Iran attack 'had state support'

[Gerald]

Tuesday's attack on Britain's embassy in Tehran had the "acquiescence and the support of the state", says the UK's former ambassador to Iran.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16010547

Note: 3 December 2011 Last updated at 00:05 GMT

[joegrundman]

Sounds like the first distinct misstep by the Iranian government in a long time. Overall they have played a difficult position very competently over the last 10 years.

This time it would seem they put themselves in the position of a chess player who makes a move whose success depends on the opponent making the desired counter-move.

So, this error of judgement, assuming that be what it is.

Is it a sign of an independent faction attempting to make their own facts on the ground?

Is it just one of those inexplicable errors of judgement that happens from time to time?

Is it a sign of the effects of international pressure clouding the mind?

Something else?

In any case, it would seem to me they have handed Britain a diplomatic opportunity here, and taken a needless prestige hit.

[yubba]

Well it seems to me this is a no brainer, some could consider this an act of war, but what the heck. A couple of well set claymores would have taken care of that problem, I guess the Brits ought to get use to praying 7 times a day and getting stoned.

[Egan]

Well I'm quite happy to get stoned seven times a day but I haven't a prayer of that happening right now. :O:

[Gerald]

This is a little side-knitters, but a consequence of what has previously happened....in Iran.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16018000

Note: 3 December 2011 Last updated at 15:43 GMT