5 ms·

Iranian here, I do completely respect his decision , although I am 100% against his decision. The only point I don't get is how Trump is not same Trump before

by 0xFFC 10y ago

Iranian here, I do completely respect his decision , although I am 100% against his decision. The only point I don't get is how Trump is not same Trump before election, He talked about banning Muslim (I was born in Muslim family , although I am not Muslim and I am atheist , I want to clear things out that I am not against ordinary people.), But he literally banned people from countries which have not participated in any terroristic act (Iran for example) whatsoever. I don't get the hypocrisy! He talked about Suadi Arabia (Iran is like France in comparison to Suadi Arabia, especially the new generation, which most of them are agnostic/atheist/nihilist , in comparison to Suadi Arabia which most of them have sympathy for ISIS, as far as I remember there was poll on the internet from one of the well-known firms, which claimed ~70% of people for Suadi Arabia do respect ISIS). But guess what? Iran was, but Suadi Arabia wasn't. People of America, Don't you get it? This is same old. I was literally in love with Bernie Sanders. But didn't you see how corrupted DNC rigged the primary against an outsider? We all are slaves to this system. We in Iran are slaves of our brutal dictator supreme leader. You, people of America, slaves of your complex network of politicians and media networks and etc. Actually, Trump campaign did have good points too (from an outsider perspective). He did want to distance himself from Suadi Arabia, or he did want to leave middle east. But I think that's not going to happen, because all of them was simple lie. P.S. Pardon My English, I am working on it ;) , and I have 1 year to improve it more and more. P.S. I was one of the "so-called" elite students which did have plan to immigrate to US in 2018. But I think I will go somewhere else .

