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

Narges Mohammadi wins 2023 Nobel Peace Prize

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–269 of 269 posts

Re: Narges Mohammadi wins 2023 Nobel Peace Prize

#261

Post by thriftwy »

catlover76 wrote: post #255
thriftwy wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Iran's brutal crackdown of late We only know about Iran's brutal crackdown of late from western NGOs and their thralls. Heck, most of Iranians themselves are likely getting these news from these sources, and not from direct or second order witnesses. Meanwhile, we never seem to hear anything about Saudi Arabia. No crackdowns, no police brutality, no dress code enforcement. Yes, we do hear "criticisms of SA governme…

> A "double-standard held among the Western public at large" is the conspiracy I'm talking about. You don't need to have any evil puppeteers if your media are obedient to the sufficient extent and if self-proclaimed critical thinking experts are in fact mental gymnastics experts. If you think the media is "obedient", then yes, you are alleging a conspiracy because it makes you feel smarter and more savvy than you are…

What real footage? As far as I noticed there are two bodies in Iran stories on the timespan of a year, one of which is still warm. It is a horrible personal tragedy, but as far as social struggle goes, not so much.

There are likely much more secondary victims who were incited by NGOs to riot and got brutalized by riot police. Who is to blame here, especially in the absense of results?

How much less are we hearing from SA? Half a dead body per year? We're not hearing anything and that's it.

Re: Narges Mohammadi wins 2023 Nobel Peace Prize

#262

Post by ReptileMan »

screye wrote: post #132
ReptileMan wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the world is just as peaceful (or peaceless) as before her activism. Now if she actually overthrew or forced the government to reform - it would be different. But award should be given for results not efforts.

It does feel more like the 'Western moral prize' rather than a Peace Prize. Truth is, the most peaceful transitions are usually military coups. 'Peacefully' won transitions are often the bloodiest. Fear is a terrible thing, but it does lead to effective peace. With the Nobel Peace Prize, it's usually a coin toss between moral martyr, future genocider and someone who did impactful work towards peace. The best example…

It's worse. She obviously deserves a western moral prize, but peace Nobel in last decades is "Moral wank to make westerners feel good about themselves"

Re: Narges Mohammadi wins 2023 Nobel Peace Prize

#263

Post by psychlops »

astrange wrote: post #259
psychlops wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obama did more drone strikes in his first year (563) than Bush did his entire term. I can't find the specific months, but it's unlikely it was all done in the last quarter. He also authorized the first drone strike on an American.

Bush didn't do drone strikes because he was too busy starting wars. The drones were supposed to be a replacement for the war.

As Bush would say, "Mission Accomplished".

Re: Narges Mohammadi wins 2023 Nobel Peace Prize

#264

Post by kramerger »

wheelerof4te wrote: post #23
cderpz wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Authoritarian regimes" usually have popular support since a huge majority supports the ruling party. This argument makes about as much sense as the following one: >Otherwise, the country would not be stable and vast sums of western money would not have to be sent there in order to ferment a color revolution. The defining characteristic of an authoritarian regime as opposed to a democratic one is that it does not de…

[flagged]

Authoritarian regimes don't allow fair elections, and suppress any attempts to freely discuss their shortcomings.

If you don't agree, tell me why neither CNN or Fox News are allowed to operate in Russia right now.

Re: Narges Mohammadi wins 2023 Nobel Peace Prize

#266

Post by trimethylpurine »

AnonCoward42 wrote: post #260
trimethylpurine wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, they armed them directly. Yes they supported terrorist groups. As did the US. No one is innocent. But the US has always supported democracy and civil rights. That includes civil rights activism deemed "terrorist" by China and Russia. The West represents civil rights. That's just as fact. Ask yourself, are people enjoying civil rights in China or Russia living with a quality of life far below Western nations? Obv…

> Yes, they armed them directly. Of course I want a source for that. > Yes they supported terrorist groups. As did the US. No one is innocent. How are "we" supposed to be better then? > But the US has always supported democracy and civil rights. That includes civil rights activism deemed "terrorist" by China and Russia. Al Qaida, Al Nusra, Taliban etc are civil rights activits for the US (sold as "moderate rebels" in…

>Of course I want a source for that.

This makes me feel like you didn't read my replies. If you read even a little bit about the Iraqi Insurgency you wouldn't be asking for a source. It's on Wikipedia, a bunch of sources at the bottom. It's on other encyclopedia pages. Plenty of articles. Etc. I don't believe that you didn't find it.

>How are "we" supposed to be better then?

Who said anything about being better? I said the US has always supported civil rights. When the US helped AQ it was under the premise that they would support civil rights. When they didn't, the West labeled them terrorists.

