4 ms·
As an Iranian, I have to say that while your last sentence might be true (Saudi Arabia sucks after all), I'd still rather live in a world where the opposing sup
by Siira 6y ago
As an Iranian, I have to say that while your last sentence might be true (Saudi Arabia sucks after all), I'd still rather live in a world where the opposing superpower would pressure my country to respect human rights and stop funding terrorism, fundamentalism, and misinformation. (See what North Korea's effective foreign immunity has brought its people.) This, of course, is hypocritical on the US part, but hypocrisy is better than complacency.
- names_are_hard 6y ago> hypocrisy is better than complacency This is a great phrase, I'm going to borrow that and use it.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- jlgaddis 6y agoThanks for sharing your perspective as an Iranian, I find it quite interesting. I'm curious if: 1) you still live in Iran and/or have immediate family who do? 2) is your opinion common amongst Iranians (and/or Persians)? 3) do/would you still feel the same way if the sanctions brought extreme economic hardship on the people of Iran? (Considering your remark about North Korea, I'm assuming the answer to the latter is "yes".)
- Siira 6y ago1) I and almost all my (even distant) family live in Iran. 2) I don’t know. I know there is a minority (again no idea how big) that really likes Trump because they really hate the Islamic regime, but these people tend to be poor (? Again not that sure) and have little grasp of economics or international politics. 3) The current sanctions have brought extreme hardships on us Iranians. From my own selfish viewpoint, I am hoping for much lighter sanctions from the potential Biden presidency. I would, however, prefer the harsh sanctions to the IR ever having nuclear bombs. (Not that I can see them being effective at preventing the bombs.) I am also not poor; I think a high-pressure strategy that results in a mass revolution by the poor can be to their medium term advantage (such a revolution would, of course, hurt the middle/upper classes a lot). But such a revolution might very well be impossible by the modern technology and the centralization of power. So to summarize, I think effective sanctions will be worth the hardships they cause, but ineffective sanctions not. The current hard sanctions seem ineffective to me unless they are made much more stringent (which might not be possible) or are paired with military interventions.
- Udik 6y agoCome on, didn't you understand yet that the US doesn't give a damn about Iran's respect for human rights? Do you think Israel is respecting Palestinians' human rights? Or is Saudi Arabia respecting human rights? Of course not, and yet they are the US's best buddies. The US even had an agreement that put a stop to Iran's nuclear program and soothed the tensions with the West, allowing Iranians to improve their living conditions and hopefully at some point ditch radicalism. They threw it in the bin, because what the US fears is ultimately a non-aligned country with the strenghts to stand against external aggression. What the US really wants is not respect of human rights or better living conditions for the people (see Libya, see Iraq, see Palestine, see the bloody civil war in Syria). What they want is to reduce every non-aligned country to either vassal or rubble.
- tensor 6y agoI wonder when the US will get sanctioned for its support of terrorists, fundamentalism, misinformation, and human rights abuse. It has a long history of these things, and they are getting worse and more blatant at an alarming rate.
- hackerman123469 6y agoYou can't be found guilty when you have veto power.