[Miss Marple]

Well, as a poster pointed out, way back in 1979 they attacked and held our embassy in Tehran. In addition , our embassies were bombed by radical Muslims in Africa.

It seems to me that people who don't respect diplomatic immunity should not be able to claim it for themselves when the situation is reversed.

[Drango]

Our diplomats are kept safe in Sudan, Nigeria, Brazil, Thailand, Libya, Bangladesh, etc by international agreement and adherence to the concept of diplomatic immunity. Attacking an embassy/consulate is an act of war.

And yes, the standard has been ignored by Iran, but that doesn't mean we should reciprocate in kind. Some US diplomats in the future will pay the price 'cause we have chosen to weaken and flaunt this protocol.

[Ax]

I fully agree, Miss Marple. But we play by the rules, and they don't. It could be that with the taking of that Iranian Consulate, we have taken the gauntlet off.

Recently, the host country had the responsibility for the security of the outer perimeter of the diplomatic mission; the Marine Security Guard has the responsibility of the chancery and other buildings in the compound. I can only imagine that these days each mission is a sand-bagged fortress. So much for wine and cheese on the embassy patio.