This. The oil that turns the crank of industry and provides the energy that produces so much of every comfort we hold dear in the west finances the very evil that seeks to destroy it. Until we end our reliance of oil, the middle east and Islam will continue to threaten the West's existence. It's a horrible irony.
We do not have Sharia Law areas in the UK. I have no idea where that story came from, but its not based on fact. Particularly amusing was the Fox News coverage of areas of Birmingham where apparently white people can't go - my white friends who've lived there for decades would like to dispute that.
I can also name a couple of Christian women who have drowned their children to inhibit alleged Satanic forces. Pointing out stories without confirming real trends is useless.
We also have Christians murdering abortion doctors, setting bombs and fires at clinics, Christian Sovereign Citizens murdering police on a near monthly basis, advocating for a theocracy in America (God above Country or Establishment of a national religion), advocation of Christian Law above secular law, etc, and we manage to keep our society from becoming a theocracy.
Frankly, if a few evangelical Muslims are capable of destroying the secular foundation of your systems, those systems were weak in the first place.
Well the obvious answer here is that all Abrahamic religions are suspect for breeding violence. But you can't say that in polite company for fear of the ADL, et. al.
Any ideology can breed violence. The Bolshevik Revolution by Marxists, or Mao's Cultural Revolution, are examples of non-religious ideologies that led to violence.
> There's always someone to say "X is prohibited" and people that do X and that profess to be allowed.
We have proof that it is prohibited, and it is the onus of those claiming otherwise to demonstrate how it isn't. I don't known where you're saying that any Muslim professes that honor killings are allowed.
> Ah so is it wrong? Go tell them.
Many already are, as how I showed in the video I linked in my last post.
It takes time to educate people. Do you think things are going to change overnight? Especially with what is going on in the world today?
The fact remains, that both of those incidents you posted are 100% against Islamic teachings. Walk to any mosque in your area and ask if you don't believe me.
Or when the demand for oil diminishes (holding supply constant) as battery-electric transport becomes widespread.
Not only are batteries becoming less expensive every year, but the deployment of autonomous vehicle networks (self driving Ubers) will make battery-electric transport more cost competitive by distributing the high fixed cost of the battery between many users.
Awkardly written, either by Kamel Daoud, or the translation by John Cullen from the French. I don't know which parts were literal and which were metaphor.
Baudrillard is fun every once in a while, but it's certainly not accurate to describe a controversial, notoriously abstruse poststructuralist philosopher as typical of "the French way of writing."
I'm sorry but i find that article rather myopic. Most of the claims in that article seem more opinion than good research. For those that are interested in getting a balanced view can get their own research on what life is actually like in Saudi Arabia by talking to a large community of expats there that would rather not return to home soil.
That said, Saudi arabia enjoys healthy support from the west and has done so right from its inception. The country is barely 100yrs old and Britain played an instrumental role in creating the country as well as shaping most of the middle east. That has striking parallels to what is going on with ISIS right now.
Here is a well researched lecture on the subject by Dr Yasir Qadhi:
You'll need to watch part 2 as well to get the full picture and if you have time might also want to watch the video on the creation of Israel which is equally damning.
And regards ISIS here's Putin's statement -- that interestingly was not covered by western media -- but is congruent with the lecture and my point above.
I commented this in a post 3 days ago.it is completely applicable here,I know maybe this is not right thing to do -copying my old cm- but those point I think closely related to the topic.( there will be Isis like groups until West's ally in middle East is most corrupted regime maybe in world.how do you want people to not be terrorist when Saudi Arabia is one of the closest society in planet . how do you expect people to change to secular ,atheist people -like people in Scandinavian,I don't remember where but there was measurement which stated 2/3 of Saudi Arabia people likes Isis and supports it.maybe it is not correct number.but the was is almost indisputable, there is huge support base for Isis in Saudi Arabia ,both government and people- when the government does not allow women to drive?.imagine the level of dictatorship. And the worst part is Saudi Arabia is us closest ally after Israel,what was the last time us puts hard sanction against Saudi Arabia because of their human right issue.what was last time us decrease relationship because of human right.as Iranian I only can say this to west politicians: go fuck yourself.
This was my old cm:
Am pretty angry about what is going on in world , so if you felt insulted , I am so sorry , and You should understand I don't want to insult you or any other person specifically,But I want insult Ideologies pretty badly.
As person who LIVES in heart of middle east (Iran) and I have seen shia militant from very close(I know people who works in IRGC),You are completely and pure wrong , do you know what would generate another generation of terrorist ? another invasion. I am atheist and liberal with a little being gay,I am not gay , but sometime things go wrong - and believe me these are pretty dangerous thing to be in Iran and would get me killed, without doubt - but I can realize the only thing will give terrorist another opportunity is invasion of a country in middle east. This is not your fucking war.This was not west fucking war at all. They shouldn't come here in any circumstance.You know what ? because Paris like terrorism act will happen again and again and again. West should understand they were wrong all the time. What the fuck are you doing in middle east ? You know what ? no body more than me would be glad to live in secular community with secular government, but it seems politician in west do not realize , being in middle east is equal to raising radical movement against them. YOU SHOULD UNDERSTAND , MIDDLE EAST SHOULD FIGHT FOR ITSELF, EVEN IF ISIS KILL ALL OF US, this is not your fucking war.I do not remember reading if any alien did help west during the renaissance. Society should grow.
PLEASE , do for humanity a favor , understand militarism is equal to terrorism. I was talking with one idiot yesterday , and he mentioned I do not believe France invade Iraq. Yes your are right idiot . France did not . but west did . These fucking killers in middle east , do not see countries , they see Islam against West.
Do you know who fights in Iran against mullah's ? Christians ? Are you kidding me, mujaheddin khalgh ? Those fucking traitors, no way.
