Huh. I go away and Mage and Mage starts taking the conservative beatings... to be fair, Mage, it appears that you were being a bit aggressive... and Jhess - you managed venom and bitterness along with your rhetoric. Really. I think you need someone sensitive in your life to give you comfort. And remember: alcohol and posting don't mix.
I neither remember nor find reference to the US Embassy ever being recalled from the Soviet Union. Just saying. It'd be interesting to be able to recite that fact with some reference, so if you know of it, please pass it on. I'm not kidding. It is really a bit of info I'd like to know the history on... since that's the first time I'd heard it. In my recollection the Ambassador to the Sov Union was recalled several times, to take personal direction or have discussion with the State Department or the president several times during diplomatic history, but at no time with the Sov Union was an embassy 'recalled', particularly in the sense that the US ended diplomatic relations, which is nearly always the same as shutting an embassy. And closing down an embassy is usually a warning that violence can occur against the nation, at any time.
I don't understand the comment on embassies in Kosovo, North Korea, and South Sudan. Kosovo and South Sudan have embassies, to my knowledge, and had established them after the US acknowledged their status and security conditions permitted. The US works though the Swiss Consulate in North Korea - we don't have an embassy there since North Korea maintains we are still in a state of war with them. I don't know how all three nations can share any kind of the same comparison. Presently, we don't keep embassies in five nations - Cuba, Iran, Bhutan, North Korea, and Taiwan. Taiwan is not recognized by the US for concern of messing up interaction with Communist China. Bhutan is small, and unusual in that the US seems to have a 'so small not worth the embassy' position. The US has outstanding and unresolved issues with Cuba, Iran and North Korea - so, no embassy.
For a long time we didn't have embassies is other nations, like Vietnam and Libya, for apparent reasons. However, nations we broke off official diplomatic relations, as conducted through an exchange of ambassadors, is very rare and unusual, and not common as commented.
And the United States' relationship with Iran may not be defined as a state of war, but most probably as in a heightened state of conflict - Iran may expect military action by the United States at any time, as retribution for the 1979 hostage issue and continued pursuit of nuclear weapons, threats against US allies and US interests. And the US has frozen their assets as well as interfered with their economy through sanctions and blockades throughout the years, pretty provocative short of shooting, I'd say. Not so much state of war but more like a state just short of official military conflict. Same conditions with North Korea. Cuba is simple retribution for choosing communism over americanism, and embarrassing the United States.
As far as a strategic action, it would be an amphibious and air assault. Iraq and Turkey would not allow an attack from their soil by the US, and probably Afghanistan would deny it also. The politics is that it serves no interest for any of those nations to screw their next door neihbor. Further, and land build up would take months in Iraq and Turkey, virtually impssible in Afghanistan due to logistics, and travel through the moutains in Turkey and Afghansitan would be insane. To rapidly deploy the heavy amor, mechanized infantry, and support it could only be by sea. Airborne would be rough against an established and professional military like Iran, and Air Assault is hugely limited by range. So if conflict gets to ground war, it'll be the Marines followed up by US Army via amphib.
It won't appen, though. Any conflict will be more along the lines of what happened against Serbia. Relentless hammer of infrastucture, ratcheted up daily, to provoke the civilian population to rise up against the government while weaking the state security and military appratus, the cripilling of export and import movement, the reduction of high tech and expensive to replace radar, communications, naval and air assets. And Iranian radar, SAM, and aircraft are all defeatable in the sme sense that Serbia's forces were defeatable. The United States has too many gizmos to bury medium to small opponents, missiles and ecm and eccm and eccccm et technological cetera before the planes enter Iranian airspace. Why commit ground troops when you can accomplish a regime change thrugh massive stand off attacks?
The only real deterrent now is the worry that Iran would retaliate through unconventional means, bio and chem against our allies including Isreal, as well as supporting/hiring out terrorist attacks against our civilians in the US.
And Jhess, I'm embarrased you shared that picture of me... I mean, as long as I maintain my six pack abs and bring home a paycheck, a girl can put up with the car bed and stuffed bears...
You really, really, REALLY need a hug. You all do. Except Kobrag. He gets a manly, comradely pat on the back. maw
.
