Battle for Iran’s Soul: Iranian Election Thread

[Shrillland]

They might be less inclined to Moderates this time around, they're the ones being burnt at the stake for both the nuclear deal and Soleimani's assassination, as I've mentioned. The collapse of the agreement meant the economy slumped, and the Iranian economy wasn't that good to begin with unless you have lots of oil. Plus, it must be remembered that the Guardian Council is half-chosen by the now Hardliner-dominated ICA(the other half by the Ayatollah).

Come to think of it, when you look at how their system works, Iran actually has a pretty robust system of separation of powers, at least for the region it's in.

makes sense. The Guardian council is a undemocratic body though. They reject candidates for arbitrary reasons and can overturn the parliament. A woman is likely never going to be allowed to be on the ballot for president.

As was said earlier, theocracy trumps democracy if there's ever a dispute.

[San Lumen]

makes sense. The Guardian council is a undemocratic body though. They reject candidates for arbitrary reasons and can overturn the parliament. A woman is likely never going to be allowed to be on the ballot for president.

As was said earlier, theocracy trumps democracy if there's ever a dispute.

Yup and the Ayatollah is more powerful than the President. If only the Shah was sill in power things in Iran might be better.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Bring back the Persian Empire, Zoroastrianism state religion now

Compromise: Bring back Ūmar or Ūthman.

Cringe.

[Shrillland]

As was said earlier, theocracy trumps democracy if there's ever a dispute.

Yup and the Ayatollah is more powerful than the President. If only the Shah was sill in power things in Iran might be better.

More secular, certainly, but not likely better. We saw to that in the 50s.

[Insaanistan]

Compromise: Bring back Ūmar or Ūthman.

Cringe.

Why? Ūmar’s last order to Ūthman was literally, “I charge the caliph after me to be kind to the dhimmis, to keep their covenant, to protect them and not to burden them over their strength.”
He also reportedly surveyed areas to make sure the Zoroastrians in the area paying too much in taxes in proportion how much they made. He was killed by a random Persian slave who complained that he was paying too much, got it reviewed by Ūmar himself, who basically said “No, you’re paying the right amount in jizya and other taxes. Sorry.”

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Cringe.

Why? Ūmar’s last order to Ūthman was literally, “I charge the caliph after me to be kind to the dhimmis, to keep their covenant, to protect them and not to burden them over their strength.”
He also reportedly surveyed areas to make sure the Zoroastrians in the area paying too much in taxes in proportion how much they made. He was killed by a random Persian slave who complained that he was paying too much, got it reviewed by Ūmar himself, who basically said “No, you’re paying the right amount in jizya and other taxes. Sorry.”

He was killed by a Persian soldier that was enslaved after the Arabs invaded and destroyed his homeland. Taxes had nothing to do with it - especially since we don't know for sure if he was still Zoroastrian at the time or if he converted to Islam (or at least pretended to). Btw, this guy is s hero in Iran. Umar's assassination is literally celebrated by Shi'ites and Iranian nationalists for obvious reasons.

And I was more objecting to the idea of replacing Shi'ite Iranian theocrats with Sunni Arab theocrats which would literally be worse.

[Insaanistan]

Why? Ūmar’s last order to Ūthman was literally, “I charge the caliph after me to be kind to the dhimmis, to keep their covenant, to protect them and not to burden them over their strength.”
He also reportedly surveyed areas to make sure the Zoroastrians in the area paying too much in taxes in proportion how much they made. He was killed by a random Persian slave who complained that he was paying too much, got it reviewed by Ūmar himself, who basically said “No, you’re paying the right amount in jizya and other taxes. Sorry.”

He was killed by a Persian soldier that was enslaved after the Arabs invaded and destroyed his homeland. Taxes had nothing to do with it - especially since we don't know for sure if he was still Zoroastrian at the time or if he converted to Islam (or at least pretended to). Btw, this guy is s hero in Iran. Umar's assassination is literally celebrated by Shi'ites and Iranian nationalists for obvious reasons.

And I was more objecting to the idea of replacing Shi'ite Iranian theocrats with Sunni Arab theocrats which would literally be worse.

I am well aware he’s considered a hero. Ūmar has been seen as villain in Iran coincidentally ever since Shah Ismail I forced the Sunni majority country to become Shiā (many don’t know or choose to ignore Āli literally named on of his sons after Ūmar).