Academia fights against mullah's, science fights, liberal people fighting against mullah's more effective than any other person in whole revolution history.This regime is almost unbeatable in political sense- because they have money and manpower and oil- but do you know they are seeing liberals in their nightmare. They even don't care about West invasion against Iran(some stupid person like G.W Bush may even consider that option).Because at the end they know the can manage harm West military pretty badly. Worse than maybe Vietnam war.BUT THEY CANNOT FIGHT WITH INTERNET, WITH TOR, WITH STUDENTS who USE TOR.
Give them internet , provide them satellite , Facebook/twitter/YouTube/porn , Show them fucking beautiful women in Texas(with respect to women, I just want show sexual incentives), show them there is no need to kill so many people to get those woman , you can f...
I get this is an emotional response and somewhere 3/4th in, it turns into drivel with Texas women and such. I do believe violence begets more violence. Further I believe the complexity is something akin to the butterfly effect where doing something can cascade into something big in half a century. Take for example the drone strikes. The kids who manage to live through it would have have pent-up animosity towards the west when they hit teenage.
What we are seeing is just the result of some bad foreign policy.
Maybe you don't know Islam as much as I do , but at the very end , it is only about sex . When you look at it in that perspective you can understand ruining their culture to show them their whole religion was a lie is the best approach.
about bad foreign policy I completely agree.And that was my whole point . stop killing people and overthrowing regime in Islamic areas and change your policy to show them new way of life. better way and more pleasant way.
I appreciate that you have an experienced perspective to offer that is rare here, but your comments are also breaking the site guidelines. We need you to try harder to follow those when posting. If you want help with that you're welcome to email us at hn@ycombinator.com.
>I don't know what you were taught in Iran, but this is 100% false.
I don't know what kind of Islam you taught, but holy book is exclusively about sex and relationship as well as 99% fatwa's.
You are just stating something without even explaining it . so nice . I would claim it is 100% true. You can study holy book , it almost exclusively about sex and relationship between men and women with stories -unrelated to relation- between them.
Please before giving such ridiculous answer , provide your reasons .
> but holy book is exclusively about sex and relationship as well as 99% fatwa's.
With all due respect, this sentence alone proves that you don't know what you're talking about. Sorry.
Fatwas are something completely different from the Quran.
> I would claim it is 100% true.
You can claim anything you want, but without proof, it is worthless.
> You can study holy book , it almost exclusively about sex and relationship between men and women with stories -unrelated to relation- between them.
The Quran does have passages about marriage, divorce, inheritance, and the like. But in no way do those constitute the majority of the Quran like you are saying.
It is sad how Iran is using religion to control the people. They picked parts of what they liked, fabricated some parts, and left out other parts. I had several Iranian colleagues when I was in school, and I could see how some of them were very displeased with the government. Please don't take it out on the religion.
Can I ask you if you were taught by the Iranian government to hate (or at least look down on) Arabs?
>Can I ask you if you were taught by the Iranian government to hate (or at least look down on) Arabs
Wtf? I taught by Iranian government to hate Arabs? Dude Iranian government is Arab.they dont give fuck about Iran.they spend money for Arab countries more than they do for our own country.they build their whole ideology on this.if any one had clue what is going on Iran , they would understand how much and how deep you are ignorant in term of Iranian government policy.
First of all I don't give fuck about race.then I don't care you are Arab or Jew or anything else.Human are humans, I don't believe in race.we are all some kind of advanced animal.
>With all due respect, this sentence alone proves that you don't know what you're talking about. Sorry.
Fatwas are something completely different from the Quran.
Did you even read my comment? where did you get that? Fatwa and guran is the same thing? Are fucking kidding me.I compelled to study religon simultaneously with other thing in 12 years. I am not religious scholar , but I have read Quran , and some main text for hadith and sunnat. Have you read guran? I read it.two different translation.very approved and good translation to Persian.Khorasani and Ghomshei.
With respect I feel sorry for you.guran is not about sex? Dude the whole book is about sex and power.
>fabricated some parts
fabricated the religion? The whole religion is about lie and fabrication .
I respect you personally. But I don't give fuck about guran or your religious believe which is lie.
Does that include Rouhani and the Ayatollas? This is something new. Or are you just saying that they are allying with the Arabs?
> I don't care you are Arab or Jew or anything else...
I'm not talking about you, I was just asking about what the Iranian government is teaching its population. One of my Iranian colleagues told me how they taught them that Arabs are backward and barbarics, and that only Islam saved them. I wanted to get another anecdote.
> Have you read guran? I read it.two different translation.very approved and good translation to Persian.Khorasani and Ghomshei.
Yes, I read it in Arabic.
> With respect I feel sorry for you.guran is not about sex? Dude the whole book is about sex and power.
Again, not true. Should I pick out random passages from it to prove you wrong?
> fabricated the religion? The whole religion is about lie and fabrication .
Unfortunately, there are many fabricated stories that exists in the Twelver books. We know this because we have a strict way of classifying which narrations are authentic, which are weak, and which are fabricated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categories_of_Hadith
>Does that include Rouhani and the Ayatollas? This is something new. Or are you just saying that they are allying with the Arabs?
Both.
Yes they are Arabs. for example you can search Iraqi people in Iran's regime. or People they call "Seyed".which means they have arab roots.Which is more than 20+ of people.and for specific people in root of power you can search about Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi .(or Mohammad Reza Naqdi or so many others)
And second one is true also, They are ripping Iran in favor of Arab countries which Iran's people naturally don't give fuck about them.
They are basically trying to be hero in middle east , because they don't have option other than that, because whole region is dominated by sunni Muslims who basically hate shia.They are trying to be hero in Palestine issue, not because they give fuck about Palestine . because they want impose their hegemony to other countries.and being hero is always best figure.
>I'm not talking about you, I was just asking about what the Iranian government is teaching its population. One of my Iranian colleagues told me how they taught them that Arabs are backward and barbarics, and that only Islam saved them. I wanted to get another anecdote.
