Tangle - What should the U.S. do about Iran?

Episode Date: November 16, 2023

Iran. Since Hamas's attack on Israel, U.S. politicians and pundits have been debating how the United States should position its foreign policy toward Iran.You can read today's podcast ⁠⁠here⁠⁠, our “Under the Radar” story here, and today’s “Have a nice day” story here. You can also check out our latest video, last Friday’s paywalled piece about how Israel has no good options here and the controversial debate we posted on YouTube here.Today’s clickables: Two announcements (0:49), Quick hits (2:01), Today’s story (4:20), Left’s take (6:55), Right’s take (10:24), Isaac’s take (14:02), Listener question (18:13), Under the Radar (21:38), Numbers (22:17), Have a nice day (23:12)You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Take the poll. What do you think should be the U.S. military policy towards Iran? Let us know!Our podcast is written by Isaac Saul and edited and engineered by Jon Lall. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Will Kaback, Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, and produced in conjunction with Tangle’s social media manager Magdalena Bokowa, who also created our logo.--- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tanglenews/message Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight.

Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. Breaking news happens anywhere, anytime. Police have warned the protesters repeatedly, get back. CBC News brings the story to you as it happens. Hundreds of wildfires are burning. Be the first to know what's going on and what that means for you and for Canadians. This situation has changed very quickly.

Helping make sense of the world when it matters most. Stay in the know. CBC News. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to

your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca. From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle Podcast, the place where we get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of my take. I'm your host, Isaac Saul, and on today's episode, we're going to be talking about Iran, specifically what the United States'

policy towards Iran should be going forward. There's been a lot of commentary about this because of what's happening in Israel and more generally, how the Republican candidates in the GOP debate are talking about Iranian policy going forward. Before we jump in, two quick heads ups. One, we have a new video on our YouTube channel about what's happening in Israel. It was a subscribers-only piece of content in the newsletter that we turned into a video. So if you want to get that for free, you can go to Tangle News and check it out. It's a video about why I believe Israel has no good options going forward. And two, a quick heads up that in tomorrow's subscribers-only Friday edition,

we're going to be releasing a transcript of a conversation I had with an economist named Ben Miller, who is convinced that a recession is coming, a kind of heterodox view on where the economy actually is right now. So it's a pretty interesting conversation. If you want to check that out, you can go to readtangle.com forward slash member and become a member. Don't forget, we have over 12,000 paying members to Tangle, and they are the reason why we can do what we do. Tangle memberships make up over 90% of our revenue. So if you've got $4.16 a month to spare, you can become a Tangle member for just $50 a year and help support our work. All right, with that out of the way, we're going to jump in with some quick hits.

First up, the Senate passed a stopgap funding bill on an 87 to 11 vote, averting a government shutdown until at least early 2024. Number two, President Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping met in person for four hours in San Francisco. The two reportedly discussed fentanyl production and military ties. Number three, Senator Joe Manchin, the Democrat from West Virginia, told NBC News he would consider running for president. Separately, New Hampshire continues to defy the Democratic Party's plan to shift its first primary to South Carolina, setting its own primary for January 23rd. Number four, Israel and Hamas are negotiating a ceasefire with talks centered around how many days Israel would allow a ceasefire in exchange for the release of hostages. And number five, New Jersey First Lady Tammy Murphy announced she is running for Senator Bob Menendez's seat in 2024. Menendez, a Democrat,

is facing a federal indictment for accepting bribes. For the third time in just over two weeks, the U.S. has launched another round of airstrikes in Syria against Iran's revolutionary guards and other Iranian-backed groups, this time with possible casualties. One of the largest financial backers and supporters of Hamas is Iran. And although the Biden administration has said no intelligence shows that Iran approved or greenlit the October 7th Hamas attacks on Israel, the relationship between Iran and Hamas is strong and lasting.

It was very important to send a very clear message to anyone who might seek to take advantage of the conflict in Gaza to threaten our personnel here or anywhere else in the region. Don't do it. I made very clear that the attacks, the threats coming from militia that are aligned with Iran are totally unacceptable. And we will take every necessary step to protect our people. We're not looking for conflict with Iran. We've made that very clear. But we'll do what's necessary to protect our personnel, be they military or civilian.