Also:
“The Persian slave Piruz Nahavandi (also known as Abu Lulu) brought a complaint to Omar about the high tax charged by his master Mughirah. Omar wrote to Mughirah and inquired about the tax; Mughirah's reply was satisfactory, but Omar held that the tax charged to Abu Lulu was reasonable, owing to his daily income. Omar then is reported to have asked Abu Lulu: "I heard that you make windmills; make one for me as well."

[Major-Tom]

I’m still very concerned someone voted for Ahmadinejad,

Look, I just think he has a very cool-sounding name, doesn't mean I'd ever vote for the guy in real life. Heavens no, but what a name, what a name.

[Insaanistan]

I’m still very concerned someone voted for Ahmadinejad,

Look, I just think he has a very cool-sounding name, doesn't mean I'd ever vote for the guy in real life. Heavens no, but what a name, what a name.

Pfffft...
I’m trying to think of what his last name actually means.
I know “Ahmad” is a nickname version of “Muhammad”, so “Praised one/Praiseworthy”... something.

“Tribe of the Praiseworthy One” or something, right?

[Insaanistan]

Biden attacks Iranian backed militia’s in Syria for actions of Iraqi Iranian backed militia attack.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-56205056

[Caribbean Confederation]

I'm not sure who's going to win -frankly I'm not about to go vote in that election, learned from my mistake in '17, thank you very much) but I'd like to point out that Ahmadinejad isn't as well-liked by Khamenei as some would like to think, and there's a possibility the Guardian Assembly won't even let him run in the first place.

[Punished UMN]

I mean, it's pretty clear the reformist government failed miserably and that the hardliners were right, so...

[Caribbean Confederation]

I mean, it's pretty clear the reformist government failed miserably and that the hardliners were right, so...

Whether the 'hardliners' were right is one thing, whether the powers-that-be (read, Khamenei) will believe that it should be the hardliners' time in the sun is another. Keep in mind, many of the so-called 'reformists' were objectively more terrible in the 80s and even now support going back to the "golden age of Imam Khomeini".

[Glorious Hong Kong]

Some "democracy".

The hardliners have always been in charge. This is just another one of these farcical Hong Kong-style "elections". All candidates are vetted and approved by the Islamist Ayatollahs in advance. Nothing further to discuss. Nobody cares. The only real change will come from sustained, nationwide protests and civil disobedience.

The Islamist regime must be toppled completely from within, and this will only happen if the Iranian economy implodes and enough people are driven to take matters into their own hands. This will never happen if sanctions are lifted. Joe Biden is making a terrible mistake sucking up to genocidal fascists, communists, Islamists, antisemites, and begging to be let back into the corrupt, morally bankrupt United Nations all over again.

The Iran sanctions clinical trial must be allowed to proceed and data must be systematically and comprehensively collated in order to definitively prove the hypothesis that crippling economic sanctions foster long-term democratic development with a view to replicating similar results in other countries. If the Iranian regime is toppled due to sanctions, the same model of unrelenting international pressure and isolation can be applied to other hostile, repressive regimes such as the PRC. This, in turn, will spell good news for places like Hong Kong and Taiwan. Iran is the clinical test subject and Hong Kong is one of the intended post-clinical recipients. Authoritarianism is the pandemic and sanctions are the vaccine.

[Caribbean Confederation]

Some "democracy".

The hardliners have always been in charge. This is just another one of these farcical Hong Kong-style "elections". All candidates are vetted and approved by the Islamist Ayatollahs in advance. Nothing further to discuss. Nobody cares. The only real change will come from sustained, nationwide protests and civil disobedience.

The Islamist regime must be toppled completely from within, and this will only happen if the Iranian economy implodes and enough people are driven to take matters into their own hands. This will never happen if sanctions are lifted. Joe Biden is making a terrible mistake sucking up to genocidal fascists, communists, Islamists, antisemites, and begging to be let back into the corrupt, morally bankrupt United Nations all over again.

The Iran sanctions clinical trial must be allowed to proceed and data must be systematically and comprehensively collated in order to definitively prove the hypothesis that crippling economic sanctions foster long-term democratic development with a view to replicating similar results in other countries. If the Iranian regime is toppled due to sanctions, the same model of unrelenting international pressure and isolation can be applied to other hostile, repressive regimes such as the PRC. This, in turn, will spell good news for places like Hong Kong and Taiwan. Iran is the clinical test subject and Hong Kong is one of the intended post-clinical recipients. Authoritarianism is the pandemic and sanctions are the vaccine.

