Well. The CIA overthrew their democratically elected leader in 1953 (Mosaddegh), because he dared think that the Iranian people had a right to Iranian oil revenues, and then backed a nice chap called Pahlavī (or "the Shah") to be dictator, so long as he toed the line. This wasn't just about the US getting the oil revenues, but also about preventing Iran from becoming a stabilising hegemonistic influence in the area, as a strong middle east with sound governance is against the US's interests. Juntas and corruption = cheap resources.
His bloody regime lead to the '79 coup, which lead to the ongoing political mess we see today, which is kept destabilised by trade sanctions and constant belligerence by the west, for the same old reasons. Iran could be great. Iran could be another "pole" of the world.
But as long as we perpetuate their current setup, through sanctions and close-mindedness through propaganda, the Iranian people will continue to suffer and their government will continue to benefit.
You aren't blaming the British enough. It was (what is now) BP's oil fields that got nationalized, and the Brits managed to convince the US to get involved to orchestrate the coup. British corporate executives are amongst the slimiest imperialists in the world but nobody ever seems to care.
Indeed, I realised that as I posted it - the brits were absolutely complicit in it, as per Suez, Egypt, Arab-Israeli, etc. We held the geopolitical crown jewels for a good few hundred years - basically since the East India Company - and the pendulum swayed elsewhere. It always has, it always will, until we learn to follow our better instincts, and get over primitive tribalism... "nations" indeed.
Israel believes that if the Iranians get the bomb, it will be used against Israel. Given the small size of Israel, this would be another genocide. They will therefore do _anything_ to prevent Iran getting the bomb.
Iran believes that if they _don't_ have the bomb, then they are forever at the mercy of US politics, potentially including an invasion in which millions of Iranians will die, just like the war with Iraq. If they do get it, then they can also hold Saudi Arabia hostage until their demands are met.
This isn't going anywhere until someone either takes their finger off the trigger or pulls it.
As you say, the US has no interest in a stable, free, democratic Iran unless it can be bullied into giving up on certain interests.
You missed a key point: Israel HAS the bomb, and threatens EVERYONE with it - even its so-called allies.
So thats why Iran - in stating it has no intentions of pursuing the bomb - is so infuriating to the fascist Israeli government. Because everyone knows, the most instable people in the world to have the bomb, already have it.
I'd love to visit Iran. From what I've been able to discern, it is a beautiful country with a fascinating culture. There are lots of wonderful things for a student of history to discover in Iran, and I'm very confident that I would establish a long-lasting relationship with the place, were I allowed to visit.
But, it seems that none of this is relevant to the powers that be. Its a darn shame that we have such people in the world, who think their culture is 'better' than anothers, and I yearn for the day when all people abandon their cultural stigma and Just .. Learn .. To .. Share.
It's a lovely place, and the people are great - warm, friendly, kind... and the skiing isn't bad either. Women are oppressed, in much the same fashion as you see elsewhere in the middle east, which is hard from ideal, but their cultural norms will only adjust through trade and the homogenisation it brings - not through military force or economic sanctions. Their government are a bunch of a-holes, although their foreign policies are readily understandable when you comprehend their geopolitical position.
No culture is any better than any other, indeed - merely different. We should revel in those differences while we still have them, rather than revile them, for, if we don't wipe ourselves out first, we will end up, most likely, for the most part, one people. I like qualifiers.
Oh, and if you really want to understand what the hell is going on in and around Iran right now, read all about a charming little hell-hole called Ashraf.
My question is why all of the world's largest companies fall in line with this so easily, especially when some have official support for persian/Iran. How does that dynamic between Corporation and US Government really work?
Personally I think many corps want to avoid any hassle and prevent any problems they may face. The laws are complicated and if they see a slim chance that they get into some legal problem they prefer not to do any kind of trade.
I really wonder about the case of coursera which is basically no trade and it is just to prevent some nationals to access knowledge supposed to be "accessible to all people". To me it's some sort of racism.
This is some serious issue. Many people have their bank accounts/paypal frozen and closed only due to having access the site through an IP from Iran.
Personally, I don't live in Iran and during christmas I was traveling there to visit my family. I basically didn't have the guts to even go near my bank website or use my credit card without making sure I'm using a VPN.
Even when living outside Iran the issue is still with Iranians. Last year I worked as a freelancer for an american startup and they were not able to pay me my 6K because treasury department bans any kind of trade with Iranians due to the sanctions. I'm even not sure if I can ever settle that.
That sucks. Shouldn't there be a way to work around it though? Something like 'I sell them this pretty logo/picture for 6k and then you sell me a pretty picture for 6k as well.', with me being neither an American nor an Iranian and the picture/logo being very hard to judge in value but easy to make ("art"). You might lose some money to taxation etc here, but hey. Or is there a problem I don't see?
That _is_ money laundering. Assuming you could find a trusted third party, they'd probably have the same legal restriction, and it's anyway an offence for the Americans to enter into this transaction knowing that the money would go to Iran.
The people I was working with were too cautious on this. I believe they could manage it somehow. I received a 500$ bounty from Facebook through paypal on my Dutch account. The same could be done potentially with them. They thought it is a risk!
I fully support sanctions on Iran as an alternative to all out war. Maybe the author doesn't understand how many conservative leaders in U.S., Europe and Israel want to pull the trigger. I oppose this with all my being, so if sanctions are the alternative, so be it.
Well. The CIA overthrew their democratically elected leader in 1953 (Mosaddegh), because he dared think that the Iranian people had a right to Iranian oil revenues, and then backed a nice chap called Pahlavī (or "the Shah") to be dictator, so long as he toed the line. This wasn't just about the US getting the oil revenues, but also about preventing Iran from becoming a stabilising hegemonistic influence in the area, as a strong middle east with sound governance is against the US's interests. Juntas and corruption = cheap resources.
His bloody regime lead to the '79 coup, which lead to the ongoing political mess we see today, which is kept destabilised by trade sanctions and constant belligerence by the west, for the same old reasons. Iran could be great. Iran could be another "pole" of the world.
But as long as we perpetuate their current setup, through sanctions and close-mindedness through propaganda, the Iranian people will continue to suffer and their government will continue to benefit.