Clubber 10y ago
>But guess what? Iran was, but Suadi Arabia wasn't. There are the stated reasons why the US government thinks a certain way and there are the real reasons. Saudi Arabia is a big one. I suspect the real reasons is we have oil deals with Saudi Arabia and Iran has oil deals with Russia. Also Iran nationalized US interests in the late 70s with the revolution. The US punished Cuba for the same thing for 50 years (plus the missile crisis). The US isn't altruistic like they want people to believe, the US works aggressively for their own best interests. If they can paint an altruistic face on it, they will. The US is still can't let go of the cold war mentality, probably justified with Putin. Iran and Saudi Arabia fit into that mentality. Iran and Saudi Arabia are the two powers in the middle east: one is traditionally an ally, one is our adversary's ally. It's a natural law of geopolitic that the victors of a major conflict split into at least minor adversaries. The victors are the only ones who can threaten each others power and security. We saw this play out after WWII. Dan Carlin just released an episode where he explores this. I haven't gotten through it yet, but it's very good. http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-59-the-destroyer-of-worlds/ http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-59-the-destroyer-o...
- 0xFFC 10y ago
  I do agree with you. But my biggest conclusion is Trump is super smart. Trump is super smart to play an outsider role because he knows how desperately people looking for an outsider, but at the other hand DNC and Obama were stupid enough to not get it. He is an insider as much as Clinton. But he is way smarter than DNC, Clinton, Obama. God, I missed Bernie.
  - kalleboo 10y ago
    Well Obama was smart enough to act an outsider (the "change candidate" to get elected (and then also re-elected), but then also keep the status quo as an insider to keep the job. Hillary couldn't act an outsider to even get elected.
refurb 10y ago
But he literally banned people from countries which does not participated in any terroristic act (Iran for example) whatsoever. There is a whole Wikipedia page for you to browse.[1] Has Iran directly committed a terrorist act again the United States? No, unless you stretch that definition a bunch. Has it supported/funded terrorism against other Western countries? Absolutely. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terrorism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terro...
- 0xFFC 10y ago
  First of all, I was talking about people. The USA government (and as far as I can see trump banned based on nationality, not relation to government) did far worse to Iran and most of other countries. In scale, I don't need to provide a link for you. You can find it on the internet. If we want to go this path, (almost) every country in the world should ban the US. From assassinating their leader, changing their government, supporting dictators, and so much more. Let me remember you, me and my generation is in this deep shit (Islamic Republic) because your government has overthrown an elected democratic government in ~1952. BTW I don't believe Hezbollah is a terrorist. Because it is not, It does not blow people in Marathon, It does not blow people in a restaurant in France. Yes, they do defend themselves against Israel. So as much as I hate , Hezbollah, they are not terrorist.
  - unscaled 10y ago
    The US used to do many nasty things during the Cold War, in the name of blocking soviet influence, and the overthrow of the Mossadegh was just once. Then again, this was over 60 years ago. If we go by the same measure, Germany and Japan, both of which haven't fought a war for over 70 years, would be banned for life. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US is probably the most benign superpower in history. Yeah, it still went for war in Iraq, but really, countries with far less power have done worse things. We should criticize America when its due, but we should also keep things in proportion. Not everything bad in the world is America's fault. As for Hezbollah, while I don't think it is primarily a terrorist organization, and they did have the right to fight back against the Israeli army while it was occupying South Lebanon, Hezbollah bombed several non-Israeli civilian targets, often for purely religious reasons (or how else you would describe an attack on a Jewish community center in Argentina?). Besides, Israel has been out of Lebanese soil for over 15 years, aside from a brief, ill-conceived war (that was nevertheless a response to an unprovoked Hezbollah raid on Israeli soil). During much of that time, Hezbollah did very much the opposite of defending Lebanon, and went out of it's way to provoke Israel to attack Lebanon, knowing that that would gain them legitimacy. This includes targeting Israeli tourists in Bulgaria (I have hard time seeing how this can ever be seen as defensive). Nowadays, they calmed down on the antisemitic terror front, and it seems like they're mainly occupied with helping Assad massacre his own people (and pretty effective at that). It's hard for me to see anything positive about this group.
towit 10y ago
Canada welcomes you.
- 0xFFC 10y ago
  Thank you so much, I think Canada and Australia are my main options now.
unscaled 10y ago
The government of Saudi Arabia doesn't officially sponsor any terrorist group (what royal family members do unofficially with their "own" money could be quite different :(). But that's not even the question. The question is which nationals are the most dangerous to US security, and here we're getting into pure populism. Most of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, the rest of them from Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Lebanon. Non of these country is on Trump's list. The countries on the lists are either countries ravished by civil war (Syria, Libya, Yemen, and to a lesser extent Iraq and Sudan) or countries with US-hostile regimes that are already embargoed (Iran, Sudan and Assad-controlled Syria). In short, the Trump administration chose the most dangerous-sounding names for American ears, picking governments that are either on bad terms with the US as it is, or simply too weak to complain. The direct economic damage will be negligible, while the people who supported Trump's idea of a temporary ban of Muslims (most of his voters) would be satisfied with his actions. It's an effective populist measure, but it's a particularly nasty, considering that the US is closing itself to refugees from countries in civil war.
- 0xFFC 10y ago
  To be honest your perspective is very sound. Trump did try to keep his word, but with lowest economic consequences. Keeping his base, active and hopeful, but at the other hand minimize economic pressure from such act. About government of Suadi Arabia I think you are right, but the government of Iran is not active as a terrorist against US too. Unless your definition from terroist is Hezbollah, which as much as I hate them, they are not terrorist.
pluma 10y ago
FWIW the list isn't even Trump's, it was copied verbatim from the Obama administration's. The excuse I often hear from Trump supporters is that the countries on the list are majority-Muslim countries where it's easy to get fake documents. Of course that still doesn't explain why the origin countries themselves aren't on the list. I'm not an American but I find it incredibly weird that Iran is always seen as a "terrorist state" when actually the only terrorist organisations I could see as being tied to Iran are only concerned with Palestine and only directly pose a threat in Israel (i.e. they operate regionally). I guess the attitude towards Iran is an artefact of the West's close ties to Israel (especially for the US and Germany). Off topic, but is it true that Iranian citizenship is difficult to get rid of when you try to become citizen of another country? I heard that one of the reason the ban on Iran was especially dire for green card holders and potentially even US citizens was that dual citizenship was basically the norm for people born in Iran.
- 0xFFC 10y ago
  To be honest , I am not law expert, I dont have very experience about citizenship laws in Iran, but as far as I know (You should consult an expert if you want to become sure) Iran's law written in a way you cannot get rid of your citizenship, even if you change your nationality, I think Iran government would consider you an Iranian. This law is ridiculous (I know). But I think the reason they wrote law in such way was not dictatorship or something like this , there was rationality (at least in their mind) behind such law. p.s. I want to make you sure, the information I wrote in this comment maybe are wrong, so do not rely on them.
analbeads 10y ago
As a Trump supporter that supports the ban, I would much rather we give Saudi Arabia and Israel the boot and ally with Iran and Syria instead. We're stuck with Israel but I have some small hope that the other sides may flip as our relationship with Russia improves. The cold war of the 21st century is looking more and more like US+Russia vs. China+EU, it will be interesting to say the least how that will affect our alliances in the middle east.