Since Hamas' attack on Israel, U.S. politicians and pundits have been debating how the United States should position its foreign policy towards Iran. A quick reminder, Iran and Israel are former allies whose relationship soured after the pro-Islamic Iranian revolution in 1979. Iran and Israel have never been in direct war, but Iran's proxies, the armed militant groups that work on behalf of certain states, are active throughout Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Bahrain, and Yemen. Central to much of their activity is the Sunni-Shia divide in the Muslim world, which is especially relevant in the rift between Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shia Iran. Hamas, the group that executed the attack against Israel, is an offshoot of Egypt's Muslim

Brotherhood and is actually a Sunni group. However, it has received funding and training from Iran due to their shared interests in destroying Israel. Speculation about Iran's role in the attack has run rampant, sparked in part by a Wall Street Journal article accusing Iranian leadership of helping to plan it. While Iran denied the role in planning the attack, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei praised it. We kissed the hands of those who planned the attack on the Zionist regime, he said. The Zionist regime's own actions are to blame for this disaster. At the same time, the United States has long been navigating a rocky relationship with Iran as evidenced over the past decade by repeated efforts to strike a lasting deal that would limit

its nuclear arms development. The United States has also had competing interests with Iran in the Middle East for decades and has spent the last few weeks bombing Iranian proxies in Syria after those groups targeted U.S. troops in Iraq. Hezbollah, an Iranian proxy group in Lebanon, has also been firing rockets into Israel. Then last week, candidates brought the issue of Iran onto center stage during the third Republican debate. The entire field of candidates, save for Vivek Ramaswamy, made the case that the Biden administration should implement far stiffer policies against Iran. Senator Tim Scott, the Republican from South Carolina who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, explicitly called for bombing Iran. Former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley,

a Republican, called for bombing Iranian infrastructure any time an Iranian proxy group struck U.S. troops in Iraq or Syria. The attacks in Israel and the GOP candidates' positions have set off a wave of debate about how the U.S. should approach Iran going forward. Today, we're going to share some opinions from the left and the right, and then my take. We'll be right back after this quick commercial break. First up, we'll start with what the left is saying. The left is concerned about the prospect of war with Iran, but thinks that outcome is still avoidable. Some say the U.S. should focus its efforts on supporting the Iranian people who want to change their country from within.

Others question Republicans' rhetoric in support of a war with Iran. In Bloomberg, James Stavridis outlined what the U.S. should do about Iran. Iran is increasingly likely to push Israel and the U.S., and I'd say the chances of a serious attack by Iran have risen uncomfortably high to over 20%. It could close the Strait of Hormuz, spike oil prices, and move forward in unpredictable ways, especially with two U.S. carrier strike groups, multiple Air Force attack aircraft squadrons, and an expeditionary Marine strike group on station today. Direct combat between U.S. and Iranian forces is not out of the question. If Iran decides to lash out, either through more proxy activity, notably from Hezbollah, or even directly, Biden

will be receiving a detailed list of options to take in response. These options include cyber attacks conducted by U.S. Cyber Command, special forces operations against Hezbollah, long strikes, and airstrikes to destroy Iranian infrastructure in the Gulf. These actions would not produce significant collateral civilian damage, but would have both deep military effect and crippling economic impact. In The Hill, Seema Sabet asks, what is America's plan B against Iran? The most significant principle that American decision makers need to formally recognize is this. There is no possibility of interaction, cooperation, or behavior change within the Iranian

government. The death of this fantasy or optimism in American foreign policy is a prerequisite for any breakthrough or alternative solution, Sabet said. America's understanding of Iranian reality needs to be updated. The tactics of Iran's government against America over the last four decades have evolved, and the dynamics of changes within Iranian society have been very fluid. Although the Islamic Republic is a natural enemy of America, the people of Iran are naturally friends of America and the West. Various American administrations, to the extent that their eyes are on agreements with the Iranian government, have not seriously supported the people who wish to change their fate. Therefore, instead of exhausting and low-yield talks with a stubborn enemy, America should have a comprehensive strategy to support the people of Iran and

the opponents of the Islamic Republic. In the Daily Beast, Ben Burgess criticized Republican presidential candidates who were warming to the idea of war with Iran. At the GOP debate last week, it was surprising how eager some of these people seemed to be to start a war with Iran, Burgess wrote. Even if you don't care about the ocean of death and suffering this would bring to Iranian civilians just trying to live their lives, how many Americans would die or come home physically or psychologically broken by the time it was all over? And at a time of broad American support for Israel saying, hey, let's at least make sure this doesn't escalate into a broader war would make them look like maybe they weren't waving those flags hard enough. Donald Trump, who's creaming all of these

people in the polls, is no better. This is the guy who, last time he was in office, ripped up Barack Obama's Iran nuclear deal, assassinated Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, and brought us closer to the war Haley wants than we've been in decades. Whatever else you want to say about this, one thing everyone should stop saying forever is that any of these people are anti-war. All right, that is it for what the left is saying, which brings us to what the right is saying. The right is warming to the idea of a preemptive military action against Iran.