This is a gross misunderstanding of the situation in the IR. It is not that the Hardliners are secretly in charge and let the "reformists" play pretend. It's that the Reformists are more totalitarian and have always been -Rohani was literally the guy who established compulsory Hijab in post-revolutionary Iran, called for the execution of many Army officers, et al; many major Reformist politicians were in the various intelligence agencies during Khomeini's era, state suppression and internet blocking has been much more expanded under Reformers than under the hardliners, et al. The Hardliner and Reformist divide in the IR is real -the Hardliners are actually objectively better though by an extremely limited margin- it's just that neither can do anything that Khamenei and his handpicked cronies (like half of the Guardian Assembly, most of the Assembly of Experts, etc.) don't want.

[Punished UMN]

Some "democracy".

The hardliners have always been in charge. This is just another one of these farcical Hong Kong-style "elections". All candidates are vetted and approved by the Islamist Ayatollahs in advance. Nothing further to discuss. Nobody cares. The only real change will come from sustained, nationwide protests and civil disobedience.

The Islamist regime must be toppled completely from within, and this will only happen if the Iranian economy implodes and enough people are driven to take matters into their own hands. This will never happen if sanctions are lifted. Joe Biden is making a terrible mistake sucking up to genocidal fascists, communists, Islamists, antisemites, and begging to be let back into the corrupt, morally bankrupt United Nations all over again.

The Iran sanctions clinical trial must be allowed to proceed and data must be systematically and comprehensively collated in order to definitively prove the hypothesis that crippling economic sanctions foster long-term democratic development with a view to replicating similar results in other countries. If the Iranian regime is toppled due to sanctions, the same model of unrelenting international pressure and isolation can be applied to other hostile, repressive regimes such as the PRC. This, in turn, will spell good news for places like Hong Kong and Taiwan. Iran is the clinical test subject and Hong Kong is one of the intended post-clinical recipients. Authoritarianism is the pandemic and sanctions are the vaccine.

Imagine your political ideas being so sociopathic that you think that it's a total necessity to make an entire country of nearly a hundred million people suffer just to fuck with their government. You don't actually care about whether people or individuals suffer, just about whether they fit your goals. You're less pro-democracy and more just want people who live under dictatorships to suffer in order to punish them for not overthrowing governments you don't like.

[Glorious Hong Kong]

Some "democracy".

The hardliners have always been in charge. This is just another one of these farcical Hong Kong-style "elections". All candidates are vetted and approved by the Islamist Ayatollahs in advance. Nothing further to discuss. Nobody cares. The only real change will come from sustained, nationwide protests and civil disobedience.

The Islamist regime must be toppled completely from within, and this will only happen if the Iranian economy implodes and enough people are driven to take matters into their own hands. This will never happen if sanctions are lifted. Joe Biden is making a terrible mistake sucking up to genocidal fascists, communists, Islamists, antisemites, and begging to be let back into the corrupt, morally bankrupt United Nations all over again.

The Iran sanctions clinical trial must be allowed to proceed and data must be systematically and comprehensively collated in order to definitively prove the hypothesis that crippling economic sanctions foster long-term democratic development with a view to replicating similar results in other countries. If the Iranian regime is toppled due to sanctions, the same model of unrelenting international pressure and isolation can be applied to other hostile, repressive regimes such as the PRC. This, in turn, will spell good news for places like Hong Kong and Taiwan. Iran is the clinical test subject and Hong Kong is one of the intended post-clinical recipients. Authoritarianism is the pandemic and sanctions are the vaccine.

Imagine your political ideas being so sociopathic that you think that it's a total necessity to make an entire country of nearly a hundred million people suffer just to fuck with their government. You don't actually care about whether people or individuals suffer, just about whether they fit your goals. You're less pro-democracy and more just want people who live under dictatorships to suffer in order to punish them for not overthrowing governments you don't like.

It takes a bitter pill to root out a toxin. I will stop at nothing to see the CCP dismantled at all costs, including calling for crippling economic sanctions or backing controversial leaders such as Donald Trump should and if our interests coincide. What works on Iran may ultimately work on China. The CCP is beyond redemption at this point.

I'm not calling for an all-out military conflict with Iran that would be guaranteed to kill upwards of a million people and piss off everyone on both sides. I'm calling for sanctions. This is a significantly more humane strategy going forward. We should be playing the long game and starving the Ayatollahs of resources and political capital like Israel has been doing to Hamas. What the U.S. is doing to Iran and what Israel is doing to Gaza can be replicated against the PRC to good effect. Communism, fascism, and radical Islam (both Shia and Sunni) must be defeated at all costs.