Are fucking kidding me ? last time I checked you comment , your sentence was "Can I ask you if you were taught by the Iranian government to hate (or at least look down on) Arabs?"
This only can show how much your claims and statements are stupid and meaningless . When you use "YOU" in your sentence. This means you are pointing to your next person.
>Yes, I read it in Arabic.
Then if you don't lie (which I cannot believe), then you should know they only incentive for people for being good is sex and 72 virgin . that's all . the whole stupid religion hinges on that .
>Unfortunately, there are many fabricated stories that exists in the Twelver books. We know this because we have a strict way of classifying which narrations are authentic, which are weak, and which are fabricated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categories_of_Hadith
You seem have problem with reading my comment , and with out reading it trying to answer , which most of the time are false.Again , seems you have problem with understanding logical statement (as most of religious people, sadly and respectfully). I did claim simple thing, but you turn it to completely other thing, and your in imaginary world you make an answer up and give it to me.
I should end this conversation . Sadly and respectfully , because as always . religious people. instead seeing simple claim, they turn it to whole another thing.
> because they want impose their hegemony to other countries.
So you're saying they are trying to take over the region?
> Are fucking kidding me ? last time I checked you comment , your sentence was "Can I ask you if you were taught by the Iranian government to hate (or at least look down on) Arabs?"
I think you're having a hard time understanding what I wrote, maybe I could have phrased it better. You said you don't hate anyone, but that doesn't mean that the Iranian government didn't try to teach you to (and failed).
> Then if you don't lie (which I cannot believe), then you should know they only incentive for people for being good is sex and 72 virgin
Can you show me where it says about the 72 virgins in the Quran?
> I did claim simple thing, but you turn it to completely other thing, and your imaginary world you make an answer up and give it to me.
You said the religion is about fabrication, I responded that no, we don't fabricate our religion, and I showed you proof.
> Academia fights against mullah's, science fights, liberal people fighting against mullah's more effective than any other person in whole revolution history...BUT THEY CANNOT FIGHT WITH INTERNET, WITH TOR, WITH STUDENTS who USE TOR. Give them internet , provide them satellite , Facebook/twitter/YouTube/porn , Show them fucking beautiful women in Texas(with respect to women, I just want show sexual incentives), show them there is no need to kill so many people to get those woman , you can fuck like heaven in earth without killing people. And BOOOOOM this is the sound of explosion of foundation of religion.
I see where you are coming from, and I am in agreement with this element of your comment. Backward, unproductive ideologies will not stand the test of time and will eventually crumble under the pressure of globalization unless they can bring tremendous force to bear against the rest of the world. I think what you say will be useful in the future, but the question is what do we do right now? Do we sit back and let ISIS attack Europe without responding? Do we let Russia deal with the issue? Are we willing to allow further areas to be destabilized?
You need to explain why this is not working in Europe before going down this path. None of the terrorists in Europe were lacking in access to internet, porn, ... Any lf that.
Yet they still kill.
In fact if most of the isis fighters do co e from the west, that goes for most of them too.
Because they taking revenge.my whole comment hinges on two base.first let middle East alone.( after that you are not going to encounter terrorist like those).
And you can work peoples mind simultaneously to show them how stupid is their religion.
Let middle East alone.West has 50 year of stupid policy history in middle East.invasion a country, are you fucking kidding me.do you want bring democracy with that.yeap,of course invasion will generate Osama bin laden and like those.
Well if that's true then it's basically eternal war. If perceived/reported "injustices" 10000km away in a language they don't understand cause these guys to massacre civilians ... there's nothing to do but use military force against them. Merely stopping a policy won't do anything to prevent more revenge.
The author has a point. Most of the 9/11 attackers were Saudis. Bin Laden was a Saudi. Saudi Arabia is a dysfunctional country propped up by oil money.
It's even more insular than it used to be. Saudis used to send their kids to the US to go to college, with Government funding. Now Saudi Arabia has enough educational institutions that they don't do that.
Years ago, I met a Saudi girl finishing Stanford who mentioned she was going to drive to New Orleans. That route meant a long drive through the boring part of the US. She said it was the only time in her life she'd be allowed to drive on a long car trip. That was decades ago, and Saudi Arabia still doesn't let women drive.
Watching Lawrence of Arabia I kept trying to identify the geologic layers in the familiar rock formations. Then I realized that it was actually filmed in Arabia. It only looked like Arizona.
So no, I don't expect that a non-geologist would find the American southwest so very novel compared to Saudi. But I've never, ever been bored in the American southwest in tens of thousands of hours of travel there.
I don't doubt that rocks have similar compositions throughout the world, but even a cursory examination of the areas from a distance reveals many differences. For one, the US southwest doesn't have huge swaths of fine sand.
Having made this drive numerous times, I tend to cut diagonally from Albuquerque->Lubbock->Austin->New Orleans in order to take in some Hill Country on the way
I went to a school in the North West with a large international program. A ton of students were Saudi Arabian. The new king actually raised their living stipend. Students are payed something like $1000 for every time they are published, regardless of the journal's reputation.
I think at high levels they realize their reliance on oil will be their downfall. And they are making huge investments in education (in my experience mostly for men) and I believe renewables as well.
But that's only useable within their country, and potentially exportable to neighboring countries (who have the same potential). Its utility will be in providing (relatively) cheap energy to other industries (whether manufacturing or intellectual or financial) within the country.
Useless for people, but I wonder what the environmental impact is of putting solar powered panels everywhere so we can satisfy our CandyCrush addictions.
The Saudi's you meet in the America or the west are the rich aristocracy. For the most part, these people aren't extremists. And that's why the West has a hard time dealing with the problem. The people who ostensibly rule the Kingdom aren't salafists.
But the actual people in the Saudi Arabia, the commoner, is very fundamentalist.
It's a dysfunctional country propped up with a deal with the devil. The fundamentalists get most of what they want, while the royal family keeps their money and their land.
