14 ms·

> But even in the US, no one I've ever had the option to vote for (and who had even a remote chance of winning) would ever consider lifting these sanctions. So

> But even in the US, no one I've ever had the option to vote for (and who had even a remote chance of winning) would ever consider lifting these sanctions. So I am similarly powerless to change this situation. Not saying Obama’s foreign policy was perfect, but he did do the Iran nuclear deal which lifted some sanctions, and started the process of normalizing relations with Cuba. Like so many other things, these were immediately undone by his successor…

nanliu 1y ago
Long term foreign relationships cannot be built on top of four year presidential terms. Besides Israel, I'm not sure any country has continuity between recent administrations.
- inetknght 1y ago
  > Long term foreign relationships cannot be built on top of four year presidential terms. Yes indeed, I agree. Although: long term foreign relationships certainly can be un-built on top of four year presidential terms. See: current US president and rest-of-the-world.
  - baggachipz 1y ago
    Not just un-built, but poisoned for generations.
    - marcosdumay 1y ago
      It's very rare that international relations get poisoned for generations without some ongoing work from both involved parties. Populations tend to forget things on the timeline of a decade or so. The US can rebuild most of what they destroyed. It's gone now, and some of it they were already on the process of losing and can't get back. But no country is beyond reconstruction.
      - baggachipz 1y ago
        The Cold War would like to have a word with you. Yes, we gave them a McDonald's in the 90's, but things have only gotten worse over time.
        int_19h 1y ago
        And yet look at Vietnam-US relations. As someone who grew up in Russia in the 90s, that McDonald's actually did wonders! The problem is that y'all figured that if you help people who say that they are "democrats" maintain control over the country, it'll all work out, somehow. What actually happened is that many of those people were grifters, some others idealistic incompetents who thought they had all the answers after reading Ayn Rand. On the whole, the people - who were very enthusiastic about the changes in late 80s - by mid-90s felt like they've been robbed, quite rightly so (read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatization_in_Russia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatization_in_Russia for some examples), by people now firmly associated with the West and with words such as "liberal". This is the big reason why Western-style liberal democracy very quickly became a marginalized minority political opinion in Russia, and why the likes of Putin could easily take power by promising people that they'll fix the mess.
    - refurb 1y ago
      You’re taking public comments ways too seriously. Relations clearly aren’t poisoned since the EU and US are still closely collaborating on several fronts such as policy towards China and Ukraine. Don’t mistake harsh words intended for domestic voters with reality.
  - dgfitz 1y ago
    It takes a week to remodel a kitchen and an hour to demolish it.
padjo 1y ago
Obama acknowledging that the US overthrew an Iranian democracy for the benefit of oil companies definitely helped and could have ushered in a new era of understanding. Sadly, America then decided to elect someone with a toddler’s understanding of history and geopolitics which destroyed all that opportunity for a generation.
- tgma 1y ago
  If you are referring to the Mosadegh story, that “apology” started with Bill Clinton and Madeline Albright trying to appease the current regime in Iran. Sadly, the “apology” itself is meddling with the historical facts. The Mosadegh government was no more or no less democratic than any other Prime Minister in that era. He had prorogued the parliament and waged a war against the Constitution and tried to elevate himself over the law and depose the ruling monarch. The Soviets and their affiliates and comrades on the ground supported the move (hoping to remove him next and extend the Bolshevik revolution to the Persian Gulf,) and the US and many Iranians did not want him to succeed. In any case facts of the story are so brazenly changed in the apology’s telling of the story that regardless of which side you are on, in and of itself is a political interference against the will of the Iranian people. Please also note that the golden era of Iranian prosperity was the decade and a half when he was removed from power by the monarch.
  - YC984983427 1y ago
    Proroguing in parliaments is nothing new or anti-democratic. Canada had its parliament prorogued for the first 4 months of this year yet I didn't see calls for violent US-backed regime change and political suppression like there was under the American puppet Shah. Same with deposing a monarch (getting rid of monarchy is "anti-democratic" now?). More information on the "Iranian golden age of prosperity" you mentioned: >During that time two monarchs — Reza Shah Pahlavi and his son Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi — employed secret police, torture, and executions to stifle political dissent. The Pahlavi dynasty has sometimes been described as a "royal dictatorship",[1] or "one-man rule". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_Imperial_State_of_Iran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_Imperial_S...
1234letshaveatw 1y ago
[flagged]
- guappa 1y ago
  If you have proof of iran having nuclear weapons, perhaps sell the scoop?
  - 1234letshaveatw 1y ago
    Did you miss the word develop? It doesn't imply developed
- k_roy 1y ago
  Except that's not what happened was it
  - 1234letshaveatw 1y ago
    Except, that is what happened wasn't it
- figmert 1y ago
  Every international body had checked, and confirmed that Iran had no intention of building nuclear weapons. Even to this day. Even after what Israel and US did. Netanyahu has been saying Iran in minutes away from building nuclear weapons since early 2010s. Never mind those facts. Let's say they are building weapons. What gives the US the right to build enough nuclear weapons that they could destroy the world multiple times over, but Iran cannot? Why is the US funding terrorist groups, but Iran cannot? Just cos they're the big bad boogeyman? Don't you think it'd be better to normalise relationship with them so that they become friendly? So that even if they are building weapons, they wouldn't use it against us because they're allies?
  - arolihas 1y ago
    Israel has been peddling that lie for 40 years now

nanliu 1y ago

Long term foreign relationships cannot be built on top of four year presidential terms. Besides Israel, I'm not sure any country has continuity between recent administrations.

