3 ms·

For human rights violations at home and sponsorship of extremism aboard. I also believe many of our current "allies" in the region should face similar sanction

by pibaker 12d ago

For human rights violations at home and sponsorship of extremism aboard. I also believe many of our current "allies" in the region should face similar sanctions in case you are wondering.

applfanboysbgon 12d ago
The US itself should be sanctioned by your listed metric.
- hammock 12d ago
  Isn’t that what they say the tariffs are?
  - edoceo 12d ago
    USA sanctioned themselves?
- Danox 11d ago
  The US is starting to have more countries look to other avenues and several of our closest friends are leading the charge. I would like to believe that after the current nightmare is over, we can put several things right but that’s a big if.
FactolSarin 12d ago
I don't disagree, but that's not why they're being sanctioned
swat535 12d ago
> I also believe many of our current "allies" in the region should face similar sanctions in case you are wondering. Interesting take, coming from a nation that has caused: - 210,296 violent civilian deaths in IRAQ - 500,000 civilians killed om Japan - 70,000 civilians killed in Vietnam - 46,000 civilians killed in Afghanistan - 3,000 civilians killed in IRAN - Threatened to exterminate Persians civilization, blown up bridges, killed children and destroyed civilian infrastructure I think United States should be sanctioned.
- deleted 12d ago
  [deleted]
- oxcartctl 12d ago
  [dead]
- ericmay 12d ago
  > - Threatened to exterminate Persians civilization, blown up bridges, killed children and destroyed civilian infrastructure Iran threatens that all the time "Death to America" so if they don't like someone saying it back to them maybe they should stop? If you want to make these kinds of body count claims, well for starters Iran killed over 30,000 of its own people recently (who knows maybe they've killed tens of thousands more over the years). Iran also made the Iraq war worse by funding insurgents, which opposed the US and the government of Iraq (which is doing much better now as a country than it was under Saddam anyway) so they are partially responsible for some of those deaths. But let's continue with this logic. While we're at it why don't we sanction China? Common estimates suggest 10s of millions dead from the Great Leap Forward (no it's not any different when you kill your own people, arguably much worse). Dramatic repression in places like Hong Kong, and continuing to threaten democratic Taiwan. Why aren't you clamoring to sanction China if you're going to bring up Japan and Vietnam? Well that's because your logic is unsound, never mind the continued hyper-focus on being critical of the United States only. Maybe all of these deaths are actually on the hands of Europeans who partitioned these gulf states in the first place. Why was France in Vietnam? Why was the UN in Korea?
  - fzn7 12d ago
    Your reply is pure, distilled whataboutism.
    - ericmay 12d ago
      The premise of the OP is whataboutism. But you can take a step back and ask, well, what's the guiding framework here? Is it arbitrarily picking certain time periods to make a point? Why do we go back to "Japan" and World War II when Japan started the war and was massacring and colonizing people throughout east Asia? Why wasn't Germany mentioned in the body count? Dresden is a popular one that comes to mind. Why do we only focus on lives lost? Maybe America saved 10,000,000 Chinese from Japanese occupation so on balance we're saving lives?
Razengan 12d ago
> For human rights violations at home reddit.com/r/2020PoliceBrutality reddit.com/r/PoliceBrutality Oh yeah sorry this is "wHaTaBoUtIsM" so it makes our shit okay
- misano 12d ago
  The difference is that in America, they don't torture and imprison the mother of a murder victim for an Instagram post on charges of disturbing national security and public unrest.
  - Razengan 12d ago
    > The difference is that we eat eggs from the little end and they eat from the big end.
    - Sabinus 11d ago
      The one-party-state and leader-for-life thing is a bit more substantial than egg eating habits. It's all fun and games while they're increasingly productive and not very internationally assertive but that won't last forever.
adrian_b 12d ago
Sanctions for human rights violations would be justified only if they would be applied equally towards any country where certain human rights violations happen. Unfortunately, USA has never applied any sanctions equally against countries with equivalent human rights violations, which proves that "human rights violations" have never been the true reason for those sanctions, but only a cover story. When I was young and I was listening the US propaganda emitted through "Voice of America", I actually believed a good part of it. Unfortunately, history has proven that practically none of it was true and many listeners like myself were too naive if they believed any of it. Moreover, the so-called "sanctions" of USA are not true sanctions. True sanctions would identify a precise behavior of the sanctioned country that is the cause of the sanctions and USA would promise that the sanctions would be terminated whenever the sanctioned country would stop those actions. Those would be true "sanctions" because they would have a chance to alter the behavior of the sanctioned countries. As it is now, no sanctioned country would change anything in what they do, even when they are "sanctioned", because they know very well that the official reasons for the sanctions are not the true reasons and whatever they do about "human rights violations" and the like will not influence in any way whether the sanctions will be terminated or not. Many of the official reasons for various US sanctions are so ridiculous that