9 ms·

> Well, there’s the minor issue of Iran’s totalitarian regime consistently announcing their intent to destroy Israel and devestate the U.S.A, and taking actual

> Well, there’s the minor issue of Iran’s totalitarian regime consistently announcing their intent to destroy Israel and devestate the U.S.A, and taking actual steps to support the same. You do realize this rhetoric goes both ways, right? Israeli politicians often make genocidal statements towards other countries including Lebanon, Palestine and Iran, so spare me this crying. Iran may have rhetoric, but Iran isn't occupying anyone. The same cannot be said for Israel. In fact when there is a terrorist attack in the US, Iran tends to condemn it, despite the non-existent relations, whereas US lawmakers say "Iran deserves it", when the same happens over there. As for sponsoring terrorism; Israel has been proven to be shipping weapons to Islamic radicals in Syria, is increasingly buddy buddy with Saudi Arabia & the UAE, commits regular war crimes, including in other countries etc., so again, spare me. > I am Israeli and completely left-wing by the way That's great, however from my personal observation, what "left-wing" means in Israel is much more to the right than in other parts of the world. In fact you've fallen for right-wing talking points, it seems. > there are many steps both Israel and the U.S. could take to mitigate the threat from Iran without war, such as strengthening moderate forces in the middle-east There's no threat from Iran to other nations that I could see, do they perhaps have some proxy forces? Sure. Does Israel? Sure. Does the U.S. Sure, exponentially more. Do the Saudis and Emiratis? You bet. As an European, I just don't get the Israeli fixation with Iran, apart for deflection purposes, it's not a great regime, but not worse than the 75% of the world's dictatorships the U.S. does support. For the US I at least get it more; control of their resources, for the Saudis and to a lesser extent the Emiratis, it also has a religious angle, but for Israel, it seems to be purely for propaganda purposes. P.S. Am not even going to get into Israelis smearing anyone critical of Israeli policies as an anti-Semite, which is not only reprehensible, but it also assumes that the Israeli government speaks for all Jews, which is itself rather anti-Semitic if you ask me.

