7 ms·
Because you are not sanctioning only the military and the government, you are sanctioning everyone in the country. You are sanctioning young people, who just wa
by jakobegger 7y ago
Because you are not sanctioning only the military and the government, you are sanctioning everyone in the country. You are sanctioning young people, who just want to live their lives, just like we do. They already suffer from the oppressive regime, and you just want to make their live even harder.
All the Iranians I've met seem like completely normal people. I've never been to Iran, but from what I hear the young people in Iran aren't much different from the people here: They like to go to parties, listen to music, etc. The only difference is that they have to do it in hiding, and that they will get arrested when they do something like hold hands in public when they are not married.
Why would anyone approve of sanctions that make these people suffer even more?
And then, when these people start fleeing the country, asking for asylum, why do we turn them away?
- flyinglizard 7y agoAt what point should we start to hold ordinary civilians responsible to the actions of their governments?
- YayamiOmate 7y agoNone? If they are under a regime and the government do not represent their will. At what point you start jailing children for their parent's actions? For any such action you should consider reason and effect. Do you have a good reason here and do you expect good results, or are yoy hust trying stuff out?
- saiya-jin 7y agoOne serious question - why are you attempting to troll, here and now? Some proper purpose or just another boring monday? You seem to enjoy stirring emotions with your rather simplistic views. an edit - Iran topic, like many other topics, is a deeply complex one, where past actions create current complex environment. You reduce this topic to simplistic black/white view, which is incorrect on many levels and doesn't correspond to reality out there. Hence the honest question above when looking at your various posts in this topic
- gdfasfklshg4 7y agoFor autocratic countries this is not even a viable question to start considering. For democracies there might be some consideration. But then you need to know how the individual people voted. EDIT: Also you need to consider whether the politicians actually had the acts on their manifestos.
- fit2rule 7y agoAlways. The people always get the politics they deserve.
- ohithereyou 7y agoDo the current citizens of North Korea deserve the government they have?
- fit2rule 7y agoThe only thing propping up the regime is the society which feeds it.
- ohithereyou 7y agoDo you believe that the main reason that the North Korean regime can survive is due to the support of the people?
- fit2rule 7y agoIndeed, its the only reason any regime survives.
- ohithereyou 7y agoWhat practical means of resistance does the average North Korean citizen have?
- fit2rule 7y agoEvery possible means. Plus, the decision - and responsibility - to act on it.
- PunchTornado 7y agowe suggest them to overturn their government, start a revolution.
- saiya-jin 7y agoWell that's the most dumb comment I've seen here for some time. you realize that most revolution end up in millions dead, having a new generation of dictators at the helm and little changed for the better, compared to a lot changed for the worse? But yeah its a sure way to give proper fundamentalists a good chance to rule.
- TeMPOraL 7y agoSee also: the Arab Spring.
- billpg 7y agothats-the-joke.gif
- PunchTornado 7y agoso according to you the revolutions in eastern europe shouldn't have happened. yes, in the Romanian revolution a few thousand heros died. but isn't that worth it to have freedom?
- darkpuma 7y agoWhy, so the CIA can ruin it again for them?
- konart 7y agoI hope you will find some time to at least google what caused Iran to be the way it is rigth now in the first place.
- frereubu 7y agoSanctions are a blunt tool for sure, and the suffering they cause ordinary people is clearly a bad thing. This is compounded in the case of Iran / US by the idiotic decision of the Trump administration to rip up the deal they had, which seemed to be working. However, and in general, if you have a nation state that does things like supporting terrorists (which Iran does seem to do), how do you try and compel them to stop those kinds of activities? Targeted sanctions are better - like targeting the overseas bank accounts of Russian oligarchs - but my understanding is that Iranian government officials don't have that kind of cash. It's a genuine question that I haven't heard a better answer for. The particular idiocy that complicates things in this specific situation is that the sanctions helped the deal to happen, and that's been derailed by Trump's fragile ego wanting complete capitulation that he's never going to get.
- yyyk 7y agoThe government and military control all the economic activity in the country. The IRGC is particularly embedded in economic activity. There's no way to 'sanction separately'. So the question is whether to feed the regime (and hope it throws some bones to the people while it uses the bulk of it on foreign adventures) or not. Unsurprisingly, some countries prefer the option that creates less risk for them.