Well this article again shows that there are few countries that will not gain power over dead people. It's sad but true.
Now imagine you were living in Iran and came to know about the work of the CIA. Whould you think the USA is the greatest country in the world and democracy is the way to go?
I think it would be best if we look at people in other countries without judgement and try to understand their point of view. Leaders are to blame but most of the people in this world are just living their life.
That was the closest we ever were to a democracy. However, democracy is very fragile, specially at the beginning.
And it was shattered and to this day, we never got as close. Tyrant regimes come and go and we still think what might've been. We could've easily been another France in middle east.
Source: Iranian living in the U.S.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-s-says-iran-may-have-ki...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/u-s-officials-iran-off...
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/19/middleeast/british-tanker-sei...
As a resident of Europe, I don't think that's accurate. I think there are negative views of these countries in the west but I think the negativity is _much_ stronger in the US than the rest of the west.
Personally I find the US itself to be a much bigger problem than any of these countries and it seems I'm definitely not alone [0].
We all live in our bubbles, me included. If we took 5 mins to look from opposite side, we’d have less conflicts.
The internet was supposed to bring people together. Instead we are all in some echo chamber or the other. Companies like Facebook profit handsomely from it too
Part of the issue we see in the Middle East, IMO, is that Islamists got the upper hand because they were the only organizations that were tolerated under the oppressive regimes that existed in so many places (Iran, Iraq, Syria, the Gulf states, Egypt,...).
So I don’t know. One thing a lot of these regimes have in common is oil wealth. Oil wealth tends to drive any other industries out of a country, insulate power around the ruling class, and lead to dictatorships and similar. Definitely getting humanity to use non oil energy sources ASAP would help lower the pressures, I hope.
The above might sound unfair but think about it. I believe there is propaganda in almost every country.
And when oil is gone there will be something else. Probably Artificial Intelligence. Also check out a current trending item in HN about the US limiting the export of AI.
Is it the systems involved, the religions, the wealth applied to a free society or just luck that created these two outcomes?
Russia is invading neighbours, actively escalating military tensions and sabre rattling.
They don't really fit the same profile as Iran currently does.
Feel free to walk me through the 'good guy' point of view of the people who invaded my home country, shot down a passenger plane, and got away with complete impunity.
There are no good or bad guys. All the superpwers are dicks, that's how they got to being superpwers.
The only reason Iran doesn't entirely fit your profile is because it's not a real superpower but merely a wannabe empire, not able to entirely get away with the evil stuff it does.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r...
It seems like there should be a better system globally but right now it's like a struggle of ant hills and maybe this is how the human race got to the level it is at. Through struggle and selection.
Iran has been treated badly by the west no doubt. But their hands are not clean either. Was not this commander killed in Iraq organizing pro Iranian militias? From the point of view of the US can they allow Iran to become the dominant power in this oil rich world crossroads region? They can't and they won't. It's really that simple. "Right" only marginally enters into this equation. I guess I'd feel much more badly had the commander been killed in Iran organizing soup kitchens for the poor. But he was poking a bees nest and the results were as expected.
In the specific case of Crimea, it's much more complicated than that. It is an invasion, but there's much more about it than just "Russia invading neighbors", you're oversimplifying things.
Russia invaded the Crimean Oblast within Ukraine, rather than all of Ukraine.
In the Soviet Union, Crimea was an Oblast of the Russian SFSR. First secretary Nikita Khrushchev, who was of Ukranian origin, transferred the governance of the Crimean oblast from the Russian SFSR to the Ukrainian SSR in 1954 as a "symbolic gesture".
But after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, many Russians (an ethnic majority inside Crimea) were not satisfied with the resulting situation.
> and democracy is the way to go
Democracy = USA? Hmmm, didn't know that.
Everything would be better in this world if we did.
Why would anyone think that?
It's an absurd question frankly. You don't need to feel that way to be an ally of the US. Is there a single US ally that thinks that at this point? The US is deeply flawed country, even more than most.
The difference is that Iranians have every reason to hate the US.
>Leaders are to blame but most of the people in this world are just living their life.
The people get the leaders they deserve. This is because people are the ultimate power - convince enough people to go along with you overtly: you're a dictator. Covertly: you're a 1% of 1%'er, who knows the right strings to pull in the world.
