[kelnos]

> I've seen this sentiment so many times from westerners. You all say this, and yet at the same time you levy economic sanctions on countries...

"You all" is a weird way of putting it. I don't support my government levying sanctions on these countries, but I have zero power to change it.

It's funny, as the gist author points out that he doesn't support the actions of the Islamic Republic, and has no power to change it because it's minority rule by a theocratic dictatorship.

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.

I think sanctions are largely pointless if their stated goal is to get citizens to rise up and change their governments. Asking people to risk their lives (when you're not risking anything at all) is an awful thing to do, and this sort of thing isn't likely to work.

But it's probably not really that; the idea is to choke the economies of these countries so they can't do whatever Bad Thing the sanction-leviers are worried about (like developing nuclear weapons). How effective sanctions are at achieving that goal is an exercise left to the reader. And even if they are effective, there's a lot of collateral damage that hurts people who have no say in the matter.

[tuveson]

> 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…

[padjo]

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]

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]

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_S...

[refurb]

Trudeau was allowed by parliamentary rules to end parliament sessions for the year.

Mossadegh was not allowed to do it.

[tgma]

> Proroguing in parliaments is nothing new or anti-democratic.

He prorogued the parliament and was calling for a referendum to overthrow the monarchy against the Constitution. He was terminated by the monarch per Constitution, but he would not leave the post which resulted in uprising from both sides.

> 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".

Yeah if you read biased and debunked media and the Mullah supporters and comrades[1] (which is the source of Wokipedia) during the Cold War era, and by the way both sides conspired to get rid of the monarch for different reasons, you might believe such propaganda. If you'd talk to the actual industrious people who experienced it, you might get a very different perspective. Double digit annual GDP growth, #1 is number of international students in the US (not per capita, absolute.) So yes, golden era, indisputably.

[1] Interestingly, we see the same Marxist-Islamist alliance has now hit the West.

[padjo]

Strange that a massive revolution would break out in a country in the midst of such a golden era.

[int_19h]

Are you seriously claiming that SAVAK wasn't a thing, or that it didn't employ torture? Or are you saying that the "golden era" justified such measures?

[nanliu]

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]

> 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]

Not just un-built, but poisoned for generations.

[marcosdumay]

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]

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.

[refurb]

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]

It takes a week to remodel a kitchen and an hour to demolish it.

[swat535]

> but I have zero power to change it.

I was under the assumption that in Western democracies, citizens have a say their government and its enacted laws.

We can't unfortunately assert the same for people of Iran since they don't live in a democracy.

[imchillyb]

Sanctions are not designed to coerce a populace into rebellion, in order to facilitate regime change.

Sanctions are designed to prevent an enemy government from profiting from our western economy. Sanctions are designed to bring hostile entities to the negotiation table. Sanctions curtail the worst behaviors of enemy nations because the sanctions deny those enemies money. Money is power. Little money = little power.

[int_19h]

For the most part, sanctions are designed to be "something" in the infamous "SOMEBODY DO SOMETHING RIGHT NOW!!!1!" mantra. They rarely achieve any of the goals that you enumerate, disproportionately inconveniencing regular citizens - government actors have the means and the know-how to work around them. But mob justice demands an eye for an eye, which is to say, someone must be made to suffer - and sanctions provide a way to do that, even if the people actually suffering are rarely morally responsible.

[YC984983427]

> but I have zero power to change it.

Well, it sounds like you should rise up against your government in violent revolution, then! After all, that's what's expected of Iranian, Cuban and Venezuelan people when the West destroys their countries with sanctions. Get to it!