It's not an easy fix. If the world turned on the royal family, they'd fall from power and be immediately replaced by fundamentalists. Fundies now backed with the worlds largest supply of oil.
Also, the fundamentalist cancer they spread is now too far gone. Even if Saudi's went back to total poverty like they were in 100 years ago, the roots of radicalization are already in other countries.
Moderate Islam needs an organized response, but there has been none.
As someone pointed out to me earlier this week here on HN, Seymour Hersh's article on the Bin Ladin assassination, the real story of Al Qe'da is that the Saudis funded it tacitly. And as a result Saudi government is partially responsible for 9/11.
The sooner we figure out how to make petroleum irrelevant, the sooner places like Saudi lose their influence. Gas == War.
The reason why Israel is important is because of its proximity to the Grand Lever of geopolitics that is crude oil. Once we stop burning crude oil, the relevance of Israel to US foreign policy wanes considerably.
The US only imports about 15% of crud oil and related products (such as gas) from Saudi Arabia. 70% is non-OPEC, and 40% is from Canada [1]. At the same time, the US produces roughly the same amount that it imports [2]. So at this point in time, the US no longer needs the Middle East for oil.
Completely true: the US doesn't need middle eastern oil. But the politics around oil are not just about getting it. It's also about preventing certain groups from getting it AND controlling access to oil to our strategic allies. Oil is the lever of all geopolitics. To understand the balance of power, the economics and politics of oil go hand in hand. It's not just about driving your car: it's about ruling the world.
---> Saudi Arabia is a dysfunctional country propped up by oil money.
I can't wait, the world can't wait any longer to end our dependence on fossil fuels. The world / middle east will be a better place if we reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.
One thing it does miss is that Al Qaeda is also Wahabbist in its theology. The problem isn't Islam so much as it is Saudi Arabia's "denomination" of Islam, Wahabbism.
This is so on point. A prime example of the hypocrisy of western governments. Until we have leaders that truly do what they claim to believe, we deserve everything that comes upon us.
That hypocrisy is one of the legitimate reasons we are often hated around the world. We talk about freedom and justice but we work behind the scenes to prop up tyrannies that are every bit as bad as the "enemies of freedom." We've been doing this for decades and it's destroyed any moral authority we might have once had in the world. That sort of trust, once destroyed, is hard to earn back.
Yes. At best we're the better evil. Our government is driven by money - the military industrial complex , big pharmaceuticals, private interest. All stuff that Lawrence Lessig talks about.
Just look at our political debates. All of the talk is dumbed down, feel-good, wishy-washy moral statements about religion, God, pretentious ideologies about "freedom", "being the beacon of the world", etc.
Our leaders came from society. All of this is our collective fault. We all can and need to do better.
Don't get me wrong. I am sure Saudi Arabia is much worse. They don't even allow women to vote and treat them like objects. Well, we were there not that long ago.
So like I said, we're most likely better, but not angels.
It doesn't justify it, but what it does do is undermine our moral authority. "Why do you condemn the Paris terror attacks and at the same time help prop up regimes that chop peoples' heads off in public? Isn't that almost the same thing?"
The thing is that most people condemn the "spraying random Frenchmen with machine guns", but applaud when the day after France carpet bombs Raqqa, a Syrian city with a population of over 200000 with the civilians being trapped in the oppression of ISIS.
Apparently, then the death of dozens of innocent civilians which had no choice other than getting trapped between bombs falling from the sky or ISIS militants controlling the city borders, is justified because "look what happened in Paris!".
From what I read, it seemed like the French were not given the option to carpet bomb Raqqa but instead got to fulfill a long list of kill orders on strategic targets instead of the usual method of doling them out to different allies to take care of.
Does that in turn justify bombing innocent children in hospitals in Syria? France just nuked the whole country. Why are innocent children being roped into this?
And what about France's own colonial and terrorist in Africa that no one wants to talk about?
I have to say, the quality of mainstream media coverage of the Middle East has gone up remarkably since 9-11. I think perhaps in the next fifty years or so we'll finally figure out how to handle the problems of the region with grace and magnanimity rather than hatred and endless warfare.
Muslims in the West are bound by Western jurisprudence.
If Muslims in the West got the legal system they* sought (polls indicate the majority support lawful recognition and enforcement of sharia law), it's a good bet that they* would start.
* = note, I know I am generalizing millions of people here, and a sizable proportion of the Muslim population is not applicable here.
Some do. Pedantically, the cases I'm referring to are literally "Muslims in the west" (and perhaps fundamentalist) rather than "Westernized" or moderate Muslims. There's certainly no absolute generalization to be made though, in one direction or the other.
"Estimate that there are 66,000 victims of FGM in England and Wales and warns that more than 24,000 girls under 15 are at risk. More than 2,000 victims of FGM sought treatment in London hospitals alone in the past three years."
The guidelines for commenting on Hacker News ask you to avoid bringing up flamebait topics without having anything new or interesting to say about them.
That's not intended as flamebait. I think it's a legitimate question. What if a religion is the root cause of this behavior? What are the appropriate steps to take at that point?
I'm not condemning Islam necessarily and certainly not Muslims but I think we need to stop dancing around and confront the issue of what an ideology is teaching. Is it appropriate for our world? If it isn't what do we do about it?
I don't think there's anything new to understand here. Outlaw it where we can, conduct diplomacy to try to get countries that don't outlaw it to outlaw it. War is a last-ditch option, one that I don't think should be off the table, but we need to go into it clear-headed with a sane understanding of what we can and cannot accomplish.
The Middle East is practically defined by war. Bringing more of it to that region isn't really going to do anything.
I actually think of Isreal as a model to work off of. Build bastions of Western ideals in the region and let the locals decide for themselves which ideology they want to be a part of. Isreal's main problem in this regard is how they treat the Palestinians, but I'm optimistic that they'll eventually work it out. If Isrealis can figure out how to adopt welcoming stances to non-Jewish immigrants, they could become an even bigger magnet for youth than the terror organizations.
