671–680 of 891 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you vote AGAINST the guy at power, and you're responsible? Broken logic.
how did their feet vote? The last time (and current time) a president was in power that I didn't agree with (and didn't vote for), I left. As a citizen, I can't fully escape taxes, but I will be my darnedest to reduce my taxable burden when I don't approve of the government.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
how did their feet vote? The last time (and current time) a president was in power that I didn't agree with (and didn't vote for), I left. As a citizen, I can't fully escape taxes, but I will be my darnedest to reduce my taxable burden when I don't approve of the government.
So being an elite who escapes the consequences of what elites have done is a virtue that should be rewarded? Why would people look up to a runner? Most people don't have anywhere else to go, and love where they're from.
Goomba fallacy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> So unstable, theocratic, dictatorships under sharia-law [1] should have access to nuclear weapons? Because it's "fair"? Ironically, this statement could apply to Pakistan, which has had nuclear weapons since 1998 and yet has never used them. How strange! According to Western leadership, all Muslims are supposed to be barbarian religious fanatics who want a worldwide nuclear holocaust! Iran having a nuclear weapon w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I don't think this needs much "teaching." We overthrew their secular democracy in 1953 and installed an extremely unpopular autocratic monarchy. They were then overthrown in a "real" revolution in 1979 which is when they became an Islamic Republic. Since then we've spent decades trying to overthrow their government, actively assassinating their leaders and scientists, bombing their country, providing material support…
I am fully aware of the US' history in the middle east, as well Europe's role and my own country within Europe. But that doesn't mean we should accept this kind of rhetoric from enemy states.
If you go down this rabbit hole of "historical rights", where does it end? The truth it it never ends. You go far enough back and we're all the assholes.
So all we can do is move forward and respond to threats like these the best we can.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The leadership of countries under sanctions rarely change their behavior due to sanctions. However the effect on the population of the countries is that they turn against the countries applying the sanctions. It becomes easier for the leaders to sell the sanctions to their populace as the enemy action. If the West is expecting any revolution due to sanctions, I have not seen it. However, sanctions do have a symbolic…
You think sanctions on Russia are not working?
And many more similar examples. Sanctions will hurt Russia in long term but not now. Because good sanctions requires to understand the country culture + execute only that hurt countries, which didn't do western countries.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> So unstable, theocratic, dictatorships under sharia-law [1] should have access to nuclear weapons? Because it's "fair"? Ironically, this statement could apply to Pakistan, which has had nuclear weapons since 1998 and yet has never used them. How strange! According to Western leadership, all Muslims are supposed to be barbarian religious fanatics who want a worldwide nuclear holocaust! Iran having a nuclear weapon w…
> According to Western leadership, all Muslims are supposed to be barbarian religious fanatics who want a worldwide nuclear holocaust!
Thanks for telling me what I and every other westerner thinks!
As you have clearly stated, we can therefore easily conclude that all muslim countries (and by extension their people) are equivalent and all must therefore share the explicit ideological goal (enshrined in their constitution) to "fulfil the ideological mission of jihad" and hopes for "the downfall of all other [non-islamic] governments". [1]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Iran#Preamble
Just to be clear: all muslim countries (and people) are equivalent = obvious sarcasm. To believe that I'd have to be about as braindead as someone who believes that all citizens of western countries share the same values, goals, and ideologies as each other (and their governments).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Not just un-built, but poisoned for generations.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A revolution also isn't easy when you know that the revolutions you could have, would be the ones supported by foreign groups that absolutely don't want your country well. USA on no account will tolerate an Iran which is both free and democratic and at all economically developed, because they don't trust a democratic public to support pro-American policies in the middle east - especially related to Israel and oil. Ju…
I would argue that not every society will thrive under a democracy. The people must be somewhat educated, politically savy, considerate, and accommodating. At least this has to be true in the beginning of a democracy where the people are laying the foundations. Now I agree that the policies of the United States may not always be in the interest of the people from that part of the world, but a "mild" dictator like the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Nobody should be expected to take that risk 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 like Iran, Cuba, and North Korea, with the justification that by making their citizens lives horrific, you encourage them to rise against their government. Their authoritarian militaristic government that doesn't care for human rights…
This the exact same as the email from the post, but the other way around. Either both normal Iranians are responsible for arming Russians and normal Americans are responsible for sanctions, or neither are. In general I don’t like blaming people for the actions of their government.
Iran is a theocratic autocracy. Only the autocrat and his supporters bear any significant responsibility for the actions of the government there.
Can someone give me an explanation for why Mike Cardwell, who lives in the UK, blocks Iranian IPs for “your decision to arm Russia with drones so that they can indiscriminately massacre civilians.” but does not block US or UK IPs for their decision to arm Israel? The answer would seem to me to be racism – he values Ukrainian lives more than Palestinians and considers non-white citizens in non-democratic countries res…