Some argue that by allowing Israel to destroy Hamas without any constraints, the U.S. can do a blow to Iran's standing in the region. Others say Republicans should back off their hawkish posturing about starting another war. The Wall Street Journal editorial board said Iran isn't impressed by the U.S. response to its proxy attacks. The war in the Middle East could still morph into a larger regional conflict, and the Biden administration is calibrating its actions to manage that risk. But the confounding reality is that President Biden's weak responses to attacks on U.S. forces aren't deterring Iran and its proxies, which increases the risk of escalation, the board said. The surgical U.S. military strikes and response aren't making Tehran think twice about hitting American troops. The central fact is that Iranian proxies are now routinely trying to kill American

service members abroad, while the U.S. is responding by shooting at ammunition. The militias will continue to do this, and eventually they may succeed. The Biden administration has been touting its addition of air defenses to the region, and an Ohio-class submarine is lurking in the neighborhood. But what's the point of military assets if America's enemies don't fear that the U.S. will use them? In the New York Post, Avi Melamad argued that the U.S. should exploit the tensions within Iran's alliances. Hamas's war exposed tensions between members of the Axis of Resistance. Hezbollah and the Iraqi militias disliked, to say the least, the fact Hamas initiated the war without consulting them. Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, for their part,

do not hide their ire and frustration that the axis of resistance does not stand by them with its full military capacities. Anger at Hamas in the Arab world is skyrocketing, Malmad said. The unification of the arenas Hamas marketed to the Palestinians turned out to be an empty promise. In response, the U.S. should deal a severe blow to Iran's axis by allowing Israel to collapse Hamas' control in Gaza while damaging Iran's military capabilities in Syria. By ending Hamas' rule in Gaza, not only would the most insurmountable obstacle to peacefully ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict be removed, it would also significantly diminish Tehran's ability to continue fueling the flames of the conflict. And it would provide momentum and conditions for stability in the region, Melnai

wrote. Ending Hamas's rule in Gaza and smashing Tehran's land corridor in Syria, proving the Unify the Arena's narrative to be false, will substantially disrupt Tehran's master plan. Be the first to know what's going on and what that means for you and for Canadians. This situation has changed very quickly. Helping make sense of the world when it matters most. Stay in the know. CBC News. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases.

What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages 6 months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca. In Reason, Eric Bohm wrote about the pivot to bombing Iran by Republican politicians.

After two debates full of promises to bomb Mexico, the Republican presidential candidates turned their eyes toward a more traditional target for saber-rattling. Iran, Boehm said. None of the candidates grappled with the most relevant question regarding the Iranian-backed militia strikes on American troops in Iraq and Syria. Why are American troops on the ground in Iraq and Syria in the first place? Surely, a better way to protect those American lives would be to remove them from a place where they are at risk and where they might draw America into a broader war with Iran. When he was president, Trump's foreign policy toward Iran was noteworthy for his relative restraint, so much so that notorious Iran hawk John Bolton fumed for

years about how Trump thwarted his plans to start another Middle Eastern war, Bohm added. Other candidates looking to stand out in the Republican field ought to remember that the GOP primary voters have favored foreign policy restraint, not dangerous threats to start new foreign wars. Alright, that is it for the left and the right are saying, which brings us to my take. So let me first start with a little bit of humility here. I genuinely don't know the best path forward. Consider the basic facts. Iranian leaders continue to call for the destruction of Israel and death to America. They fund proxy groups across the Middle East that worsen civil

and religious wars in the Muslim and Arab world and directly undermined the interests of the U.S. and other Western governments. They continue to stockpile uranium in order to develop a nuclear weapon, though of course we've been hearing that for years. And perhaps most importantly, the Iranian people continue to live under an oppressive, corrupt regime that affords them little freedom and can't support its citizens with basic necessities. To put that differently, the current situation is bad for everyone in almost every way. One thing that strikes me about commentary on this issue is that it is led by a lot of the same people I've been commenting on in shaping U.S. policy for decades. Those people, collectively, have put us in the position we are in today, but they're also among the most informed on the region's dynamics, so it is hard to know who to trust. Fundamentally, though, there are two things