enriquto 8y ago
> As an European, I just don't get the Israeli fixation with Iran, I agree, but let's not forget also the ridiculous fixation of Iran with Israel, which is even more senseless. I do not understand where the Irani animosity towards Israel comes from. Both countries are surrounded by arabs that hate them, wouldn't they all be better of as best buddies?
- AsyncAwait 8y ago
  > I do not understand where the Irani animosity towards Israel comes from. Both countries are surrounded by arabs that hate them, wouldn't they all be better of as best buddies? I have studied this very question previously and it's a bit more complex than that. Iran had a democratically elected government, but in the early 50s, the UK & US orchestrated a coup that ousted that government, since they wanted to nationalize their natural resources and kick foreign oil firms out of the country. The U.S. the installed the King of Iran as their puppet dictator. The King was a close ally of Israel and Saudi Arabia as well. After some 20+ years, the dictator was overthrown in the Iranian Revolution of 1979. Part of Iran's national defense strategy since then, is to have allied forces in some neighboring countries like Lebanon, Iraq etc. These forces are not occupying the territories, they're native to the land, but just ideologically align more with Iran than other countries in the region. This strategy exists because Iran knows it would not be able to defeat an invasion on its own, were that to ever happen. Part of how Iran was able to attract their support was by positioning itself as the force to stand against Western abuses in the region, (including Israel). Because Israel was an ally of the old Iranian dictator, who was hated in Iran and because their abuses against the Palestinians, it was natural for Iran to position itself as against Israeli abuses, both because of its own history and because it strengthened its image as an alternative in the region against Western abuse. It is therefore far from true that "arabs hate them". Some Arabs hate Iranians, mostly Sunni gulf states, who supported the previous Iranian regime, but some consider them an ally, including a significant portion of Lebanon, Syria, portions of Yemen and the Palestinians. Looking at it this way, it does at least make some sense.
  - kamyarg 8y ago
    Wanted to say thank you, this explains the situation very well.
    - tome 8y ago
      It explains the situation very well indeed, precisely because it has developed to become "the" explanation of the other side of the argument.
spiritcat 8y ago
Thank you Mr. European, we'll continue to greatly consider and internalize your thoughts on what and when it is appropriate for Israelis act in self defense. Now get fucked. (not Israeli, but yes Jewish)
- AsyncAwait 8y ago
  > for Israelis act in self defense Are other people/nations also allowed to 'act in self defense', or is it only Israel? > Now get fucked. Well, I guess you won the argument.
  - spiritcat 8y ago
    Yes, but half the world isn't actively trying to destroy most people/nations. And yes I do recognize it must suck ass to live in Gaza and I feel for them, and hope for a better future where their lives don't suck ass. I have no idea what to do about it though. I know it's inconvenient for Europeans and progressives who think they can just lift the blockade and stop operations in Syria and everyone will live happily ever after, but when that filters through my ears it becomes "we don't give a fuck if you live or die." Why should I care about the opinions of people who don't give a fuck if I live or die?
    - AsyncAwait 8y ago
      > half the world isn't actively trying to destroy most people/nations True, including Israel. You do realize that the occupation and abuse of Palestinians by Israel is what drives those Arabs that hate Israel, right? It's a rallying call, if you will. As for genocidal rhetoric, it's been done both by Israeli neighbors and Israel itself. As for military might, Israel is clearly on top. > I do recognize it must suck ass to live in Gaza and I feel for them, and hope for a better future where their lives don't suck ass. I have no idea what to do about it though. > I know it's inconvenient for Europeans and progressives who think they can just lift the blockade and stop operations in Syria and everyone will live happily ever after As for Syria, is a sovereign country that you have no right to operate in, nor do you have the right to constantly violate Lebanese airspace. How do you expect other countries to respect you, when you don't even respect international law? As for Palestinians, there's always the rhetoric that they will never become peaceful etc. but how about you stop thinking of 'Greater Israel' and stop building illegal settlements as a first step? You can't continue jacking their land and somehow come to an agreement with them. As for Gaza, yes, lifting the blockade, at least for essential supplies, lifting fishing restrictions, not targeting civilians and perhaps sponsoring targeted programs to build infrastructure there etc. would help. Stop sniping nurses and journalists as you did with the great match of return, that would be nice. Build some goodwill, allows Gazans to leave and study abroad, sponsor some targeted infrastructure projects... > but when that filters through my ears it becomes "we don't give a fuck if you live or die." > Why should I care about the opinions of people who don't give a fuck if I live or die? For my part, I absolutely care for you to live, but it could be said that it is what comes out of Israel is to my ears as if you don't care whether Palestinians live or die indeed. There's much talk about their violence etc. but from what I've studied, it is driven by desperation. There's no prospects there, no future, no joy, no nothing. When there's such a situation, resisting what they, (and the international community btw), see as occupation is pretty much the only thing that occurs to many of them. I realize the issue isn't simple, but as I said, outreach and show of goodwill go a long way. Stop building settlements for one, enforce security in their areas from settler attacks as well, build infrastructure, come to the table and most importantly stop dreaming of 'Greater Israel' and you may get somewhere.
doanguyen 8y ago
The giant elephant in the room, I guess
misja 8y ago
I dont'agree with the Israeli occupation of foreign territories but I don't see what that has to do with the US's sanctions against Iran. Are you trying to say that the sanctions against Iran are bad, because there are no US sanctions against Israel? >> As an European, I just don't get the Israeli fixation with Iran, Well I'm a European too but I can completely understand that a country which repeatedly has announced its intention to wipe Israel of the earth gets more than usual attention from the Israeli's.
- AsyncAwait 8y ago
  > I dont'agree with the Israeli occupation of foreign territories but I don't see what that has to do with the US's sanctions against Iran. If, as an Israeli, one makes claims that the sanctions are justified because Iran is sponsoring terrorism, perhaps it's justified to look at whether Israel is not only sponsoring, but committing terrorist acts on its neighbors, unless Israel is somehow justified to do so, while Iran isn't. > I can completely understand that a country which repeatedly has announced its intention to wipe Israel of the earth gets more than usual attention from the Israeli's. Right, but my point is that isn't nor really a one-sided thing. Israel does it too towards not only Iran, but its closest neighbors, they regularly threaten to "bomb Lebanon back to the stone age", as an example.
  - Kiriyat 8y ago
    > If, as an Israeli, one makes claims that the sanctions are justified because Iran is sponsoring terrorism, perhaps it's justified to look at whether Israel is not only sponsoring, but committing terrorist acts on its neighbors, unless Israel is somehow justified to do so, while Iran isn't. You must have a very broad definition of "terrorism" if you consider Israeli military operations to be "terrorist acts". Iran sponsors an out-and-proud terrorist organization called Hezbollah. They've committed textbook terrorist attacks around the world. > Right, but my point is that isn't nor really a one-sided thing. Israel does it too towards not only Iran, but its closest neighbors, they regularly threaten to "bomb Lebanon back to the stone age", as an example. ...as a response to legitimate threats made by Hezbollah in Lebanon. Don't forget that Hezbollah started and escalated the war in Lebanon in 2006. Israel does not threaten Egypt, or Jordan, or even Syria itself except for Hezbollah's presence therein.
sonnyblarney 8y ago
"Iran may have rhetoric, but Iran isn't occupying anyone" Well, Iraq and Syria would be two countries. And if they could, they would be occupying many more. Iran is not some entity trying to protect themselves from invaders, they are a theocratic dictatorship and they want to spread their specific brand of revolution throughout the region and the world. Nukes involve us all so it's less a matter of sovereignty. Nobody wants Iran to have nukes - not Britain, Germany, France, Russia, China etc which is why they are all signatories to the treaty! If Iran tried to get nukes in the eyes of the above, they would pull out as well! The issue here is more or less one of 'what Iran is doing' - not an issue of 'what we should do if Iran is cheating'. So the headline of 3 major countries doing trade with Iran is not an abnegation of the nuclear issue, it's just a difference of opinion on what is actually going on inside Iran.
- AsyncAwait 8y ago
  > Well, Iraq and Syria would be two countries. No, they wouldn't, Iran is in both countries with the explicit permission of the local governments, (like them or not). That's not what occupation means. > And if they could, they would be occupying many more. Given you first statement isn't true, I doubt this one is, beyond the cynical, "who wouldn't"? > Iran is not some entity trying to protect themselves from invaders, they are a theocratic dictatorship and they want to spread their specific brand of revolution throughout the region and the world. Look, am not a fan of Iran, but am also trying to be rational about them. Their strategy of having some proxy forces in strategic places is part of their defense strategy, this has been studied. As for them trying to spread their ideology, sure, that alone doesn't seem to warrant sanctions, given the Gulf states and our relationship with them. > Nobody wants Iran to have nukes - not Britain, Germany, France, Russia, China etc which is why they are all signatories to the treaty! Right, and Iran has been complying with the deal, so what's your point? It's the U.S. that pulled out of it. (For the record, am not sure why Israel should have unacknowledged nukes either.)
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    "Their strategy of having some proxy forces in strategic places is part of their defence strategy, this has been studied." Iran's sponsorship of Hezbollah towards attacking Israel is part of their defence strategy? Iran's passing of Hadouthi missiles to targeted at cilivian areas in Saudia Arabia is part of their defence strategy. Yes 'this has been studied' and I'm afraid you're wrong. Iran is a antagonistic entity, and they want nukes so they can point them at Turkey, Saudi, Israel, Europe and further embolden themselves. The reason that 'UK/France/Germany' issue is important is because it undermines almost all of the arguments being made here i.e. that 'Iran is sovereign, a victim, and shouldn't be subject to sanctions'. The fact that 'the entire world' wants to sanction Iran for pursuing nukes fairly points to their bad acting. The only reason that trade is possibly going to happen - is because of the belief that they are not pursuing nuclear weapons.
dang 8y ago
Please do not engage in political or ideological or nationalistic flamewar on HN. This is the sort of discussion that starts out bad ("spare me this crying"), can only get worse, and leads to hell. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