There's not really a religious basis for FGM. The practice predates Islam in the Muslim countries where it's popular, and in certain places is more commonly practiced by Christians than Muslims.
We warned you that we would ban your account if you didn't stop doing this (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178800), and you haven't, so we've banned your account. If you don't want it to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com.
I don't know what you're referring to. If you want to supply the context, we're happy to answer, but it would be better to send this to hn@ycombinator.com.
This is a friendly reminder that the United States have sponsored ISIS when they were still considered freedom fighters against Assad. The United States also happily still do business with ISIS in that they are buying extremely cheap, under market value, oil and capital goods from Iraq exported by ISIS.
Of course, none of this is officially documented, just like how not a dollar its whereabouts, of the 40 billion dollar cash the United States sent to Iraq circa 2004, is documented.
It is no secret the United States have selectively supported "freedom fighters" and militant groups when they deemed that would be more productive for the petrodollar and their Zionist friends than putting their own boots on the ground. Saddam, Osama Bin Laden, Gadaffi, ISIS and countless of others have all been supported by the United States and their removal has always been justified either because they turned their back on the United States and their allies (with Zionists being the most prominent) - or because they could be replaced by a better/cheaper/more productive puppet.
--edit: if you are downvoting this reply, consider offering substantial content to the discussion instead of trying to cloak statements which do not strike well with your opinion or observation of geopolitics. Thanks in advance.
> This is a friendly reminder that the United States have sponsored ISIS when they were still considered freedom fighters against Assad.
Not really. United States sponsored other opponents to Assad, which were then sufficiently marginalized as to be either annihilated or convert to Daesh, but they clearly weren't Daesh at the time.
Just because that at that point in time they didn't have the "brand" or association yet, it doesn't mean they don't belong to the same group of people. Or do you also think that during the Eighty Years' War people already knew they were at the half when forty years passed?
Article rings true for me. Growing up in the Khaleej, I saw an increasing influence of the Salafi mindset around me. Maybe as a child I didn't pay attention to it, but in my teens and certainly visiting now after a decade, I see a very different, more conservative region.
As an aside, The Mersault Investigation by Kamel Daoud (author of this article) is a very interesting book. I recommend it to people who have liked The Stranger.
One frustrating thing that the author gets wrong is labelling Iran the "Gray Daesh."
Iran has geopolitical conflict with the West, but it's a false equivalent of Saudi Arabia. Iran is a theocracy trying to control a population that growingly wants to be secular. Women in Iran go to university at higher rates than men, can drive, hold office, and vote. Life in Iran for a women is not perfect but is heaven compared to Saudi Arabia.
Iranian sponsored militias like hezbollah are in geopolitical conflicts as Iran wants more regional influence. They want regional islam. They are not trying to establish a global Shiite islamic state.
Like most things it comes down to money and power. Saudi plays ball with America economic hegemony and Iran does not. So rather than allying with the more moderate/educated nation with huge potential to be progressive, we ally with the one that is best for big business and willing to cede military control of the region to us.
The Iranian theocracy is fucked, don't get me wrong. But we really have our priorities in a mess.
I think the major difference is that Iran is openly and directly funding/helping Hizbollah. Whereas Saudi Arabia is more of funder of extremist beliefs but no direct funding of terrorist orgs
There was a fairly complete turnaround in the politics of both Germany and Japan after they lost the Second World War, in case you didn't notice. The "money's right" came as a consequence of that.
Nothing rules out Iran having such a complete turnaround. Plenty of people there remember the days of the Shah, they also remember the days of the SAVAK.
Neither of those solutions was 'all good' so at some point the people will say 'enough'. It can take a while.
Iran was a U.S. ally under the Shahs, whose reign lasted from the coup we supported or engineered (against their mostly democratic government) in 1953 until the revolution in 1979. Many/most 9/11 perpetrators, including Osama Bin Laden, came from Saudi Arabia; there is plenty of reason for the U.S. to hate them.
All countries (or other groups) can find reasons to hate or love each other. Look at France and Germany, close allies now but plenty of opportunity for hate. All it takes is an effective political leader to manipulate the public in whatever way suits them.
Iran was a U.S. ally under the Shahs, whose reign lasted from the coup we supported or engineered (against their mostly democratic governemnt) in 1953 until the revolution in 1979.
The beginning of Mohammad Reza's reign was in 1941 and had nothing to do with the US. The coup (by both the US and UK) was about reversing the nationalization of Iran's oil industry, not about installing Mohammad Reza as king. Britain and the Soviet Union did that in WWII.
Whatever the mechanics the US and UK effectively removed Prime Minister Mosaddegh from power and gave it to, and supported the Shah (Reza). Is that not correct?
Yes, it is correct. Although, as with any CIA destabilisation and coup operation, a certain layer of plausible deniability was a key strategic consideration.
Author got paid to paint Saudi's black ( they are certainly blackish in terms of things that they do [I am not racist] with US approval) and Iran as Gray (not very true, Iran is way more whiter than US, EU and KSA), such a moron. at the end every country is a different shade of Gray.
That's an interesting point you raise there. People in Western societies see themselves as 'at the pinnacle of civilization' but there is plenty that other countries have, even if their governments are not arrived at through the same mechanisms that we have and by our yardstick are 'less free' whereas we are by their yardstick 'less free'.
As for being a slave to credit card companies and banks: that's optional where I live.
I think most westerners think of freedom as the ability to do what you want when you want. This means freedom of speech, freedom to travel, freedom of censorship, freedom of dress codes.
I'm not claiming other nations are completely free, they're not. But Iran is free? Not even close.