I wonder how the US politicians are able to utter them with a straight face. For instance, there are many Chinese companies which are sanctioned because they might provide services or products for the Chinese Army or for the Chinese government. ??? Of course they do that. Any US company that makes anything of value will also provide services or products to the US military and government. The same will do any company in any country for their military and government. In reality, the sanctioned Chinese companies have always been those which make consumer products that provided too much competition for US companies, like those that make DRAM modules and SSDs, so we have to thank the US sanctions for the huge price increases that have stolen money from people all over the world. Regarding "sponsorship of extremism abroad", that is also questionable. Iran has supported various organizations which want to fight against Israel, but Israel has remained at war since its creation and the reason why they are still at war and they have never made peace with their enemies is because this was the wish of the Israeli government, who prefers to be at war than at peace. There have existed opportunities of peace for Israel, but whenever there were chances for peace the forces within Israel that are against peace have prevented it, e.g. by the murder of the prime-minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995 or by the sabotage of the prime-minister Ehud Barak by Ariel Sharon and Likud in 2000. As long as Israel will not implement an acceptable closure for the events from its creation and for their consequences, there will be people willing to fight against it, and because Israel has a crushing military superiority, the only form of fight are the "terrorist" actions. The existence of the "terrorists" is a choice made by Israel, more precisely by certain elites from Israel, for whom the continuous state of never-ending war has been extremely profitable. I have worked for many years in Israel and more than 90% of the people that I encountered there were very nice people, but I have also seen some very bad people, who of course, like in any country, were concentrated in the government and in the management of companies, so they had much more influence than the majority. I pitied a lot my Israeli co-workers, because they were exploited to a degree that would not be possible in most countries. Only USA might come close with its "employment at will", which gives disproportionate power to the employer. In Israel, employees have to work much harder than in most other countries and nobody could protest against that, because that would be considered as unpatriotic, i.e. the priority for everybody is to work as hard as possible, to maintain the technological and military superiority of Israel, for fear that otherwise their neighbors would come and cut their throats. This kind of work discipline is of course very desirable for the owners of the companies, so for them it is good that Israel is permanently at war and under the menace of "terrorist" attacks. The term "terrorist" is just an euphemism for enemies with which Israel is at war and with which it desires no peace. Moreover, even if there have been a lot of more or less innocent Israeli victims (but all have chosen willingly to be part of a military conflict), Israel has always succeeded to kill a much greater number of "terrorists" or persons related to them or persons who just happened to be close to them. Israel does not want to make any concessions for peace, because it reckons that peace will be obtained eventually, over the dead bodies of all enemies, but there is no hurry for that, because war is good for the economy. In these circumstances, applying "sanctions" against countries who "support terrorists" has no legal basis, but it is just joining the conflict between Israel and its enemies, as an ally of Israel. Of course any sovereign country may do this, but they should present it as what it is, i.e. as taking sides in a conflict, and not as something which has any legal or ethical reasons.
Danox 11d ago
Does that include China? The only thing this is gonna lead to is an alternative system. More countries turning away from the United States/Europe for good, this is another one of those cases of winning or without firing a shot.
ioulaum 9d ago
Most of the problem there is an adaptation resulting from the long sanctions and bad security posture. Iran is much like Israel as a country... Their territory isn't safe, and so they maintain a forward defense strategy that keeps enemies from directly reaching their borders where they are vulnerable. It's more a result of the international order being primitive, and there being a lack of intelligent leadership on the global level that can establish trust. Plus, one has to be realistic about the sheer amount of harm the US has caused internationally – and even on Americans in the past (chemical weapon tests? the outrageous number of people in prison?). Pretending that Iran is somehow especially evil is childish. It's more that that's also a "human government". Unfortunately for them, they're not ruled by super geniuses...

by pibaker 12d ago

For human rights violations at home and sponsorship of extremism aboard. I also believe many of our current "allies" in the region should face similar sanctions in case you are wondering.

applfanboysbgon 12d ago

The US itself should be sanctioned by your listed metric.

hammock 12d ago
Isn’t that what they say the tariffs are?
- edoceo 12d ago
  USA sanctioned themselves?
Danox 11d ago
The US is starting to have more countries look to other avenues and several of our closest friends are leading the charge. I would like to believe that after the current nightmare is over, we can put several things right but that’s a big if.