enriquto 8y ago

> As an European, I just don't get the Israeli fixation with Iran, I agree, but let's not forget also the ridiculous fixation of Iran with Israel, which is even more senseless. I do not understand where the Irani animosity towards Israel comes from. Both countries are surrounded by arabs that hate them, wouldn't they all be better of as best buddies?

AsyncAwait 8y ago
> I do not understand where the Irani animosity towards Israel comes from. Both countries are surrounded by arabs that hate them, wouldn't they all be better of as best buddies? I have studied this very question previously and it's a bit more complex than that. Iran had a democratically elected government, but in the early 50s, the UK & US orchestrated a coup that ousted that government, since they wanted to nationalize their natural resources and kick foreign oil firms out of the country. The U.S. the installed the King of Iran as their puppet dictator. The King was a close ally of Israel and Saudi Arabia as well. After some 20+ years, the dictator was overthrown in the Iranian Revolution of 1979. Part of Iran's national defense strategy since then, is to have allied forces in some neighboring countries like Lebanon, Iraq etc. These forces are not occupying the territories, they're native to the land, but just ideologically align more with Iran than other countries in the region. This strategy exists because Iran knows it would not be able to defeat an invasion on its own, were that to ever happen. Part of how Iran was able to attract their support was by positioning itself as the force to stand against Western abuses in the region, (including Israel). Because Israel was an ally of the old Iranian dictator, who was hated in Iran and because their abuses against the Palestinians, it was natural for Iran to position itself as against Israeli abuses, both because of its own history and because it strengthened its image as an alternative in the region against Western abuse. It is therefore far from true that "arabs hate them". Some Arabs hate Iranians, mostly Sunni gulf states, who supported the previous Iranian regime, but some consider them an ally, including a significant portion of Lebanon, Syria, portions of Yemen and the Palestinians. Looking at it this way, it does at least make some sense.
- kamyarg 8y ago
  Wanted to say thank you, this explains the situation very well.
  - tome 8y ago
    It explains the situation very well indeed, precisely because it has developed to become "the" explanation of the other side of the argument.

