4 ms·

I've personally known 2 women from Iran who are not fans of the US foreign policy, but become red with anger and visibly shaking when talking about their govt's

I've personally known 2 women from Iran who are not fans of the US foreign policy, but become red with anger and visibly shaking when talking about their govt's treatment of women.

sdfghswe 4y ago
> I've personally known 2 women from Iran who are not fans of the US foreign policy, but become red with anger and visibly shaking when talking about their govt's treatment of women. Why "but"? Those are usually the same groups of people.
- achow 4y ago
  Don't get it; 'but' seems to be very legitimate use. Intuitively, it is more likely that people who are not fan of US policies would be fan of Iranian govt's policies (you know because Iranian govt and US govt don't see eye to eye and all that..).
  - sdfghswe 4y ago
    > but become red with anger and visibly shaking when talking about their govt's treatment of women. Oh sorry I misinterpreted this phrase. I read it as if it said "become red with anger when you criticize their govt's treatment of women". My bad.
  - rhamzeh 4y ago
    "Intuitively, it is more likely that people who are not fan of US policies would be fan of Iranian govt's policies" In what world but an American worldview is that even remotely intuitive? That statement is plain wrong.
Centigonal 4y ago
A lot of Iranians see US foreign policy as aiding or even causing the current Iranian government.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- weatherlite 4y ago
  Perhaps, that doesn't make it true though...
  - Centigonal 4y ago
    Causality in global geopolitics is complicated, multifactorial, and generally very difficult to pin down. The original comment was talking about the perceptions of Iranians, and my comments speaks to the perceptions I have seen. US-Iran relations post-WW2 and why some Iranians see the US as a causal factor for the current repressive regime is a fascinating topic! If you want to explore, here are a few starting points: 1. More of an anti-Shah stance: https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=legacy https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=100... 2. More of a pro-Shah, US-centric stance: https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/1979-iran-and-america/ https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/1979-iran-and-america/
    - weatherlite 4y ago
      At what point do we allow people (in this case the Iranian regime) to have free will / self agency? And also - we usually don't allow ourselves to go 50 years back to explain someone's behavior. At least in court - that kind of testimony wouldn't have much value.
      - defrost 4y ago
        US Courts (and others) will lock up or send to death row some on evidence that they killed someone 50 years ago (and more) .. murder has no statute of limitations. US actions set the conditions (a foreign puppet ruler) for a people's overthrow which itself was usurped by the worst form of theocrats (your "Iranian Regime") who maintain power by murder (public hangings in squares, etc) .. and act which, again, US Courts have no time limitation on the consideration of.
marcosdumay 4y ago
I get impressed every time I see those people that don't see that the most effective thing supporting the current Iran government is the US foreign policy. Really, I can't understand why this worldview comes from.
- itissid 4y ago
  Would the current Iran government collapse if the US removed all the sanctions and let Iran be? Historically a 180 reversal on sanctions on countries while the regimes were in place has never really been fully tested or known to work.
  - marcosdumay 4y ago
    The current government was elected as soon as GWB started threatening invade Iran. (And followed with a much expected unnoficial coup.) The previous one (not exactly democratic, but not "let's kill everybody that dresses wrong" either) was created by a lot of popular pressure, replacing another set of religious nutjobs that were put there by the CIA. Now, answer me, did the sanctions destroy the current government yet? Or maybe they are only there for 15 years and they just need a century or two to make any effect?
    - dogma1138 4y ago
      Eh, all parties and candidates have to be approved by the council of experts and the supreme leader there are no free elections in Iran. The CIA definitely did not put the religious nut jobs in power in Iran. Unless you want to blame them for the revolution in the first place.
hydrok9 4y ago
I worked with an Iranian woman (in Canada) and she would look terrified and basically shut down if you mentioned the morality police.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

I've personally known 2 women from Iran who are not fans of the US foreign policy, but become red with anger and visibly shaking when talking about their govt's treatment of women.

sdfghswe 4y ago

> I've personally known 2 women from Iran who are not fans of the US foreign policy, but become red with anger and visibly shaking when talking about their govt's treatment of women. Why "but"? Those are usually the same groups of people.

achow 4y ago
Don't get it; 'but' seems to be very legitimate use. Intuitively, it is more likely that people who are not fan of US policies would be fan of Iranian govt's policies (you know because Iranian govt and US govt don't see eye to eye and all that..).
- sdfghswe 4y ago
  > but become red with anger and visibly shaking when talking about their govt's treatment of women. Oh sorry I misinterpreted this phrase. I read it as if it said "become red with anger when you criticize their govt's treatment of women". My bad.
- rhamzeh 4y ago
  "Intuitively, it is more likely that people who are not fan of US policies would be fan of Iranian govt's policies" In what world but an American worldview is that even remotely intuitive? That statement is plain wrong.

Centigonal 4y ago

A lot of Iranians see US foreign policy as aiding or even causing the current Iranian government.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
weatherlite 4y ago
Perhaps, that doesn't make it true though...
- Centigonal 4y ago
  Causality in global geopolitics is complicated, multifactorial, and generally very difficult to pin down. The original comment was talking about the perceptions of Iranians, and my comments speaks to the perceptions I have seen. US-Iran relations post-WW2 and why some Iranians see the US as a causal factor for the current repressive regime is a fascinating topic! If you want to explore, here are a few starting points: 1. More of an anti-Shah stance: https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=legacy https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=100... 2. More of a pro-Shah, US-centric stance: https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/1979-iran-and-america/ https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/1979-iran-and-america/
  - weatherlite 4y ago
    At what point do we allow people (in this case the Iranian regime) to have free will / self agency? And also - we usually don't allow ourselves to go 50 years back to explain someone's behavior. At least in court - that kind of testimony wouldn't have much value.
    - defrost 4y ago
      US Courts (and others) will lock up or send to death row some on evidence that they killed someone 50 years ago (and more) .. murder has no statute of limitations. US actions set the conditions (a foreign puppet ruler) for a people's overthrow which itself was usurped by the worst form of theocrats (your "Iranian Regime") who maintain power by murder (public hangings in squares, etc) .. and act which, again, US Courts have no time limitation on the consideration of.

marcosdumay 4y ago

I get impressed every time I see those people that don't see that the most effective thing supporting the current Iran government is the US foreign policy. Really, I can't understand why this worldview comes from.

itissid 4y ago
Would the current Iran government collapse if the US removed all the sanctions and let Iran be? Historically a 180 reversal on sanctions on countries while the regimes were in place has never really been fully tested or known to work.
- marcosdumay 4y ago
  The current government was elected as soon as GWB started threatening invade Iran. (And followed with a much expected unnoficial coup.) The previous one (not exactly democratic, but not "let's kill everybody that dresses wrong" either) was created by a lot of popular pressure, replacing another set of religious nutjobs that were put there by the CIA. Now, answer me, did the sanctions destroy the current government yet? Or maybe they are only there for 15 years and they just need a century or two to make any effect?
  - dogma1138 4y ago
    Eh, all parties and candidates have to be approved by the council of experts and the supreme leader there are no free elections in Iran. The CIA definitely did not put the religious nut jobs in power in Iran. Unless you want to blame them for the revolution in the first place.

hydrok9 4y ago

I worked with an Iranian woman (in Canada) and she would look terrified and basically shut down if you mentioned the morality police.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]