There is footage of Iranian students walking around a graffiti drawing of the U.S. flag and shaming those who walk on it. Iranians want change more than ever. Protests have been growing ever larger, louder, more sustained, and more frequent with each passing year prior to the pandemic. Anger and resentment continue to build against the regime as people demand real democracy, real elections, and an end to the rule of the Ayatollahs, proving that sanctions work. The pandemic is merely a temporary setback for liberal democrats and genuine reformists in Iran. Once the pandemic has died down, it's only a matter of time before Khamenei goes.

I have personally met young Iranians in New Zealand who are nothing like the conservative, chador-wearing stereotype of submissive muslimah and violent, wife-beating, bearded men. The Iranians in question served pork and alcohol and the food was absolutely delightful. The Iranian regime does not represent them in any way, shape, or form. In Iran, these Iranians (a man and a woman) would be savagely whipped and incarcerated for their "transgressions". It's possible they could be refugees. My heart goes out to them and I hope their business succeeds. I believe my college classmates from Iran are also staunchly opposed to the Ayatollahs and yearn for freedom. I sympathize with them as much as I do with Hong Kongers who feel the whole world is closing in on them and they can't breathe.

Ali Khamenei has got to go. Make Iran Great Again.

[Punished UMN]

Imagine your political ideas being so sociopathic that you think that it's a total necessity to make an entire country of nearly a hundred million people suffer just to fuck with their government. You don't actually care about whether people or individuals suffer, just about whether they fit your goals. You're less pro-democracy and more just want people who live under dictatorships to suffer in order to punish them for not overthrowing governments you don't like.

It takes a bitter pill to root out a toxin. I will stop at nothing to see the CCP dismantled at all costs, including calling for crippling economic sanctions or backing controversial leaders such as Donald Trump should and if our interests coincide. What works on Iran may ultimately work on China. The CCP is beyond redemption at this point.

I'm not calling for an all-out military conflict with Iran that would be guaranteed to kill upwards of a million people and piss off everyone on both sides. I'm calling for sanctions. This is a significantly more humane strategy going forward. We should be playing the long game and starving the Ayatollahs of resources and political capital like Israel has been doing to Hamas. What the U.S. is doing to Iran and what Israel is doing to Gaza can be replicated against the PRC to good effect. Communism, fascism, and radical Islam (both Shia and Sunni) must be defeated at all costs.

There is footage of Iranian students walking around a graffiti drawing of the U.S. flag and shaming those who walk on it. Iranians want change more than ever. Protests have been growing ever larger, louder, more sustained, and more frequent with each passing year prior to the pandemic. Anger and resentment continue to build against the regime as people demand real democracy, real elections, and an end to the rule of the Ayatollahs, proving that sanctions work. The pandemic is merely a temporary setback for liberal democrats and genuine reformists in Iran. Once the pandemic has died down, it's only a matter of time before Khamenei goes.

I have personally met young Iranians in New Zealand who are nothing like the conservative, chador-wearing stereotype of submissive muslimah and violent, wife-beating, bearded men. The Iranians in question served pork and alcohol and the food was absolutely delightful. The Iranian regime does not represent them in any way, shape, or form. In Iran, these Iranians (a man and a woman) would be savagely whipped and incarcerated for their "transgressions". It's possible they could be refugees. My heart goes out to them and I hope their business succeeds. I believe my college classmates from Iran are also staunchly opposed to the Ayatollahs and yearn for freedom. I sympathize with them as much as I do with Hong Kongers who feel the whole world is closing in on them and they can't breathe.

Ali Khamenei has got to go. Make Iran Great Again.

If the people want change there, they can have it. At least a military strike is actually against the regime, sanctions aren't. The goal of sanctions is to harm the people in the hopes that they will harm their government, it doesn't directly harm the government. The goal of regime change has become the primary goal you have to such a degree that the actual well-being of the people living under it is no more than an afterthought. And "what Israel is doing to Gaza can be done to Iran" and this is supposed to convince me your policies aren't sociopathic? What's happening to the people in Gaza is horrible, and you're talking about doing that, with less provocation, to 80 million people in Iran? And why? Just because you don't like their system? What you're talking about wanting to do would be a worse humanitarian disaster than any of these regimes have inflicted on the world.