inetknght 1y ago
> Long term foreign relationships cannot be built on top of four year presidential terms. Yes indeed, I agree. Although: long term foreign relationships certainly can be un-built on top of four year presidential terms. See: current US president and rest-of-the-world.
- baggachipz 1y ago
  Not just un-built, but poisoned for generations.
  - marcosdumay 1y ago
    It's very rare that international relations get poisoned for generations without some ongoing work from both involved parties. Populations tend to forget things on the timeline of a decade or so. The US can rebuild most of what they destroyed. It's gone now, and some of it they were already on the process of losing and can't get back. But no country is beyond reconstruction.
    - baggachipz 1y ago
      The Cold War would like to have a word with you. Yes, we gave them a McDonald's in the 90's, but things have only gotten worse over time.
      - int_19h 1y ago
        And yet look at Vietnam-US relations. As someone who grew up in Russia in the 90s, that McDonald's actually did wonders! The problem is that y'all figured that if you help people who say that they are "democrats" maintain control over the country, it'll all work out, somehow. What actually happened is that many of those people were grifters, some others idealistic incompetents who thought they had all the answers after reading Ayn Rand. On the whole, the people - who were very enthusiastic about the changes in late 80s - by mid-90s felt like they've been robbed, quite rightly so (read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatization_in_Russia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatization_in_Russia for some examples), by people now firmly associated with the West and with words such as "liberal". This is the big reason why Western-style liberal democracy very quickly became a marginalized minority political opinion in Russia, and why the likes of Putin could easily take power by promising people that they'll fix the mess.
  - refurb 1y ago
    You’re taking public comments ways too seriously. Relations clearly aren’t poisoned since the EU and US are still closely collaborating on several fronts such as policy towards China and Ukraine. Don’t mistake harsh words intended for domestic voters with reality.
- dgfitz 1y ago
  It takes a week to remodel a kitchen and an hour to demolish it.

padjo 1y ago

Obama acknowledging that the US overthrew an Iranian democracy for the benefit of oil companies definitely helped and could have ushered in a new era of understanding. Sadly, America then decided to elect someone with a toddler’s understanding of history and geopolitics which destroyed all that opportunity for a generation.

tgma 1y ago
If you are referring to the Mosadegh story, that “apology” started with Bill Clinton and Madeline Albright trying to appease the current regime in Iran. Sadly, the “apology” itself is meddling with the historical facts. The Mosadegh government was no more or no less democratic than any other Prime Minister in that era. He had prorogued the parliament and waged a war against the Constitution and tried to elevate himself over the law and depose the ruling monarch. The Soviets and their affiliates and comrades on the ground supported the move (hoping to remove him next and extend the Bolshevik revolution to the Persian Gulf,) and the US and many Iranians did not want him to succeed. In any case facts of the story are so brazenly changed in the apology’s telling of the story that regardless of which side you are on, in and of itself is a political interference against the will of the Iranian people. Please also note that the golden era of Iranian prosperity was the decade and a half when he was removed from power by the monarch.
- YC984983427 1y ago
  Proroguing in parliaments is nothing new or anti-democratic. Canada had its parliament prorogued for the first 4 months of this year yet I didn't see calls for violent US-backed regime change and political suppression like there was under the American puppet Shah. Same with deposing a monarch (getting rid of monarchy is "anti-democratic" now?). More information on the "Iranian golden age of prosperity" you mentioned: >During that time two monarchs — Reza Shah Pahlavi and his son Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi — employed secret police, torture, and executions to stifle political dissent. The Pahlavi dynasty has sometimes been described as a "royal dictatorship",[1] or "one-man rule". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_Imperial_State_of_Iran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_Imperial_S...

1234letshaveatw 1y ago

[flagged]

guappa 1y ago
If you have proof of iran having nuclear weapons, perhaps sell the scoop?
- 1234letshaveatw 1y ago
  Did you miss the word develop? It doesn't imply developed
k_roy 1y ago
Except that's not what happened was it
- 1234letshaveatw 1y ago
  Except, that is what happened wasn't it
figmert 1y ago
Every international body had checked, and confirmed that Iran had no intention of building nuclear weapons. Even to this day. Even after what Israel and US did. Netanyahu has been saying Iran in minutes away from building nuclear weapons since early 2010s. Never mind those facts. Let's say they are building weapons. What gives the US the right to build enough nuclear weapons that they could destroy the world multiple times over, but Iran cannot? Why is the US funding terrorist groups, but Iran cannot? Just cos they're the big bad boogeyman? Don't you think it'd be better to normalise relationship with them so that they become friendly? So that even if they are building weapons, they wouldn't use it against us because they're allies?
- arolihas 1y ago
  Israel has been peddling that lie for 40 years now