by 0xFFC 10y ago

Clubber 10y ago

>But guess what? Iran was, but Suadi Arabia wasn't. There are the stated reasons why the US government thinks a certain way and there are the real reasons. Saudi Arabia is a big one. I suspect the real reasons is we have oil deals with Saudi Arabia and Iran has oil deals with Russia. Also Iran nationalized US interests in the late 70s with the revolution. The US punished Cuba for the same thing for 50 years (plus the missile crisis). The US isn't altruistic like they want people to believe, the US works aggressively for their own best interests. If they can paint an altruistic face on it, they will. The US is still can't let go of the cold war mentality, probably justified with Putin. Iran and Saudi Arabia fit into that mentality. Iran and Saudi Arabia are the two powers in the middle east: one is traditionally an ally, one is our adversary's ally. It's a natural law of geopolitic that the victors of a major conflict split into at least minor adversaries. The victors are the only ones who can threaten each others power and security. We saw this play out after WWII. Dan Carlin just released an episode where he explores this. I haven't gotten through it yet, but it's very good. http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-59-the-destroyer-of-worlds/ http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-59-the-destroyer-o...

0xFFC 10y ago
I do agree with you. But my biggest conclusion is Trump is super smart. Trump is super smart to play an outsider role because he knows how desperately people looking for an outsider, but at the other hand DNC and Obama were stupid enough to not get it. He is an insider as much as Clinton. But he is way smarter than DNC, Clinton, Obama. God, I missed Bernie.
- kalleboo 10y ago
  Well Obama was smart enough to act an outsider (the "change candidate" to get elected (and then also re-elected), but then also keep the status quo as an insider to keep the job. Hillary couldn't act an outsider to even get elected.

refurb 10y ago

But he literally banned people from countries which does not participated in any terroristic act (Iran for example) whatsoever. There is a whole Wikipedia page for you to browse.[1] Has Iran directly committed a terrorist act again the United States? No, unless you stretch that definition a bunch. Has it supported/funded terrorism against other Western countries? Absolutely. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terrorism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terro...

0xFFC 10y ago
First of all, I was talking about people. The USA government (and as far as I can see trump banned based on nationality, not relation to government) did far worse to Iran and most of other countries. In scale, I don't need to provide a link for you. You can find it on the internet. If we want to go this path, (almost) every country in the world should ban the US. From assassinating their leader, changing their government, supporting dictators, and so much more. Let me remember you, me and my generation is in this deep shit (Islamic Republic) because your government has overthrown an elected democratic government in ~1952. BTW I don't believe Hezbollah is a terrorist. Because it is not, It does not blow people in Marathon, It does not blow people in a restaurant in France. Yes, they do defend themselves against Israel. So as much as I hate , Hezbollah, they are not terrorist.
- unscaled 10y ago
  The US used to do many nasty things during the Cold War, in the name of blocking soviet influence, and the overthrow of the Mossadegh was just once. Then again, this was over 60 years ago. If we go by the same measure, Germany and Japan, both of which haven't fought a war for over 70 years, would be banned for life. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US is probably the most benign superpower in history. Yeah, it still went for war in Iraq, but really, countries with far less power have done worse things. We should criticize America when its due, but we should also keep things in proportion. Not everything bad in the world is America's fault. As for Hezbollah, while I don't think it is primarily a terrorist organization, and they did have the right to fight back against the Israeli army while it was occupying South Lebanon, Hezbollah bombed several non-Israeli civilian targets, often for purely religious reasons (or how else you would describe an attack on a Jewish community center in Argentina?). Besides, Israel has been out of Lebanese soil for over 15 years, aside from a brief, ill-conceived war (that was nevertheless a response to an unprovoked Hezbollah raid on Israeli soil). During much of that time, Hezbollah did very much the opposite of defending Lebanon, and went out of it's way to provoke Israel to attack Lebanon, knowing that that would gain them legitimacy. This includes targeting Israeli tourists in Bulgaria (I have hard time seeing how this can ever be seen as defensive). Nowadays, they calmed down on the antisemitic terror front, and it seems like they're mainly occupied with helping Assad massacre his own people (and pretty effective at that). It's hard for me to see anything positive about this group.