I feel pretty confident about. First, advocating for a direct war with Iran should be absolutely disqualifying for any presidential candidate or politician. In 2019, about 18% of Americans supported military action against Iran. I haven't seen more recent polling, but I can only presume or hope that number is even lower now. Not only would a hot war with Iran be deeply unpopular here at home, it would likely be even more destabilizing in the Middle East than previous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The only half-decent argument for it is that a direct war with Iran is one of the few things we haven't tried in the region, and perhaps winning such a war would open a new door to the future. But the downsides and the risks, and of course the human toll, are too numerous to list. So that's number one. Number

two is that if the West wants to have a cohesive policy in Iran, it should focus on empowering the Iranian people. Iranian authorities responded to the 2021-2022 uprisings with brutal force, but that response didn't make the problem go away. It only temporarily muted the very real desire amongst the Iranian people for something different. After decades of jihad, extremism, and failed domestic policy, Iranians are done. Polling from Iran shows an overwhelming majority, 80%, according to some surveys, want to rid themselves of the Islamic Republic. So, how do we accomplish number two without number one? That is the difficult question at the heart of the issue, and one I don't feel qualified to

answer. But answering it should provide the North Star for our policy. I thought Seamus Abed, the former host at Iran International TV, made the most compelling points in this regard under what the left is saying. The most important thing for American decision makers to formally recognize is that there is no possibility of interaction, cooperation, or behavior change with the Iranian government, she said. Focusing so much on Iran's nuclear program distracts us from the challenge of confronting its proxy groups and supporting the desires of its people for a different leadership. Instead, the U.S. needs to internalize the fact that this Iranian people's movement is stronger than any before it, and that the people of Iran, for the most part, are secular, desire relationships

with the West, and understand the reality of their situation. Sabet smartly points out that protest chants heard on the streets include, they are lying that our enemy is America, our enemy is right here. However we go forward, one thing is nearly certain. The strategies of the last two decades, hot and cold engagement with the Iranian regime, obsession over the nuclear program's advances and sputters, intermittent attacks and assassinations, and oscillating approaches from friendly to aggressive and back again, aren't working. We need a cohesive policy, one much more focused on uplifting and supporting the Iranian people's desire for change. Militarily, that means focusing on limiting

the attacks from Iran's proxies across the region. And we have to try to do all this while avoiding a direct conflict. We'll be right back after this quick break. We'll be right back after this quick break. All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one's from Dan in Maricopa, Arizona. Dan said, is it possible that Biden's ratings are just Democrats showing their frustrations with some of his policies and decisions? I'm an old guy, but it seems that Biden's policies are focused on keeping my generation happy, not making the best decisions for the future and the current younger Democratic voters. Personally, I can see a pro-choice voter using their vote for Trump or

the Republicans. Okay, so there are two things I found interesting about this question that I wanted to dive into. First off, I think the idea that Biden is keeping the older generation happy and not making the best decisions for the future is actually out of step with how most people would criticize the Biden administration. That criticism usually goes something like this. Biden is captive to the agenda of the progressive left, but he isn't advancing that agenda sufficiently for them. This is seen in his striking with the union members, the Inflation Reduction Act's emphasis on green energy, the size of the COVID relief package, and his repeated attempts to cancel student debt. On one hand, many in the center and the right see him as a president too

keen on spending and advancing policy positions of progressives. On the other hand, progressive C. Biden is not doing enough. That doesn't sound like a president who's especially focused on the older generation, but I do think there's an argument there too. That argument would go like this. Two of Biden's signature pieces of legislation, the Build Back Better Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, are large investments in American infrastructure and domestic industry, something that benefits the older generation more than, say, an investment in education and childcare. Simultaneously, Biden has picked fights with Republicans for being open to cutting Medicare or Social Security, positions very popular

