Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 309 posts

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#211

Post by amalag »

briandear wrote: post #26
DiabloD3 wrote: post #3

If you had told me that would be today's headline at any point over the past decade, I'm not sure I would have believed you. If this works out, the President has another thing to add to his list of "things no President before me achieved".

Have you read the Iran deal? The Iranians were happy about it, this it likely wasn't a good deal for the rest of us. The Iranians can't be trusted. If Obama cares about Iran, he would have supported their Green Revolution; instead those protestors were executed, tortured or imprisioned. Yet, strangely, Obama supported the Egyptian coup. Honestly, Obama doesn't know what he's doing when it comes to foreign policy. He…

Are the republicans really that dumb that if they see Iran telling their people "It is a great deal for us" they think they are telling them the truth.

Guess what, they have to spin deals to their public too.

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#212

Post by kbenson »

Jgrubb wrote: post #141
0xFFC wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iranian here , and I am commenting from Iran.Iranian people maybe most pro usa people in middle east. and about government, they just need keep people busy because of they systematic corruption. Thats all. 10 years before , Ali Khamneai said following : "anyone who says we should communicate with USA is or idiot or our enemy/traitor". and guess what ? today , FM Zarif have record in our history for maximum time negot…

> They just love money.And they only weapon they have for keeping people in iran busy and afraid of any kind of protest, is "imaginary" enemy.That's all. American here, commenting from America. We have almost the exact same situation here with our political "leadership".

See, natural allies! ;)

Really, the difference here is trust and competence. The Iranian government doesn't seem to have the trust of it's people (that is, trust it has their best intentions at heart), or the competence to adequately hide the corruption. The U.S. is fairly competent at hiding the corruption, and thus has garnered quite a bit of trust. In the U.S. we know we have corruption, but we don't really know how much, because the politicians and the system are fairly competent and providing alternative narratives that make it hard to come to a definitive answer.

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#213

Post by bsaul »

Systemic33 wrote: post #158
maratd wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The unfaltering support given to Israel seems strange There's nothing strange about it. Yes, it is militarily aggressive and has to be considering the neighborhood. The support given is purely selfish as Israel is the only nation in the region which mirrors the values the US wishes to promote in the region, provides military support when needed, and a plethora of other various benefits which none of the other playe…

> with rampant antisemitism in Europe Because Israel isn't escalating this at all with the palestine conflict... Netanyahu is a warmongerer that keeps the conflict alive, because it serves his interests, in increasing antisemitism, resulting in jews feeling increasingly threatened, and starts to consider relocation to Israel, increasing support for Netanyahu.

Jews don't feel threatened because of netanyahu, but because of antisemites ( this word has an historical meaning, which is why i'm using it).

And unfortunately, antisemitism doesn't take its root in the palestinian conflict, but in religious books ( both christian and muslims). Which are much older than Israel, and won't change no matter the number of square kilometers of the palestinian state.

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#214

Post by Udik »

maratd wrote: post #113
user_0001 wrote: post #105

>(besides Israel, obviously) Out of interest, why obviously? The unfaltering support given to Israel seems strange (to most outside of the US who I have spoken to). Israel has it's religious fundamentalists (just like the rest of the region). Is militarily aggressive, disregards civilian life, commits war crimes, disregards international law and opinion (with impunity due to the US and their veto - and forcing other…

> The unfaltering support given to Israel seems strange There's nothing strange about it. Yes, it is militarily aggressive and has to be considering the neighborhood. The support given is purely selfish as Israel is the only nation in the region which mirrors the values the US wishes to promote in the region, provides military support when needed, and a plethora of other various benefits which none of the other playe…

>rampant antisemitism in Europe

rampant bullshit. The only antisemitism in Europe is that which is cried out loud by Israelis and Jewish lobbies every time Israel's actions are criticized. It's frankly sickening.

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#215

Post by maratd »

Udik wrote: post #214
maratd wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The unfaltering support given to Israel seems strange There's nothing strange about it. Yes, it is militarily aggressive and has to be considering the neighborhood. The support given is purely selfish as Israel is the only nation in the region which mirrors the values the US wishes to promote in the region, provides military support when needed, and a plethora of other various benefits which none of the other playe…

>rampant antisemitism in Europe rampant bullshit. The only antisemitism in Europe is that which is cried out loud by Israelis and Jewish lobbies every time Israel's actions are criticized. It's frankly sickening.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AltyhmrIFgo

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#216

Post by anigbrowl »

0xFFC wrote: post #119
bsaul wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out or curiosity, why does the (religious) iranian regime keeps calling USA "the great devil" then ? Ps :reading some answers, i know about the history of conflicts between usa and iran. I was just pointing the fact that calling Iran a "natural ally" is a bit of a stretch.

