Context does matter. For example, the IRGC is the more trusted branch of the military, and responds pretty much directly to the Supreme Leader, who is the actual guy in charge, not Iran's Presidents. So, what you are arguing above is something along the lines of "Well, the
US government didn't do something, the
CIA, acting under the orders of the President did it.
No, there is no "
of course Iran is going to kill Americans". Saying "
of course they are going to do it" doesn't mean they aren't responsible for their actions.
Academia is often useful, and has an ideological bent same as anyone else - I read them and take them into account, just as I do other sources of information.
now who is pushing a flat, cheap narrative? The region is a bit more complicated and complex than that
Oh, sure. They're not responsible for their actions, because you wish to excuse them. Others
are responsible for their actions because you
don't wish to excuse them.
Their actions and reactions are well-thought-out, and deliberate. These aren't idiots or children.
Nah. For example, I'd say we live in approximately zero fear that Iranian culture is going to take over the US and cause us to lose our religion.
I am glad to see you say so, since that means you accept that the OP is factually incorrect, and that Shia Iran is willing to help Sunni extremists for hard-nosed Realist reasons of their own
.
:shrug: I would have to ask how you came to that conclusion. I've gone back and forth with CIA analysts a bit, and even where we disagreed, I always found them pretty well-sourced and well-educated in their topics.
... No, the best intelligence
analysis relies on multi-source and multi-int inputs (to include those open sources you mention), and places that in context. It includes source analysis, gap analysis, and alternative analysis.
Intelligence Community Directive 203, if you'd like to read up
.
Actually, if you will go read the competing narratives, you will note that how to approach the Shia is a major source of contention between AQI/ISIS (who have traditionally seen them as the Near Enemy) and al-Qa'ida Senior Leadership (who see them more as mistaken brothers). AQSL has always said that converting the Shia is the long-term goal, after you have driven western powers out of Muslim lands (a term which includes, among other things, Spain) and established Islamic governance; ISIS has said that defeating/driving back/wiping out the Shia is the short term goal. You will notice, for example, that AQI/ISIS attack the Shia in Iraq and Iran..... but AQ does not.