[paganel]

> But they can decide to fund water projects instead of bombs.

And become again a client state of the West, you forgot that part.

[baxtr]

Oh yes sorry. I forgot that it’s much better to let your people starve then to be a client state of the West. I think you have your trade-offs right.

[paganel]

> I forgot that it’s much better to let your people starve

It's actually the US making the Iranian people starve on account of their (US's) economic war against Iran, and the same goes for Cuba and the Cubans living in Cuba. Saying that the Iranians should embrace with full arms the same Westerners that are making them starve right at this moment has to be a bit.

[baxtr]

Yes, it's always other people. It's never the actual leaders of a country who kill their own people.

[croes]

People in western client states still starve just with less of their countries resources.

[inglor_cz]

The closest semi-Westernized country to Iran in the same region is Turkey:

* Highly educated population.

* Remnant of an ancient non-Arab Islamic empire.

* Almost precisely the same population count.

And people don't starve in Turkey. Why would they starve in a Western-aligned Iran? The main problem in the richer half of the world is already obesity.

[croes]

Client state doesn't mean westernized.

Just pick a random African country where the West helps.

[inglor_cz]

Iran is an ancient and developed civilization, though. One of the oldest in the world. There is no reason why it should develop into the next South Sudan.

And some African countries are, in fact, developing as well. I don't think that an average Kenyan starves either.

[graemep]

> And become again a client state of the West, you forgot that part.

That matters if you live in a functioning democracy.

If you are being exploited and oppressed by your own ruling class rather than a foreign one it makes little difference. You might even be better off.