[Washington Resistance Army]

What the U.S. is doing to Iran and what Israel is doing to Gaza can be replicated against the PRC to good effect.

Something tells me you'd really quick change your tone if the US started bombing schools and hospitals and shooting up protests in Hong Kong lol

[East Blepia]

I would prefer an Ahmadinejad administration. If Iran becomes nuclear-armed (and they have every right to when Israel is nuclear-armed), an Israeli war with Iran (of course, America would do the actual fighting) would be off the table. An 'Iran war' would be the most serious since Vietnam and very sorrowful indeed for those of us Americans who do not like our country being taken advantage of by these Zionist warmongers. It would pain me greatly to see young American men shipping off with falsehoods in their hearts fighting those who should be our friends. I may even end up among the conscripted. The bottom line is that I do not want a war with Iran under any circumstances.

Consider this: What has the average American gained from our intervention in Syria, or in Iraq, or in Libya, or anywhere else in living memory? Every developed nation needs oil to function, yet none other than ours feels the need to use the military to ensure its safe passage.

My point is that before worrying about the regime in Iran we need to take a good hard look at our own.

[Repubblica Fascista Sociale Italiana]

I would prefer an Ahmadinejad administration. If Iran becomes nuclear-armed (and they have every right to when Israel is nuclear-armed), an Israeli war with Iran (of course, America would do the actual fighting) would be off the table. An 'Iran war' would be the most serious since Vietnam and very sorrowful indeed for those of us Americans who do not like our country being taken advantage of by these Zionist warmongers. It would pain me greatly to see young American men shipping off with falsehoods in their hearts fighting those who should be our friends. I may even end up among the conscripted. The bottom line is that I do not want a war with Iran under any circumstances.

Consider this: What has the average American gained from our intervention in Syria, or in Iraq, or in Libya, or anywhere else in living memory? Every developed nation needs oil to function, yet none other than ours feels the need to use the military to ensure its safe passage.

My point is that before worrying about the regime in Iran we need to take a good hard look at our own.

The average American gains nothing from interventionism, only arms companies like Lockheed Martin and virtue-signaling neoliberals gain anything. The idea that the US is some sort of democratic paradise destined to enforce freedom everywhere stems from Wilsonianism.

War with Iran would be practically suicidal, though

[Glorious Hong Kong]

It takes a bitter pill to root out a toxin. I will stop at nothing to see the CCP dismantled at all costs, including calling for crippling economic sanctions or backing controversial leaders such as Donald Trump should and if our interests coincide. What works on Iran may ultimately work on China. The CCP is beyond redemption at this point.

I'm not calling for an all-out military conflict with Iran that would be guaranteed to kill upwards of a million people and piss off everyone on both sides. I'm calling for sanctions. This is a significantly more humane strategy going forward. We should be playing the long game and starving the Ayatollahs of resources and political capital like Israel has been doing to Hamas. What the U.S. is doing to Iran and what Israel is doing to Gaza can be replicated against the PRC to good effect. Communism, fascism, and radical Islam (both Shia and Sunni) must be defeated at all costs.

There is footage of Iranian students walking around a graffiti drawing of the U.S. flag and shaming those who walk on it. Iranians want change more than ever. Protests have been growing ever larger, louder, more sustained, and more frequent with each passing year prior to the pandemic. Anger and resentment continue to build against the regime as people demand real democracy, real elections, and an end to the rule of the Ayatollahs, proving that sanctions work. The pandemic is merely a temporary setback for liberal democrats and genuine reformists in Iran. Once the pandemic has died down, it's only a matter of time before Khamenei goes.

I have personally met young Iranians in New Zealand who are nothing like the conservative, chador-wearing stereotype of submissive muslimah and violent, wife-beating, bearded men. The Iranians in question served pork and alcohol and the food was absolutely delightful. The Iranian regime does not represent them in any way, shape, or form. In Iran, these Iranians (a man and a woman) would be savagely whipped and incarcerated for their "transgressions". It's possible they could be refugees. My heart goes out to them and I hope their business succeeds. I believe my college classmates from Iran are also staunchly opposed to the Ayatollahs and yearn for freedom. I sympathize with them as much as I do with Hong Kongers who feel the whole world is closing in on them and they can't breathe.

Ali Khamenei has got to go. Make Iran Great Again.