spiritcat 8y ago

Thank you Mr. European, we'll continue to greatly consider and internalize your thoughts on what and when it is appropriate for Israelis act in self defense. Now get fucked. (not Israeli, but yes Jewish)

AsyncAwait 8y ago
> for Israelis act in self defense Are other people/nations also allowed to 'act in self defense', or is it only Israel? > Now get fucked. Well, I guess you won the argument.
- spiritcat 8y ago
  Yes, but half the world isn't actively trying to destroy most people/nations. And yes I do recognize it must suck ass to live in Gaza and I feel for them, and hope for a better future where their lives don't suck ass. I have no idea what to do about it though. I know it's inconvenient for Europeans and progressives who think they can just lift the blockade and stop operations in Syria and everyone will live happily ever after, but when that filters through my ears it becomes "we don't give a fuck if you live or die." Why should I care about the opinions of people who don't give a fuck if I live or die?
  - AsyncAwait 8y ago
    > half the world isn't actively trying to destroy most people/nations True, including Israel. You do realize that the occupation and abuse of Palestinians by Israel is what drives those Arabs that hate Israel, right? It's a rallying call, if you will. As for genocidal rhetoric, it's been done both by Israeli neighbors and Israel itself. As for military might, Israel is clearly on top. > I do recognize it must suck ass to live in Gaza and I feel for them, and hope for a better future where their lives don't suck ass. I have no idea what to do about it though. > I know it's inconvenient for Europeans and progressives who think they can just lift the blockade and stop operations in Syria and everyone will live happily ever after As for Syria, is a sovereign country that you have no right to operate in, nor do you have the right to constantly violate Lebanese airspace. How do you expect other countries to respect you, when you don't even respect international law? As for Palestinians, there's always the rhetoric that they will never become peaceful etc. but how about you stop thinking of 'Greater Israel' and stop building illegal settlements as a first step? You can't continue jacking their land and somehow come to an agreement with them. As for Gaza, yes, lifting the blockade, at least for essential supplies, lifting fishing restrictions, not targeting civilians and perhaps sponsoring targeted programs to build infrastructure there etc. would help. Stop sniping nurses and journalists as you did with the great match of return, that would be nice. Build some goodwill, allows Gazans to leave and study abroad, sponsor some targeted infrastructure projects... > but when that filters through my ears it becomes "we don't give a fuck if you live or die." > Why should I care about the opinions of people who don't give a fuck if I live or die? For my part, I absolutely care for you to live, but it could be said that it is what comes out of Israel is to my ears as if you don't care whether Palestinians live or die indeed. There's much talk about their violence etc. but from what I've studied, it is driven by desperation. There's no prospects there, no future, no joy, no nothing. When there's such a situation, resisting what they, (and the international community btw), see as occupation is pretty much the only thing that occurs to many of them. I realize the issue isn't simple, but as I said, outreach and show of goodwill go a long way. Stop building settlements for one, enforce security in their areas from settler attacks as well, build infrastructure, come to the table and most importantly stop dreaming of 'Greater Israel' and you may get somewhere.

doanguyen 8y ago

The giant elephant in the room, I guess

misja 8y ago

I dont'agree with the Israeli occupation of foreign territories but I don't see what that has to do with the US's sanctions against Iran. Are you trying to say that the sanctions against Iran are bad, because there are no US sanctions against Israel? >> As an European, I just don't get the Israeli fixation with Iran, Well I'm a European too but I can completely understand that a country which repeatedly has announced its intention to wipe Israel of the earth gets more than usual attention from the Israeli's.