Iranian here , and I am commenting from Iran.Iranian people maybe most pro usa people in middle east. and about government, they just need keep people busy because of they systematic corruption. Thats all. 10 years before , Ali Khamneai said following : "anyone who says we should communicate with USA is or idiot or our enemy/traitor". and guess what ? today , FM Zarif have record in our history for maximum time negot…

I thought it was very interesting recently when FM Zarif, who seems very wise and pragmatic, discussed the nuclear negotiations as a form of diplomatic jihad, presumably to reassure the religious/political factions that that government had not gone 'soft'. As other people said, we have similar factions here in the USA.

I am curious, is awareness of Persian history a regular part of Iranian cultural life? I mean in day-to-day conversation, not just in school or a museum. Anti-Iranian people in the USA often denounce the country because it is an Islamic republic, but every Iranian person I've ever meet seems very proud of their Persian heritage and history, parallel to their religious heritage.

I'm European (living in the USA) and Iran seems culturally much closer to Europe/USA than a country like Saudi Arabia. It seems like religion is very strict in Saudia Arabia because it is the only thing that holds the country together, whereas Iranian people had a strong national identity before Islam existed. Is this accurate?

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#218

Post by EliRivers »

hodwik wrote: post #187
EliRivers wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember this graphic, much shown in the media? The bullshit made up nonsense about mobile WMD factories? Yes. I recall that the thinking was that there were entire convoys of these driving around in deserts somewhere. They had to exist, right, because that explains why we can't find the WMDs. The decision had been made. Access was irrelevant because the invasion was going to happen anyway. Any number of "smoking gun…

Just about everyone thought there were WMDs. The decision had been made, yes, but because we thought there were hidden caches and moving caches that the weapons inspectors were ill-equipped to find, and Saddam was comfortable with everyone (Iran especially) believing that. (I mean, people are still digging up 1980s-era WMDs in Iraq. They're pretty easy to hide, they're not large. It wasn't an insane thing to believe.…

Just about everyone thought there were WMDs

That is just plain not true. Loud voices shouted over and over that it was true, it was true, here's a bullshit report we made up, believe us believe us. That's not the same as just about everyone.

I read the UN inspection summary myself. It was pretty clear that there was no decent evidence of WMDs (barring some leftover materials from the discontinued productions), or a continuing program to make them. Many of the intelligence people involved agreed. That we were lied to very loudly doesn't mean everyone thought it was true. There was a predetermined agenda; justify an invasion. Make up whatever bullshit we have to. You've got this "curveball" guy making up nonsense bullshit stories that no intelligence analyst in his right mind would believe? Just order the intelligence guys to shut up and get on with invading.

And in the end, good riddance, we should have taken him out WMDs or not -- the problem wasn't an invasion in Iraq, but a poorly planned invasion in Iraq.

Why should we have taken him out? We did it, and it made things worse. A lot, lot worse. How can you possibly, with the benefit of hindsight, maintain that invading Iraq was a good thing to do? Have you seen the state of the place now?

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#219

Post by moistgorilla »

[deleted] wrote: post #202
angrybits wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the way things are. You have to subdue the opposing side completely, or the war never ends. Doing this means essentially beating them mercilessly until they have no choice to fully capitulate. It's not that we lack the capability, it's that soccer moms don't want to see that shit on CNN. War is an ugly business, and we seem to have lost our stomach for it. Time will tell if it is to our benefit or determent.

[deleted]

naive about what?

Re: Iran Nuclear Deal Reached

#220

Post by jokr004 »

bsaul wrote: post #206
jokr004 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Thinking "sure, they apply shariah, and believe islam is the only true religion, and that god leads them, but deep inside they know things aren't that simple" is applying your own logic to them So we should just apply your logic to them, then?

We should apply our logic to ourselves, and theirs to themselves. That means, be rational, and not expect them to be.

Oh, I think I misunderstood your wording. But in reality, the theocracy in Iran doesn't hold absolute power.. there is some semblance of a democracy and at the end of the day the government does face the scrutiny of its people and the international community, just like every other nation.. saying they are completely devoid of logic is just foolish.
Post reply on HN