If the people want change there, they can have it. At least a military strike is actually against the regime, sanctions aren't. The goal of sanctions is to harm the people in the hopes that they will harm their government, it doesn't directly harm the government. The goal of regime change has become the primary goal you have to such a degree that the actual well-being of the people living under it is no more than an afterthought. And "what Israel is doing to Gaza can be done to Iran" and this is supposed to convince me your policies aren't sociopathic? What's happening to the people in Gaza is horrible, and you're talking about doing that, with less provocation, to 80 million people in Iran? And why? Just because you don't like their system? What you're talking about wanting to do would be a worse humanitarian disaster than any of these regimes have inflicted on the world.

If you're so dead-set against sanctions, then why is the power to impose sanctions enshrined in international law and the UN Security Council? I suppose international law is "sociopathic" now. Perhaps the UN should be abolished given the total irrelevance and moral bankruptcy of "international law" and its weaponization by the very same dictators that international law was supposed to contain?

Some limited economic hardship is a "worse humanitarian disaster" than 50 million dead from the Great Leap Forward or millions dead from the Holodomor Ukrainian genocide, or the ongoing Uighur genocide? It's not like anyone's going to starve to death. Such malicious allegations as have been leveled against the UN sanctions regime against Iraq in the 1990s have since been debunked as total fabrications of the deposed Saddam Hussein regime that were enthusiastically lapped up by anti-Israel, anti-American, anti-Western, "anti-imperialist", "anti-fascist", "anti-racist", "anti-war", self-flagellating leftist agitators and the immediate precursors to today's wokists and SJWs who are cut from the same cloth and belong to the same faction (Momentum) of the same party (UK Labour Party). I'm talking about Islamist- and antisemite-enablers such as Jeremy Corbyn, who values cordial relations with an Islamist regime more than he does the Iranian or Syrian people. He has been rightly expelled from the British Labour Party and his lieutenants have been sacked from the Starmer Cabinet. His name has been soiled, tarnished, and disgraced for posterity. Good riddance to him.

And sanctions do harm the government directly. Chinese officials are now unable to go sightseeing at Yellowstone National Park, for instance. They are legally barred from visiting the United States and their assets have been frozen. Sanctions have been imposed against Carrie Lam and other such individuals and their families. If sanctions are extended to the entire economy, the people will naturally revolt against the regime. Democracy will consequently follow. This is true of China. It is true of Iran.

Even if the Iranian or Chinese regimes fail to be toppled via sanctions, they will be considerably weakened internally. Saddam Hussein committed his worst atrocities, including genocide against the Kurds, at a time when he enjoyed U.S. Cold War backing. Iraq was far less belligerent or antagonistic after the Gulf War because it was during that time that Hussein realized he could no longer get away with the kinds of crimes he had gotten away with beforehand the moment his American (and Soviet) enablers turned on him. After the Gulf War and the imposition of crippling economic sanctions, Saddam Hussein was reduced to a cowering, whimpering wretch despite remaining nominally in power. George Bush Jr.'s intervention was a mistake, of course.

Dictators understand, on the same level as a playground bully, that actions have consequences. They will frequently test the waters by committing an atrocity and awaiting the international response. If no response is forthcoming, they will double down. If the international community responds, they will back down. This is plain common sense that any schoolkid, whether they are the bully, the bullied, or an onlooker, understands. I learned this the hard way when Assad bombed, stabbed, and gassed his own people to death and the whole world looked on in total indifference.

This is middle school playground politics whether you like it or not. It's a fact. Dictators view Western diplomacy and rapprochement as signs of weakness and opportunities to be exploited. The concept of good will is entirely foreign to them. They only understand the language of might makes right. Western leaders, particularly left-leaning leaders such as Barack Obama, to their own detriment and to the detriment of everyone else, typically fail to appreciate this fundamental and jarring difference in mindset borne of an insufficient or total lack of exposure to liberal ideals from an early age, coupled perhaps with a difficult childhood. I can imagine Joe Biden or Antony Blinken committing similar blunders. I can't say the same about Mike Pompeo, an ex-CIA director who absolutely knew what he was doing. He should be the next POTUS. His foreign policy experience and expertise are needed more than ever before.

But this is beginning to slide away from the topic, which is the so-called "election" in Iran. I prefer none of the candidates and regard them all as puppets of the Ayatollah. Someone mentioned that the "hardliners" are actually less repressive than the "moderates". I could care less. The entire system has got to go. The Iranian people have directed their anger at both "moderate" President Hassan Rouhani as well as Ali Khamenei. There is no difference between the two. They are the hierarchical equivalent of Carrie Lam and Xi Jinping. A passenger plane being shot down could've been the last straw were it not for the sudden arrival of the coronavirus from Communist China.