AsyncAwait 8y ago
> I dont'agree with the Israeli occupation of foreign territories but I don't see what that has to do with the US's sanctions against Iran. If, as an Israeli, one makes claims that the sanctions are justified because Iran is sponsoring terrorism, perhaps it's justified to look at whether Israel is not only sponsoring, but committing terrorist acts on its neighbors, unless Israel is somehow justified to do so, while Iran isn't. > I can completely understand that a country which repeatedly has announced its intention to wipe Israel of the earth gets more than usual attention from the Israeli's. Right, but my point is that isn't nor really a one-sided thing. Israel does it too towards not only Iran, but its closest neighbors, they regularly threaten to "bomb Lebanon back to the stone age", as an example.
- Kiriyat 8y ago
  > If, as an Israeli, one makes claims that the sanctions are justified because Iran is sponsoring terrorism, perhaps it's justified to look at whether Israel is not only sponsoring, but committing terrorist acts on its neighbors, unless Israel is somehow justified to do so, while Iran isn't. You must have a very broad definition of "terrorism" if you consider Israeli military operations to be "terrorist acts". Iran sponsors an out-and-proud terrorist organization called Hezbollah. They've committed textbook terrorist attacks around the world. > Right, but my point is that isn't nor really a one-sided thing. Israel does it too towards not only Iran, but its closest neighbors, they regularly threaten to "bomb Lebanon back to the stone age", as an example. ...as a response to legitimate threats made by Hezbollah in Lebanon. Don't forget that Hezbollah started and escalated the war in Lebanon in 2006. Israel does not threaten Egypt, or Jordan, or even Syria itself except for Hezbollah's presence therein.

sonnyblarney 8y ago

"Iran may have rhetoric, but Iran isn't occupying anyone" Well, Iraq and Syria would be two countries. And if they could, they would be occupying many more. Iran is not some entity trying to protect themselves from invaders, they are a theocratic dictatorship and they want to spread their specific brand of revolution throughout the region and the world. Nukes involve us all so it's less a matter of sovereignty. Nobody wants Iran to have nukes - not Britain, Germany, France, Russia, China etc which is why they are all signatories to the treaty! If Iran tried to get nukes in the eyes of the above, they would pull out as well! The issue here is more or less one of 'what Iran is doing' - not an issue of 'what we should do if Iran is cheating'. So the headline of 3 major countries doing trade with Iran is not an abnegation of the nuclear issue, it's just a difference of opinion on what is actually going on inside Iran.

AsyncAwait 8y ago
> Well, Iraq and Syria would be two countries. No, they wouldn't, Iran is in both countries with the explicit permission of the local governments, (like them or not). That's not what occupation means. > And if they could, they would be occupying many more. Given you first statement isn't true, I doubt this one is, beyond the cynical, "who wouldn't"? > Iran is not some entity trying to protect themselves from invaders, they are a theocratic dictatorship and they want to spread their specific brand of revolution throughout the region and the world. Look, am not a fan of Iran, but am also trying to be rational about them. Their strategy of having some proxy forces in strategic places is part of their defense strategy, this has been studied. As for them trying to spread their ideology, sure, that alone doesn't seem to warrant sanctions, given the Gulf states and our relationship with them. > Nobody wants Iran to have nukes - not Britain, Germany, France, Russia, China etc which is why they are all signatories to the treaty! Right, and Iran has been complying with the deal, so what's your point? It's the U.S. that pulled out of it. (For the record, am not sure why Israel should have unacknowledged nukes either.)
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  "Their strategy of having some proxy forces in strategic places is part of their defence strategy, this has been studied." Iran's sponsorship of Hezbollah towards attacking Israel is part of their defence strategy? Iran's passing of Hadouthi missiles to targeted at cilivian areas in Saudia Arabia is part of their defence strategy. Yes 'this has been studied' and I'm afraid you're wrong. Iran is a antagonistic entity, and they want nukes so they can point them at Turkey, Saudi, Israel, Europe and further embolden themselves. The reason that 'UK/France/Germany' issue is important is because it undermines almost all of the arguments being made here i.e. that 'Iran is sovereign, a victim, and shouldn't be subject to sanctions'. The fact that 'the entire world' wants to sanction Iran for pursuing nukes fairly points to their bad acting. The only reason that trade is possibly going to happen - is because of the belief that they are not pursuing nuclear weapons.

dang 8y ago

Please do not engage in political or ideological or nationalistic flamewar on HN. This is the sort of discussion that starts out bad ("spare me this crying"), can only get worse, and leads to hell. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html