As Iranian (I am commenting from Tehran) I completely approve your point of view.I even explained in long comment in this post(you can find it in bottom).Iranian regime nightmare is liberal people( because they are the most effective opposition to current regime, all of other opposition's dismantled by regime very easily they don't even exist in society).
you know why? Because they are only threat to nature of this unbeatable regime(which have money manpower and religion).but west politicians keep ignoring this fact.Iran society is way ahead of its regime.Maybe far better than turkey in term of progressiveness And regime knows perfectly. Not Isis.not USA.not Israel.non of them is serious threat for them in long term.but a huge young population with secular believes is THE most threat for regime nature.people who use internet and spend time behind porn sites and don't give fuck about Islam is the most threat (and lose) for Iran regime.
You want change middle east . change their fucking -stupid- culture with internet, with porn.
Of course , I am using porn as notion, because it is such red line in Iran's(or broadly in Islamic) culture. It is the most - and first - effective attack to the stupid Islamic culture.Of course science is the best alternative. I just want show people the hardware -military,sanction, etc- is not answer . the best answer is software -culture,education,etc-.
I fail to see the downside of a free education. The questions you might ask is what it is exactly that is being taught but in general a free education is a good thing.
"Since the act of accepting a gift can create a sense of unfulfilled obligation on the part of the receiver, gifts are sometimes refused, depending on the situation."
This notion from an etiquette guide to foreign culture I think is relevant.
No, this one does not apply for free gift of education, but it applies to any gift that have some sort of monetary value, because when you educate people you enlighten them and give them ability of understanding true value of what they are receiving too. so you are wrong again. you give a man fish you feed him for a day ( your case ), you teach him fishing, you feed him for life ( education case ).
Well I went to a paid university in Iran, the quality of education wasn't good either. Almost 1% of people get that "free" education you're talking about.
you went to paid university because you were not smart enough to get into free one, I went to free one, AmirKabir University of Technology and studied computer science for free. I like to know where did you get your 1% from?
Maybe you're right and I'm not smart enough. But 1% of 1.7 million students who went Konkoor the year I went to is still a lot more than capacity of all universities in Iran. So your statement is incorrect. We didn't "all" get free education
you even cannot read properly,no wonder you didn't get accepted in Concour (Concour is a french word, you can learn this one too), I wrote: "we all get free or almost free or very cheap", read again so you learn to read correctly and you can comment again. we were 5 kids in family and my father had very modest income, me and my brother went to free university and 3 of my sisters went to Azad university and my father was able to pay for tuition with his modest income however it was hard for him to pay sometimes, but he was able to pay. and we didn't end up with mountains of debt.
2. It's the same here in the U.S. With all the nagging cost of education is not that high. I'm paying for my wife college.
3. You are attacking me for no reason. Once you called me dumb. But you know how the entry exam works, it is certainly not the best system for pickup up the most talented people. I'm not saying I'm talented or anything but your basis of judgment is wrong
I will leave at here, I didn't call you dumb, you just may be didn't think enough, I looked at your submissions, it seems you are smart enough and had decent education ( i guess in iran ) :)
Nope, as I said Azad university sucks balls. I didn't finish school there. I came to the U.S., got some real education and started working for a company that you use it's products everyday. But it's not about me. I might be the dumbest person on planet
Back to your original point in which you suggested we have decent education for cheap of free in Iran. I still disagree with you. There is only a handful of schools (Sharif and maybe Tehran) with decent teachers and some decade old equipments, other than that most of schools in Iran are inefficient and I consider them a waste of time. Azad university is more like a religious school than an art and science college. So no, we don't have "free or cheap" "decent education" "for everyone". If we had we wouldn't have such terrible society. You went to a "decent" school and living in Canada. You're considered "elite" or counted in brain drain stats! Yet, you are attacking people on internet for no reason. That's why I'm saying we have a terrible society.
I didn't attack anyone, I only said you were not possibly smart enough to pass the entrance exam, I didn't pass it either on first attempt, I managed to get into decent school on second try. Azad wasn't very good university at first it was kinda like a high school at the beginning ( my high school use to be Azad branch in after hours !!!) , I have seen it grown since its inception, now is good enough on main branches in big cities, in terms of equipments even with sanctions we had good stuff, for sure not as Ivy league universities in US, but good. yes I am living in Canada, I also lived in 4 other countries and I am still proud of whatever my country provided for me, with education that I had in Iran, and my hard work today I work for one of top 3 software makers in world.I am by no means elite but may be in brain drain stats ;). since you are in US go to any decent US university's engineering department and see how many Iranian educated boys and girls study there, and how many of them actually finished their BS or MSc in Iran.
here in Canada/Quebec in one of the universities 70% of Phd students are Iranian (official stat by university itself). they must have had decent education to get accepted for continuing higher education, i guess, what do you think?. for you information my wife also study Phd in McGill, she finished her Msc and BS in Iran. education in Iran is way more decent than many other countries and is cheap or free. today they don't have a big competition to get into universities as there many more seats available.we don't have terrible society we only have terrible individuals which could possibly include myself too. so let's fix ourselves first.
On HN, telling someone that they can't read properly or that they weren't smart enough to pass an exam do count as personal attacks. We ban accounts for doing this, so please don't do this again.
To be a good contributor to this site it's best to make sure you've read the following:
I said he cannot read, because he didn't read, I will say it as long as someone reads my writings partially and not complete.I said he was not possibly smart enough as Iran's free university entrance exam was to the most degree IQ test ( at least in my days ) I failed myself for first time. you can go ahead and ban my account now.
You posted "you even cannot read properly" in a comment upthread.
We don't want to ban you! Your comments indicate a perspective that doesn't often show up here. Diverse perspectives are good for HN. But to participate effectively, you need to learn and follow the local conventions, and also understand that HN has rules, the foremost of which is civility.