What the U.S. is doing to Iran and what Israel is doing to Gaza can be replicated against the PRC to good effect.

Something tells me you'd really quick change your tone if the US started bombing schools and hospitals and shooting up protests in Hong Kong lol

What you've described is completely nonsensical and I'll say it again: I'm not talking about military intervention. I'm talking about sanctions. And yes, activists in HK have been charged with subversion for calling for foreign sanctions against Carrie Lam and other officials, even if it hurts ordinary people economically. It's a kind of scorched-earth mentality. Freedom-loving Iranians, who are humans just like the rest of us, would want the same. If we burn, you burn with us. This is analogous to how governments have resorted to crippling economic lockdowns (sanctions, but directed inward rather than outward, and many people have complained that such sanctions are, more often than not, lifted too fast and too early or are not stringent enough) over the past year in order to defeat a virus that has ruined the livelihoods and snuffed out the lives of so many without mercy. We recognize that lockdowns and restrictions are all for a good cause. My country is no exception. The same applies to traditional sanctions directed outward against other countries and governments.

"Election" or no "election", the Ayatollahs have got to go, and sanctions work.

[Punished UMN]

If the people want change there, they can have it. At least a military strike is actually against the regime, sanctions aren't. The goal of sanctions is to harm the people in the hopes that they will harm their government, it doesn't directly harm the government. The goal of regime change has become the primary goal you have to such a degree that the actual well-being of the people living under it is no more than an afterthought. And "what Israel is doing to Gaza can be done to Iran" and this is supposed to convince me your policies aren't sociopathic? What's happening to the people in Gaza is horrible, and you're talking about doing that, with less provocation, to 80 million people in Iran? And why? Just because you don't like their system? What you're talking about wanting to do would be a worse humanitarian disaster than any of these regimes have inflicted on the world.

If you're so dead-set against sanctions, then why is the power to impose sanctions enshrined in international law and the UN Security Council? I suppose international law is "sociopathic" now. Perhaps the UN should be abolished given the total irrelevance and moral bankruptcy of "international law" and its weaponization by the very same dictators that international law was supposed to contain?

Some limited economic hardship is a "worse humanitarian disaster" than 50 million dead from the Great Leap Forward or millions dead from the Holodomor Ukrainian genocide, or the ongoing Uighur genocide? It's not like anyone's going to starve to death. Such malicious allegations as have been leveled against the UN sanctions regime against Iraq in the 1990s have since been debunked as total fabrications of the deposed Saddam Hussein regime that were enthusiastically lapped up by anti-Israel, anti-American, anti-Western, "anti-imperialist", "anti-fascist", "anti-racist", "anti-war", self-flagellating leftist agitators and the immediate precursors to today's wokists and SJWs who are cut from the same cloth and belong to the same faction (Momentum) of the same party (UK Labour Party). I'm talking about Islamist- and antisemite-enablers such as Jeremy Corbyn, who values cordial relations with an Islamist regime more than he does the Iranian or Syrian people. He has been rightly expelled from the British Labour Party and his lieutenants have been sacked from the Starmer Cabinet. His name has been soiled, tarnished, and disgraced for posterity. Good riddance to him.

And sanctions do harm the government directly. Chinese officials are now unable to go sightseeing at Yellowstone National Park, for instance. They are legally barred from visiting the United States and their assets have been frozen. Sanctions have been imposed against Carrie Lam and other such individuals and their families. If sanctions are extended to the entire economy, the people will naturally revolt against the regime. Democracy will consequently follow. This is true of China. It is true of Iran.

Even if the Iranian or Chinese regimes fail to be toppled via sanctions, they will be considerably weakened internally. Saddam Hussein committed his worst atrocities, including genocide against the Kurds, at a time when he enjoyed U.S. Cold War backing. Iraq was far less belligerent or antagonistic after the Gulf War because it was during that time that Hussein realized he could no longer get away with the kinds of crimes he had gotten away with beforehand the moment his American (and Soviet) enablers turned on him. After the Gulf War and the imposition of crippling economic sanctions, Saddam Hussein was reduced to a cowering, whimpering wretch despite remaining nominally in power. George Bush Jr.'s intervention was a mistake, of course.