FactolSarin 12d ago

I don't disagree, but that's not why they're being sanctioned

swat535 12d ago

> I also believe many of our current "allies" in the region should face similar sanctions in case you are wondering. Interesting take, coming from a nation that has caused: - 210,296 violent civilian deaths in IRAQ - 500,000 civilians killed om Japan - 70,000 civilians killed in Vietnam - 46,000 civilians killed in Afghanistan - 3,000 civilians killed in IRAN - Threatened to exterminate Persians civilization, blown up bridges, killed children and destroyed civilian infrastructure I think United States should be sanctioned.

deleted 12d ago
[deleted]
oxcartctl 12d ago
[dead]
ericmay 12d ago
> - Threatened to exterminate Persians civilization, blown up bridges, killed children and destroyed civilian infrastructure Iran threatens that all the time "Death to America" so if they don't like someone saying it back to them maybe they should stop? If you want to make these kinds of body count claims, well for starters Iran killed over 30,000 of its own people recently (who knows maybe they've killed tens of thousands more over the years). Iran also made the Iraq war worse by funding insurgents, which opposed the US and the government of Iraq (which is doing much better now as a country than it was under Saddam anyway) so they are partially responsible for some of those deaths. But let's continue with this logic. While we're at it why don't we sanction China? Common estimates suggest 10s of millions dead from the Great Leap Forward (no it's not any different when you kill your own people, arguably much worse). Dramatic repression in places like Hong Kong, and continuing to threaten democratic Taiwan. Why aren't you clamoring to sanction China if you're going to bring up Japan and Vietnam? Well that's because your logic is unsound, never mind the continued hyper-focus on being critical of the United States only. Maybe all of these deaths are actually on the hands of Europeans who partitioned these gulf states in the first place. Why was France in Vietnam? Why was the UN in Korea?
- fzn7 12d ago
  Your reply is pure, distilled whataboutism.
  - ericmay 12d ago
    The premise of the OP is whataboutism. But you can take a step back and ask, well, what's the guiding framework here? Is it arbitrarily picking certain time periods to make a point? Why do we go back to "Japan" and World War II when Japan started the war and was massacring and colonizing people throughout east Asia? Why wasn't Germany mentioned in the body count? Dresden is a popular one that comes to mind. Why do we only focus on lives lost? Maybe America saved 10,000,000 Chinese from Japanese occupation so on balance we're saving lives?

Razengan 12d ago

> For human rights violations at home reddit.com/r/2020PoliceBrutality reddit.com/r/PoliceBrutality Oh yeah sorry this is "wHaTaBoUtIsM" so it makes our shit okay

misano 12d ago
The difference is that in America, they don't torture and imprison the mother of a murder victim for an Instagram post on charges of disturbing national security and public unrest.
- Razengan 12d ago
  > The difference is that we eat eggs from the little end and they eat from the big end.
  - Sabinus 11d ago
    The one-party-state and leader-for-life thing is a bit more substantial than egg eating habits. It's all fun and games while they're increasingly productive and not very internationally assertive but that won't last forever.

adrian_b 12d ago

Sanctions for human rights violations would be justified only if they would be applied equally towards any country where certain human rights violations happen. Unfortunately, USA has never applied any sanctions equally against countries with equivalent human rights violations, which proves that "human rights violations" have never been the true reason for those sanctions, but only a cover story. When I was young and I was listening the US propaganda emitted through "Voice of America", I actually believed a good part of it. Unfortunately, history has proven that practically none of it was true and many listeners like myself were too naive if they believed any of it. Moreover, the so-called "sanctions" of USA are not true sanctions. True sanctions would identify a precise behavior of the sanctioned country that is the cause of the sanctions and USA would promise that the sanctions would be terminated whenever the sanctioned country would stop those actions. Those would be true "sanctions" because they would have a chance to alter the behavior of the sanctioned countries. As it is now, no sanctioned country would change anything in what they do, even when they are "sanctioned", because they know very well that the official reasons for the sanctions are not the true reasons and whatever they do about "human rights violations" and the like will not influence in any way whether the sanctions will be terminated or not. Many of the official reasons for various US sanctions are so ridiculous that I wonder how the US politicians are able to utter them with a straight face. For instance, there are many Chinese companies which are sanctioned because they might provide services or products for the Chinese Army or for the Chinese government. ??? Of course they do that. Any US company that makes anything of value will also provide services or products to the US military and government. The same will do any company in any country for their military and government. In reality, the sanctioned Chinese companies have always been those which make consumer products that provided too much competition for US companies, like those that make DRAM modules and SSDs, so we have to thank the US sanctions for the huge price increases that have stolen money from people all over the world. Regarding "sponsorship of extremism abroad", that is also questionable. Iran has supported various organizations which want to fight against Israel, but Israel has remained at war since its creation and the reason why they are still at war and they have never made peace with their enemies is because this was the wish of the Israeli government, who prefers to be at war than at peace. There have existed opportunities of peace for Israel, but whenever there were chances for peace the forces within Israel that are against peace have prevented it, e.g. by the murder of the prime-minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995 or by the sabotage of the prime-minister Ehud Barak by Ariel Sharon and Likud in 2000. As long as Israel will not implement an acceptable closure for the events from its creation and for their consequences, there will be people willing to fight against it, and because Israel has a crushing military superiority, the only form of fight are the "terrorist" actions. The existence of the "terrorists" is a choice made by Israel, more precisely by certain elites from Israel, for whom the continuous state of never-ending war has been extremely profitable. I have worked for many years in Israel and more than 90% of the people that I encountered there were very nice people, but I have also seen some very bad people, who of course, like in any country, were concentrated in the government and in the management of companies, so they had much more influence than the majority. I pitied a lot my Israeli co-workers, because they were exploited to a degree that would not be possible in most countries. Only USA might come close with its "employment at will", which gives disproportionate power to the employer. In Israel, employees have to work much harder than in most other countries and nobody could protest against that, because that would be considered as unpatriotic, i.e. the priority for everybody is to work as hard as possible, to maintain the technological and military superiority of Israel, for fear that otherwise their neighbors would come and cut their throats. This kind of work discipline is of course very desirable for the owners of the companies, so for them it is good that Israel is permanently at war and under the menace of "terrorist" attacks. The term "terrorist" is just an euphemism for enemies with which Israel is at war and with which it desires no peace. Moreover, even if there have been a lot of more or less innocent Israeli victims (but all have chosen willingly to be part of a military conflict), Israel has always succeeded to kill a much greater number of "terrorists" or persons related to them or persons who just happened to be close to them. Israel does not want to make any concessions for peace, because it reckons that peace will be obtained eventually, over the dead bodies of all enemies, but there is no hurry for that, because war is good for the economy. In these circumstances, applying "sanctions" against countries who "support terrorists" has no legal basis, but it is just joining the conflict between Israel and its enemies, as an ally of Israel. Of course any sovereign country may do this, but they should present it as what it is, i.e. as taking sides in a conflict, and not as something which has any legal or ethical reasons.

Danox 11d ago

Does that include China? The only thing this is gonna lead to is an alternative system. More countries turning away from the United States/Europe for good, this is another one of those cases of winning or without firing a shot.

ioulaum 9d ago

Most of the problem there is an adaptation resulting from the long sanctions and bad security posture. Iran is much like Israel as a country... Their territory isn't safe, and so they maintain a forward defense strategy that keeps enemies from directly reaching their borders where they are vulnerable. It's more a result of the international order being primitive, and there being a lack of intelligent leadership on the global level that can establish trust. Plus, one has to be realistic about the sheer amount of harm the US has caused internationally – and even on Americans in the past (chemical weapon tests? the outrageous number of people in prison?). Pretending that Iran is somehow especially evil is childish. It's more that that's also a "human government". Unfortunately for them, they're not ruled by super geniuses...