towit 10y ago

Canada welcomes you.

0xFFC 10y ago
Thank you so much, I think Canada and Australia are my main options now.

unscaled 10y ago

The government of Saudi Arabia doesn't officially sponsor any terrorist group (what royal family members do unofficially with their "own" money could be quite different :(). But that's not even the question. The question is which nationals are the most dangerous to US security, and here we're getting into pure populism. Most of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, the rest of them from Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Lebanon. Non of these country is on Trump's list. The countries on the lists are either countries ravished by civil war (Syria, Libya, Yemen, and to a lesser extent Iraq and Sudan) or countries with US-hostile regimes that are already embargoed (Iran, Sudan and Assad-controlled Syria). In short, the Trump administration chose the most dangerous-sounding names for American ears, picking governments that are either on bad terms with the US as it is, or simply too weak to complain. The direct economic damage will be negligible, while the people who supported Trump's idea of a temporary ban of Muslims (most of his voters) would be satisfied with his actions. It's an effective populist measure, but it's a particularly nasty, considering that the US is closing itself to refugees from countries in civil war.

0xFFC 10y ago
To be honest your perspective is very sound. Trump did try to keep his word, but with lowest economic consequences. Keeping his base, active and hopeful, but at the other hand minimize economic pressure from such act. About government of Suadi Arabia I think you are right, but the government of Iran is not active as a terrorist against US too. Unless your definition from terroist is Hezbollah, which as much as I hate them, they are not terrorist.

pluma 10y ago

FWIW the list isn't even Trump's, it was copied verbatim from the Obama administration's. The excuse I often hear from Trump supporters is that the countries on the list are majority-Muslim countries where it's easy to get fake documents. Of course that still doesn't explain why the origin countries themselves aren't on the list. I'm not an American but I find it incredibly weird that Iran is always seen as a "terrorist state" when actually the only terrorist organisations I could see as being tied to Iran are only concerned with Palestine and only directly pose a threat in Israel (i.e. they operate regionally). I guess the attitude towards Iran is an artefact of the West's close ties to Israel (especially for the US and Germany). Off topic, but is it true that Iranian citizenship is difficult to get rid of when you try to become citizen of another country? I heard that one of the reason the ban on Iran was especially dire for green card holders and potentially even US citizens was that dual citizenship was basically the norm for people born in Iran.

0xFFC 10y ago
To be honest , I am not law expert, I dont have very experience about citizenship laws in Iran, but as far as I know (You should consult an expert if you want to become sure) Iran's law written in a way you cannot get rid of your citizenship, even if you change your nationality, I think Iran government would consider you an Iranian. This law is ridiculous (I know). But I think the reason they wrote law in such way was not dictatorship or something like this , there was rationality (at least in their mind) behind such law. p.s. I want to make you sure, the information I wrote in this comment maybe are wrong, so do not rely on them.

analbeads 10y ago

As a Trump supporter that supports the ban, I would much rather we give Saudi Arabia and Israel the boot and ally with Iran and Syria instead. We're stuck with Israel but I have some small hope that the other sides may flip as our relationship with Russia improves. The cold war of the 21st century is looking more and more like US+Russia vs. China+EU, it will be interesting to say the least how that will affect our alliances in the middle east.