Dictators understand, on the same level as a playground bully, that actions have consequences. They will frequently test the waters by committing an atrocity and awaiting the international response. If no response is forthcoming, they will double down. If the international community responds, they will back down. This is plain common sense that any schoolkid, whether they are the bully, the bullied, or an onlooker, understands. I learned this the hard way when Assad bombed, stabbed, and gassed his own people to death and the whole world looked on in total indifference.

This is middle school playground politics whether you like it or not. It's a fact. Dictators view Western diplomacy and rapprochement as signs of weakness and opportunities to be exploited. The concept of good will is entirely foreign to them. They only understand the language of might makes right. Western leaders, particularly left-leaning leaders such as Barack Obama, to their own detriment and to the detriment of everyone else, typically fail to appreciate this fundamental and jarring difference in mindset borne of an insufficient or total lack of exposure to liberal ideals from an early age, coupled perhaps with a difficult childhood. I can imagine Joe Biden or Antony Blinken committing similar blunders. I can't say the same about Mike Pompeo, an ex-CIA director who absolutely knew what he was doing. He should be the next POTUS. His foreign policy experience and expertise are needed more than ever before.

But this is beginning to slide away from the topic, which is the so-called "election" in Iran. I prefer none of the candidates and regard them all as puppets of the Ayatollah. Someone mentioned that the "hardliners" are actually less repressive than the "moderates". I could care less. The entire system has got to go. The Iranian people have directed their anger at both "moderate" President Hassan Rouhani as well as Ali Khamenei. There is no difference between the two. They are the hierarchical equivalent of Carrie Lam and Xi Jinping. A passenger plane being shot down could've been the last straw were it not for the sudden arrival of the coronavirus from Communist China.

Something tells me you'd really quick change your tone if the US started bombing schools and hospitals and shooting up protests in Hong Kong lol

What you've described is completely nonsensical and I'll say it again: I'm not talking about military intervention. I'm talking about sanctions. And yes, activists in HK have been charged with subversion for calling for foreign sanctions against Carrie Lam and other officials, even if it hurts ordinary people economically. It's a kind of scorched-earth mentality. Freedom-loving Iranians, who are humans just like the rest of us, would want the same. If we burn, you burn with us. This is analogous to how governments have resorted to crippling economic lockdowns (sanctions, but directed inward rather than outward, and many people have complained that such sanctions are, more often than not, lifted too fast and too early or are not stringent enough) over the past year in order to defeat a virus that has ruined the livelihoods and snuffed out the lives of so many without mercy. We recognize that lockdowns and restrictions are all for a good cause. My country is no exception. The same applies to traditional sanctions directed outward against other countries and governments.

"Election" or no "election", the Ayatollahs have got to go, and sanctions work.

What is happening to the people of Gaza is not "some limited hardship" and you should just shut up if you know so little about the situation that that's what you think. But I really think you're just deliberately malicious.

The sanctions have been there since 1979, if they work, why haven't they? The sanctions against the PRC were in place from 49 into the 70's. If they work, why didn't they? Sanctions don't work, in fact in a lot of cases they do the opposite of work, they often increase support for the government.

And the reason foreign dictatorships don't view Western diplomacy seriously is because Western governments don't keep their bargains. It was the US that withdrew from the nuclear deal. It was the US that broke its agreement with Gaddafi, it was the US that invaded Iraq despite Iraq following the UN resolutions well-enough for the UN. Why on earth would dictatorships negotiate with the US? It can't help them, and some of the things they may give up (e.g. WMD) may hurt them later.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Sanctions do not and never have worked in any meaningful way. They didn't stop China, they haven't stopped Russia, they haven't stopped the DPRK, they didn't stop Iraq, they didn't stop Libya, they haven't stopped Iran etc etc. They're effectively just a way for us to say we don't like a country, and if China and Korea are anything to go by it makes people support their government more.

[Caribbean Confederation]

Sanctions do not and never have worked in any meaningful way. They didn't stop China, they haven't stopped Russia, they haven't stopped the DPRK, they didn't stop Iraq, they didn't stop Libya, they haven't stopped Iran etc etc. They're effectively just a way for us to say we don't like a country, and if China and Korea are anything to go by it makes people support their government more.

In the particular case of Iran, I can confirm that people haven't come to support the IR more. I don't agree with GHK most of the time, but in this he's not wrong, though in the particular case of Iran it's because we already know the regime would very much rather spend any added revenue to buy weapons to give to its proxies or further prop up Assad than do anything to make it better liked among the citizenry.