I don't think you were intentionally uncivil. I do think you were unintentionally uncivil. That's nowhere near as bad, but still needs correcting.
did you see "Properly"? please re-read what I wrote and you quoted, otherwise I "might" think you unintentionally unable to read what I wrote, or unintentionally don't like to understand what I wrote, I don't like sweet talks, I prefer to be concise and direct. you don't know me, so you cannot judge my civility neither I can do yours. and you are not in a position of correcting me or anyone here, but you can express your opinion on someone's opinion and you are just a moderator (I guess), you seems like US government which is trying to "Correct" people who don't know ( by using force ) and have no intention of knowing them, you just use your "Civil Words" and threat of banning rather than trying to understand what I said. ( did I attack you too? I hope not, don't take it personally everyone needs a reminder sometimes, it could be me or you), feel free to ban me if my opinion hurts your level of civility. I have no intention of correcting you or anyone, peoples are uncorrectable until they realize (by education may be or facing the truth/consequences of their actions) themselves that they were wrong, then they might overcome their ignorance and mistakes, and that is very small possibility specially these days. :)
I feel like we may be running up against some language and cultural barriers here, and am happy to discuss further at hn@ycombinator.com if it would help clear things up. But you do have to follow the rules, like everyone else, when posting to HN.
good, next time before jumping in and using your gun (banning), try to read (re-read) and understand first as English is not universal mother tongue of everyone (including myself), and I generally follow the rules as they are necessary.
Now that there are negative experiences on the consequences of overthrowing the regime in Iraq, Libya, Syria, it might unfortunately take a long time before the West will have courage to support a regime change in Iran.
Why would the West have to support such a change? It can only happen from within, just like that last time that Iran decided on Regime Change and showed they were perfectly capable of getting rid of their leader of the day (the Shah). Persia ceased to exist and Iran was born, much against the wish of the West and without any of its support (rather the opposite). I'm pretty sure that Iran can manage the next transition just fine. Though it may be a while. If we want to expand IS territory then by all means, let's mess in Irans internal affairs.
From the perspective of a Western government, Iran's international relations are the problem.[1] The fact that Iran's society is relatively advanced does little to console the families of the 1100 American soldiers killed by Iranian proxies in Iraq; nor does it console the families of the hundreds (if not thousands) of Israeli civilians killed by (Iranian government supported) Hamas. State support for the Assad regime isn't helping the Iranian government's international reputation either.[2]
If you want to change the West's attitude towards Iran, a good first step would be to push for the release of Jason Rezaian, and the end of state support for terrorism.[3]
I think the US/Iran resentment goes back a bit further, roughly to the time that Iran took a whole pile of US hostages that were held for more than a year.
That's not the sort of thing that is easily forgotten and it is one of the cornerstones of West/Islam conflict.
After that it was mostly a downward spiral, with some recent relaxation on both sides of the line.
That's certainly a good point, but they can do little to change their history, other than plead for forgiveness, which the state is unlikely to do, as that is now part of their origin myth.[1]
Yes, I'm aware of that. But for the US that was not a reason to hate Iran (then Persia). (Of course it may not have helped the other side of the balance)
> I think the US/Iran resentment goes back a bit further, roughly to the time that Iran took a whole pile of US hostages that were held for more than a year.
But that didn't happen in a vacuum either. The U.S. engineered or facilitated the overthrow of a mostly democratic Iranian leader in 1953, and put in his place a mini-dynasty of dictators who brutally oppresssed Iranians, with U.S. support, until that day in 1979. I'm not saying the Iranians should have taken those innocent Americans hostage but they didn't pick the American embassy and take hostages in a random act of violence.
... and I'm sure the 1953 coup didn't happen in a vacuum either.
I said 'US/Iran' resentment. The 'Iran/US' resentment dates back even further, and if you trace it all to its roots you end somewhere in the 1700's or so, but then it was still (mostly) the UK and not the US.
If you mean "US/Iran resentment" means "US resentment of Iran but not Iranian resentment of the US", I now understand what you intended. Unfortunately, your syntax is undocumented and not defined in the language standard. :)
Also, the overthrow of Mossadegh was fundamentally about communism. Eisenhower featured that Mossadegh's policies would lead Iran towards communism. (The British were the ones who got that ball rolling; they wanted to depose Mossadegh for other reasons, mostly related to oil, but were not in a position to do anything with him.)
I approve your point , but you are not going to beat a regime which has effective - and clever - regional - and domestic - policy with a bunch of sanction. Iran and its proxies are fighting against USA.That is truth. But the question is how we can solve Iran -regime- problem?
What is the solution ?
I personally believe there is no answer to this question other than Iran's own population.
You cannot believe me , but I can see with my own eye. Every time USA or international community interfere in something all people are suspicious and whole community turn to regime supporters (you may know , being against foreign powers in middle east is one of the effective way to stay in power , and Iran's supreme leader does this in extremely effective way).
If you want to fight you can only throw this regime with only academia and liberal people through a push for reform. There is no other alternative.They cleverly managed to stop and destroy every other opposition in country.Even parties which was more than 100 years old.
I will guarantee you other way of fighting against this regime is not effective and will not effective.You want military invasion ? hell no , they will harm your military very badly , they will turn Iran worse than Vietnam and Germany in second WW.Even after changing regime they will remain active force like Al-Quada , suicidal force in society, which can change or throw government very easily.
But the increasing liberal force in Iran want reform more than ever , they pushing even badly. I am not saying it is going to be successful.No , not yet, but I am saying it can be if west does not provoke people against reform and provide platform for free information flow (which is regime nightmare)
I'll bet way more than 1100 Iranian soldiers were killed by American proxies, umm I mean, allies in Iraq back when Hussein was a friend of America. So, call it even?
I think those are rationalizations for the larger reason: The U.S. and the West are the status quo powers; that is, we support the status quo power structure in the Mideast, with Sunnis and Saudi Arabia in particular dominating the Gulf and Arabian Peninsula. Iran is challenging that status quo.