with older Americans. I don't personally find that argument too persuasive, since Biden's legislation doesn't sound like an investment that favors older Americans more than younger ones, and since not cutting Social Security and Medicare are just mainstream Democratic positions, ones that he once opposed. But I do think your question shows how varied the opinions on Biden's administration are. Secondly, I want to talk briefly about the much sought after pro-choice voter because I think the way people usually talk about these voters is wrong. Republicans have not been losing elections since Roe fell because they are losing the votes of people they once carried. They're losing these elections because people who didn't care enough to vote previously

are motivated to cast a ballot against Republicans just on this issue. I can show that with two of the numbers we shared after last week's election. 3% was the difference in the people who said they voted for Biden then said they voted for Trump in Ohio this year when abortion was on the ballot. voted for Trump in Ohio this year when abortion was on the ballot. That's an 11-point swing in a state Trump carried by 8% in 2020. 7% was the proportion of registered voters in New York City who cast the ballot this year. That's a whole lot of people staying on the sidelines. So we aren't seeing some frustration with Biden from the big block of pro-choice voters. We're seeing that a big block of voters are frustrated, but a very decisive slice of those voters are singly driven to vote because they're pro-choice. All that said, my overall answer for why Biden's approval rating is so low isn't that progressives are angry at him or that

pro-choice voters are venting frustration. It's that nobody is totally thrilled with him on the left, that his age is becoming a bigger and bigger factor, and that he's getting hammered on the one thing voters have always cared about above all else. And it's not abortion, it's the economy. All right, that's it for our reader question today, which brings us to our under the radar section. Dissatisfaction with the 2024 presidential field is strongly concentrated among Democrats and independents. Republicans, meanwhile, are more satisfied with their options than other groups. Overall, 52% of respondents to a Quinnipiac poll said they would like to see other candidates in the race, including 72% of independents and 58% of Democrats. Just 29% of Republican respondents said they wanted a new candidate, though.

Axios has the story on this disparity, and there's a link to it in today's episode description. All right, next up is our numbers section. The number of times U.S. and coalition troops have been attacked in Iraq and Syria since October 17th is 55, according to U.S. officials. The number of personnel injured in those attacks was 59. The percentage of world oil reserves that Iran accounted for in 2021 was 12%. The estimated net oil export revenues for Iran's oil companies in 2021 was $40 billion. The rate of inflation in Iran's economy in September 2023 was 39.5%, and the unemployment rate in Iran in 2022 was 9%. The annual funding Hezbollah receives from Iran, according to the U.S. State Department, is $700 million. The annual funding Hamas receives from Iran is $100 million.

The estimated number of rockets and missiles currently aimed at Israel by Hezbollah is 150,000. rockets and missiles currently aimed at Israel by Hezbollah is 150,000. All right, that is it for our numbers section, which brings us last but not least to our have a nice day story. Daisy may be a Springer Spaniel that lives in Cornwall, England, but she channeled her inner lassie to help save her friend. Michelle Rose noticed her dog Daisy going berserk in the woods near their home, zooming around trees and trying to get her attention. So Rose decided to listen, following Daisy into the woods. Daisy took off down a path before she stopped dead in her tracks next to an abandoned mineshaft. That's when Rose's thoughts turned to her cat, Mowgli, who had been missing for the past six days and with whom Daisy had a strong bond.

Rose trusted that Daisy was trying to tell her something and decided to call authorities to search the mine shaft for a missing cat. The next day, a rescue team found Mowgli miraculously uninjured and retrieved him. Without Daisy doing that, Mowgli could still be down there, that's for sure. She was persistent in making me follow her. It was amazing. Daisy is a superstar. She's an amazing dog, Rose said. Global News has the Lassie-like story, and there's a link to it in today's episode description.

All right, everybody, that is it for today's podcast. As always, if you want to support our work, please go to retangle.com forward slash membership. And if you want to get Friday editions, including tomorrow's with all of our 12,000 plus members, you got to get on that membership list. So take two minutes and go do that. We'll be back here on Monday. Have a good weekend. Peace. Our podcast is written by me, Isaac Saul, and edited and engineered by John Law. The script is edited by our managing editor, Ari Weitzman, Will Kab me, Isaac Saul, and edited and engineered by John Law. The script is edited by our managing editor, Ari Weitzman, Will Kedak, Bailey Saul, and Sean Brady. The logo for our podcast was designed by Magdalena Bokova, who is also our social media manager. Music for the

podcast was produced by Diet75. And if you're looking for more from Tangle, please go to readtangle.com and check out our website. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada,

which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine

authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca.