As a Jewish born Iranian atheist refugee to the states who protested against Iran a few years ago in Iran, I'd have to say, you're pretty wrong on this one.
I hate Islamic Republic with every single cell in my body but you're just wrong.
* U.S. plain and simply fucked Iran up with a coup at 1953.
* Then helped Islamic Republic gain power in 1979. (This is up for debate though)
* Then helped Saddam Hussein attack Iran.
* Then sanctioned the country to the verge of bankruptcy.
* Then made a deal and backed out of it for no reason (Internal politics?)
Iran was already fucked up of its own doing before the 1953 coup. For the last few centuries Iran's history had been alternating periods of civil war and regional agression on Iran's part.
The late 19th century was marked by occupation by Russia and the Ottoman empire. Following defeats in wars which Iran generally had provoked.
Once Iran became a constitutional monarchy in the early 20th century political instability reigned as forces loyal to the monarchy fought for power with those with a more democratic bent. Between 1947-1951 Iran had 6 different prime ministers. The coup itself was really a continuation of this political battle with the US helping the forces loyal to the monarchy.
Iran also didn't help itself during WW2 by choosing to technically remain neutral while allowing a large German presence and German utilization of the oil fields. This led to a joint British and Russian occupation to drive the Germans out.
Even today Iran's economic woes although made worse by sanctions is mostly rooted in economic policy decisions and large scale corruption which feeds money to those backed by the revolutionary guard at the expense of the people.
But it is easier to blame the big bad West for all your woes rather than take an introspective look at your own culpability.
Path to democracy is not easy, specially in an oil-rich country like Iran.
We've had our moments that we were getting close. Now those moments are quite fragile. Every single time the U.S. has kicked us in the nuts in those moments.
Examples are this very same moment, where the economic sanctions and the reformists finally convinced the hardliners to talk to the U.S.
Supreme Leader finally gave it a thumbs up. And he raised his concerns back then that the U.S. cannot be trusted but if that's what people want it's OK to do it.
He was right. The U.S. could not be trusted. Now reformists have lost all credibility. In 2 years we have another election and for sure a batshit crazy like Ahmadinejad is going to be elected.
Same happened around 9/11. We had a really strong reformist movement and government. Then, out of nowhere, president Bush named Iran a part of "axis of evil". That gave the hardliners enough of a reason to push back against major reforms.
Jack Straw (British foreign minister of the time) has good notes on this if you're more interested.
1953's coup was another moment like that. Actually that's probably the closest we've ever been.
Now, if Iran is moving towards democracy, and at the most important moments, you kick it in the nuts, you "are" part of the problem.
You have not really disproven most of the more recent issues he brought up. The US (and Britain) did have a big hand in the struggle that culminated in the Iranian revolution: for fear of getting a USSR ally, they got a completely out-of-control regime and then have fought it with the dirtiest tricks they could muster ever since. Sure, nobody is fully innocent, but that doesn't justify acting like a c*nt in return; it actually justifies blaming "the big bad West" and helping the worst sectors of Iranian society. Isolation always helps this sort of regime, see also: fascist Italy, socialist Cuba and so on.
As also an European, I think breaching international agreements like this and making regular people suffer, (because that's what the sanctions are doing), in order to score points because the U.S. is still mad that their regime in Iran got overthrown, I absolutely support the EU opposition to this.
I may say that I recently got a victim of the USA sanctions when our plane back from Iran made two emergency landings in a row and had no real possibility to repair it obviously. We were then put on another Jetliner which can be only seen in museums nowadays (except for Iran, where, thanks to Trump, this is now a dangerous mean transportation). No one should trust the Iranian government without really checking twice everything they say, yet those sanction take hostage of 80 Million people who now really struggle for a decent life. Sure, the US want to create another revolution to overthrow the government. Yet this means regular people have to want to die (because many will fall victims to this authoritarian government then).
History is long, and I can't say it with as much definitive certainty as you (I wish you'd cite your reasoning), but as far as I know the reintroduction of sanctions against Iran will cause economic hardships which will radicalize a lot of people, and which will cause further instability to the world.
The same kind of hardships that also radicalized Trump voters, it lead them to vote a populist fascist into power.
Of course if Iran or Iranians cause trouble in the future, you'd use these as an excuse to say "Trump did the right thing, see what they did, they deserved those sanctions!", ignoring cause and effect: without the sanctions, they wouldn't be that pissed off to cause these troubles.
Exactly. The neoconservative ethos does not concern itself with those sorts of side effects.
What the US is doing is a form of terrorism. It completely nullifies any inspiring or positive influence that the narratives about the US founding principles might evoke in those abroad, and it is only possible due to the idea of American Exceptionalism, which is patently false to anyone who observes without bias US actions.
A power asserting its dominance has been the norm for thousands of years; you have just been brainwashed into hating your country. As for neocons being responsible for everything- just wow- that’s two steps past ignorant. The last president and Secretary of State are directly responsible for open slave markets in libya. Predatory foreign policy has been the only bipartisan issue in our history.
I'm not the one you replied to, but you're commenting under my reply chain, so...
> you have just been brainwashed into hating your country.
That's a very large assumption from a few lines of text, I'll classify this as a cheap baseless attack/dismissal.
> The last president and Secretary of State are directly responsible for open slave markets in libya.
So I guess Bush and Cheney are "directly responsible" for a lot of thousand dead Iraqis and Afghanis. Or were those military interventions justified in your eyes? At least Obama has admitted "the aftermath" is his biggest regret.
> They may be but US is on the right side of history on this one. And I say this as an European.
As anopther European, the US is most certainly on the wrong side of history with this shit. They're still salty that their pet dictator got ousted all those years ago.
Why are you cowardly hiding behind a throwaway account? Why do you care? Everybody is entitled to their own personal opinion and you are free to disagree with it.
I've used this account for several months now. It's not exactly single use.
You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to ask you for the arguments behind your opinion. You are of course entitled to respond angrily. However, it doesn't make for great discussion and you won't persuade many people with this approach.
I hate Islamic Republic with every single cell in my body but you're just wrong.
* U.S. plain and simply fucked Iran up with a coup at 1953.
* Then helped Islamic Republic gain power in 1979. (This is up for debate though)
* Then helped Saddam Hussein attack Iran.
* Then sanctioned the country to the verge of bankruptcy.
* Then made a deal and backed out of it for no reason (Internal politics?)