In the end, neither of these conditions can occur unless the people, in their enthusiasm or in their apathy, allow it.
No, they don't. There's no voting system that allows everyone to be represented.
I think the attitude you are expecting people to have is insulting both ways. You are denying the Iranians and Chinese have any agency...Do you really think they or their Goverments spend all their time just reacting?
Ps. If you say to someone in the west "What do you think of those re-education camps?" they will reply "Sounds like a university". Sadly, they are not completely wrong.
Most people living outside the USA are very negative about the United States because this president is a very "bad guy". I'm not under such a opinion but I find it increasingly hard to have a normal conversation about the USA and it's form of the human experiment without hitting a wall of generalised criticism that ends up in stalemate.
Considering what we know what the CIA has done in the past. What kind of shadow government is functioning without consent of the people. The media institutions that suppose to keep that power in check never really informed the public on these developments. And on top the revelation of the catholic church being the biggest pedofile network that hitted the American society probably a lot harder than Europe because of stronger religious sentiments. All things combined for me it is not strange an anti establishment campaign won the presidency.
Friends, family, people that have watched movies like the Irishman, Spotlight, the Good Shepherd are not really open to adjust their point of view on the States. Iran, China and Russia are however topics where nuanced opinion still is expressed.
That's a very simplistic view of people outside the USA. Unlike US news that do no mention US proxy wars, veto votes and the like, other countries are well aware of US foreign policy and the terror it brings with it, be it in south America, Africa, the middle east or elsewhere.
There is apparently a joke amongst diplomats that 'Iran is the only country in the world which still regards the United Kingdom as a superpower'. There is a phrase in Iran, which translates as something like "It's always an English job", applied to something that has been botched and mishandled. I'd definitely say that for the layman, if you want to understand the relationship twixt the West and Iran (which is so much more than just the US and Iran) this book has a place on your reading list.
Our oil dependency isn't just about the cars we drive.
There are no circumstances in sight that would make oil/gas extraction uneconomical, especially in light of the rise of demand from developing countries.
So we'll have to arrange for the oil extraction reductions using international agreements.
As long as oil is valuable, we'll fight over it. If lithium becomes valuable, we'll fight over it. Times change, but sadly people remain the same. Especially the greedy elite.
Like Afghanistan, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mining_in_Afghanistan#Lithium
And if you're looking for more recent cases, the USA supported the military coup in Egypt in 2013. The government even refused to call it a coup because of legal implications. This was an important blow to democracy in the region. The authoritarian evolution in Turkey is partly due to this.
I'm not saying other democracies are better than the USA. I'm French, and my country still cannot face its past in Algeria. And France still supports dictators, like a 2018 bombing in Chad recently proved. But over the last couple of decades, I don't think any country killed more foreign civilians than the USA did, by a large margin. Even Saudi Arabia and UAE, with their wars in Yemen and Lybia, can't compare.
Never become complacent.
Start with wiki it is actually surprisingly good.
“The official pretext for the start of the coup was Mosaddegh's decree to dissolve Parliament, giving himself and his cabinet complete power to rule, while effectively stripping the Shah of his powers.[13][14][15]”
Say Boris Johnson dissolves parliament takes all of the power into his own hands and his ministers. Queen tries to relieve him(coup!!!!) has to run away to France :o He then starts imprisoning anyone who has a problem with that.
I also like the legend about CIA managing to bribe a bunch of communists party members to burn down part of Tehran trying to start revolution, at the same time they were bribing: media, army, other counter protestors, security, religious leaders. Just how many agents did they have running this masterclass operation? Nobody in in Tehran clearly had any will of their own.
> The Shah himself initially opposed the coup plans, and supported the oil nationalization, but he joined after being informed by the CIA that he too would be "deposed" if he didn't play along.
It also has this to say:
> During the coup, Roosevelt and Wilber, representatives of the Eisenhower administration, bribed Iranian government officials, reporters, and businessmen. They also bribed street thugs to support the Shah and oppose Mosaddegh. ...
> Another tactic Roosevelt admitted to using was bribing demonstrators into attacking symbols of the Shah, while chanting pro-Mosaddegh slogans. ...
Is this surprisingly good or is it laughable legend again?
Wiki might be incomplete but compared to npr agitprop it is much better
