[Eric7]

Neither of those things are true, but anyway....

[john_b]

So they’re misunderstood champions of stability who just happen to echo Kremlin talking points from time to time...

Yeah. Right.

[Eric7]

Ok, I'll bite...
Which leaders you do think have promoted stability?
Which ones have balanced the interests of their own countries against the wider agenda?

[Eric7]

More escalation...

The Iranian oil and gas infrastructure at the South Pars and Assaluyeh fields was subjected to attacks by the US and Israel.

Fars News Agency (Iran), citing a military source: "We will strike the enemy's infrastructure after their targeting of the Assaluyeh gas field."

This is going very bad, very fast.
It's probably time to buy some (very expensive) heating oil...

[john_b]

Ok, I'll bite...
Which leaders you do think have promoted stability?
Which ones have balanced the interests of their own countries against the wider agenda?

Depends what we mean by ‘stability’. If it’s the kind that involves weakening institutions, sidelining independent media, and keeping relations cosy with Vladimir Putin while a neighbour is being invaded, then yes — very stable indeed.

You're certainly not alone in your enthusiasm for Orban & Fico (Trump, Alice Weidel, Marine Le Pen, Geert Wilders spring to mind) so clearly that model has its fan club. Although it has to be said that Orban is looking increasingly unpopular at home these days.

Personally I’d put ‘balancing national interests’ a bit closer to supporting allies under attack, maintaining rule-of-law standards, and not redefining ‘stability’ as ‘nothing changes as long as we stay comfortable’.

[Eric7]

You managed to not answer my question(s) while at the same time making some snidey, not so subtle implications. Well done!

At some point, the interests of a sovereign country have to be put before outside interests. Yes, allies should be supported (when it suits*, sorry Don ) but not when it causes extreme, long term damage to a country. You seem to disagree. *shrugs*

* I fully agree with the (current) decision not to support the US in the current madness. Maybe our leaders are finally moving closer to 'balancing the interests of their own countries against the wider agenda'?

[john_b]

Fair enough — let me actually answer you then.

If we’re talking about leaders trying (imperfectly) to balance national interest with wider responsibilities, I’d point to people like Emmanuel Macron, or Donald Tusk — not because they got everything right (far from it), but because they’ve broadly tried to keep their countries stable and uphold alliances, institutions, and the basic idea that borders aren’t changed by force.

Where I struggle is this idea that supporting Ukraine is some kind of optional ‘outside interest’. If a country in Europe can be invaded and carved up, that is the long-term damage — to everyone. At that point ‘national interest’ and ‘wider agenda’ stop being separate things.

And yes, I completely agree about not blindly following the US — but that cuts both ways. If ‘independent thinking’ just happens to align with Vladimir Putin’s preferences, it’s worth asking who actually benefits from that version of ‘balance’. *shrugs*

[Eric7]

Macron!
I think the French people would disagree with you. Out of all the EU leaders, 'Little Napoleon' is widely accepted as being the most 'globalist' and out of touch with what the french actually feel is good for France.

*****deleted - felt a bit patronising*****

Anyway, I don't think we will agree on the other issues (and neither of us will get anything from trying to convince the other) and I don't want to fall out with anyone so let's stick to discussing the actual current events of the Iran conflict.

----

QatarEnergy CEO says the Iranian attack overnight damaged approx. 17% of it's LNG production capacity, and it would take 3-5 years to repair the (current!) damage (with more damage to come being highly likely!).

----

We need a poop emoji.