>I find the civil right activism of the US questionable to say the least.

I see, but ISIS and AQ are deserving of awards in that department? That's laughable. These are groups that televise beheadings, and treat women worse than the West treats animals. And this is glamorized. Is anti civil rights behavior glamorized in the US? Of course not. The very definition of civil rights is at odds with non Western society. And that's true whether or not you believe that the US is committing acts outside those values. The point is, if it's done, then it's done in secret, which is at the least preventing its promotion in society.

>Am I supposed to feel better that it is supposedly worse in other countries...

Obviously. Less worse = better. Why would you want it to be worse? What did you mean by "supposedly?" Are you trying to sell me that AQ and ISIS treat women better than the US government treats its citizens? That's ridiculous. Does the US stone women for adultery? Jail women for showing their body? Amputate limbs for theft? You can't be seriously pushing for that to be called civil rights. Those are blatantly in opposition of civil rights. Those 100% are anti Western ideals.

Re: Narges Mohammadi wins 2023 Nobel Peace Prize

#267

Post by AnonCoward42 »

trimethylpurine wrote: post #266
AnonCoward42 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, they armed them directly. Of course I want a source for that. > Yes they supported terrorist groups. As did the US. No one is innocent. How are "we" supposed to be better then? > But the US has always supported democracy and civil rights. That includes civil rights activism deemed "terrorist" by China and Russia. Al Qaida, Al Nusra, Taliban etc are civil rights activits for the US (sold as "moderate rebels" in…

>Of course I want a source for that. This makes me feel like you didn't read my replies. If you read even a little bit about the Iraqi Insurgency you wouldn't be asking for a source. It's on Wikipedia, a bunch of sources at the bottom. It's on other encyclopedia pages. Plenty of articles. Etc. I don't believe that you didn't find it. >How are "we" supposed to be better then? Who said anything about being better? I sa…

> It's on Wikipedia [...]

Hitchen's Razor; argument dismissed.

> Who said anything about being better? I said the US has always supported civil rights.

You implied it and you are doing it in your last paragraph again.

> Are you trying to sell me that AQ and ISIS treat women better than the US government treats its citizens? [...]

I am trying to say that you are hanging the bar so low, that you can get away with 3rd world standards (for civil rights). With your question series you are just describing islamic countries and not all 3rd world countries are islamic.

> Those are blatantly in opposition of civil rights. Those 100% are anti Western ideals.

Motte-and-bailey for civil rights and you again try to sell me that we are better. The west is not better and we should stop meddling in internal affairs of foreign countries. I can't blame them for anti-western sentiment.

Re: Narges Mohammadi wins 2023 Nobel Peace Prize

#268

Post by trimethylpurine »

AnonCoward42 wrote: post #267
trimethylpurine wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Of course I want a source for that. This makes me feel like you didn't read my replies. If you read even a little bit about the Iraqi Insurgency you wouldn't be asking for a source. It's on Wikipedia, a bunch of sources at the bottom. It's on other encyclopedia pages. Plenty of articles. Etc. I don't believe that you didn't find it. >How are "we" supposed to be better then? Who said anything about being better? I sa…

> It's on Wikipedia [...] Hitchen's Razor; argument dismissed. > Who said anything about being better? I said the US has always supported civil rights. You implied it and you are doing it in your last paragraph again. > Are you trying to sell me that AQ and ISIS treat women better than the US government treats its citizens? [...] I am trying to say that you are hanging the bar so low, that you can get away with 3rd w…

Hitchen's Razor? LMFAO! You're refusing to read and follow citation from multiple encyclopedias. Not to be too forward, but you don't exactly sound like you know what you're talking about. I have better things to do with my time than listen to your claims of superiority over Brittanica, and other trusted sources.

Re: Narges Mohammadi wins 2023 Nobel Peace Prize

#269

Post by leaguedreams »

screye wrote: post #136
Gud wrote: post #112

Well deserved. Iran has so much potential. It's extremely sad how a small group of extremists holds the entire country hostage.

Genuine question, doesn't the ultra-orthodox wing reflect the popular opinion of the country ? My understanding is that Iran has among the greatest Urban-Rural divides in the world, and that the rural population is large enough to democratically force their conservative views onto the urban population. Turkey seems to be in a similar position, but their proximity to NATO and Europe keeps them somewhat grounded. > sma…

Iran is actually relatively unique in the developed world in that their urban population is about as conservative as the population as a whole (Japan is another example IIRC). There is nuance here (most of the conservative urban population is concentrated in certain cities and neighborhoods) but the urban/rural divide does not explain the political divide.
Post reply on HN