Speaking generally, in any such situation the challengers appear to be behaving badly because they are disruptive - they have to disrupt the status quo to bring change. In the end, neither side necessarily has a more legitimate claim to power and both would do the same in the other's shoes.
I'm also not sure either side behaves better. Remember the U.S. played a major role in overthrowing a (mostly) democratic Iranian government in the 1950s, then supported a dictator who brutally oppressed the people of Iran for decades. The U.S. supports insurgent groups in and near Iran, sabotages their infrastructure (the nuclear program), imposes crippling economic sanctions, and very likely participated in the assassination of Iranian scientists. I happen to think the actions against Iran's nuclear weapons program are necessary, and Iran's government is generally a danger to many people's lives in the Mideast, but the West can hardly complain about Iran behaving badly. (And don't forget the U.S. misleading the world and invading a neighboring Mideast country for no good reason.)
> The fact that Iran's society is relatively advanced does little to console the families of the 1100 American soldiers
US killed a lot more of the American soldiers since. You make it seems like 1000 US soldiers' concerns somehow makes huge difference in the overall geopolitics. That is just propaganda.
Many of those solders were killed in Iraq and Afghanistan invasion. Others were sent home traumatized mentally and physically.
> soldiers killed by Iranian proxies in Iraq
In general mentioning "killing by proxy" and US in the same comment is not a good idea if it is supposed to support the US position. US has killed by proxy a lot more and supported brutal regimes and dictators for many decades on almost all continents.
There's also the Israel tail wagging the dog issue. Israel hates Iran so we hate Iran. Israel loves Sunni dictatorships in Egypt and Saudi Arabia so we love Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
I don't think Israel hates Iran or Iran hates Israel. Both, regardless of their differences, behave logically.
I believe they find in each other an enemy that helps with their narrative, without the detriment of having to deal with the danger of an erratic or unreasonable enemy.
> does little to console the families of the 1100 American soldiers killed by Iranian proxies in Iraq
Hang on... the USA sent armed forces 9,500 km across the globe to unilaterally invade a country literally across the border from Iran, and you reckon it's Iran's fault they were killed?
Of course Iran was going to take advantage of the situation. It's their backyard, the USA was thrashing around aimlessly and they saw an opportunity to achieve an objective to their benefit. After all they have to live beside the self-imploding remains of Iraq, they can't just climb into C-17s and say it's over.
>1100 American soldiers killed by Iranian proxies in Iraq
And how 'bout all the Iranian soldiers killed by our friend and alley, Saddam Hussein, during the Iran-Iraq war? We didn't even get upset at Saddam for the USS Stark incident!
For a large and influential constituency in Iran, this is true. Iran is a very complex, multipolar environment, in contrast to the facile way it is generally presented as a monolith ruled in an absolutist way by mad mullahs or whatever. There are at least three significant camps in Iran.
The main difference is that the government in power currently in Iran deposed the government that the US set up and wanted to have as an ally. If the Shah had remained in power in Iran, the US would likely be as close with Iran as they are with Saudi Arabia.
> the government in power currently in Iran deposed the government that the US set up
The U.S. did not 'set up' the Shah; he was the legitimate ruler of Persia. Nor did the U.S. overthrow a 'democratically-elected leader'; the Shah's legitimate government successfully defeated a coup attempt by his prime minister Mossadegh, who died peacefully under house arrest years later.
You've been posting comments that break the Hacker News guidelines. We ban accounts that do that, so please don't do that.
Temper runs high and patience is thin when it comes to questions like this, so it's understandable when people boil over—but it also breaks the rules of this site, which are there for good reason. Please don't post comments unless they are civil and substantive.
I'm asking because I don't see any markers indicating that it is and I get this wrong every 3rd comment or so.
If it isn't sarcasm you are somewhat mis-informed. If it is sarcasm then please ignore this comment.
As for the Shah, he was very much there with the support of the oil industry, but that doesn't make him all bad. He wanted to make Persia a modern state and in doing so upset the Mullahs which culminated in the return of banished Ayatollah Khomeini (who resided in Paris, of all places during his exile), and how that ended we probably all already know.
> As for the Shah, he was very much there with the support of the oil industry, but that doesn't make him all bad. He wanted to make Persia a modern state and in doing so upset the Mullahs
IIRC, he oppressed, imprisoned, tortured and killed people in large numbers, for decades.
Yes, he did that too. (Especially to his opponents.) The keyword is 'SAVAK'. (See comment elsewhere in this thread). The Shah was a dictator in every sense of the word, but surprisingly, he had some good sides too.
Ah yes, but you fail to mention Iran's extremely aggressive agenda in the region.
The Ahwazi Arabs (Sunni, coincidentally) are stripped of nearly all basic human rights, enclosed in their own state essentially within Iran's borders [1]. Even the Shia in Saudi Arabia are treated better than how Iran handles the Ahwaz region.
Further, Iran loves fighting wars by proxy for some reason. Hezbollah and the Revolutionary Guard are roaming around Syria like they own it. Hezbollah's hold on Lebanese politics is undeniable. And of course, the funding of Houthis in Yemen who hilariously failed to execute an easy coup, the result of which started a full-blown war.
The region is in turmoil, and both sides are at fault. I personally believe that the US is entirely aware of the troubled sectarian relations in the region, and is using that as a way to get cheap oil and sell arms, which is a valid strategy.
This has to stop. The only lasting solution is dialogue.
I don't presume that anyone on this board would make such a mistake, but thank you for sublty reminding us that Iranians are not Arabs. Such obfuscations make it difficult for us to parse the active conflicts in the region.
Tehran is quite busy dealing with threats on all sides, whilst still trying to pursue its support of Hezbollah in Lebannon.
I think lessons learned in Iraq changed the calculus for Tehran and Washington. Keeping in mind there are at least 18m Sunni muslims in Iran vulnerable to ISIS message and good number of disaffected Shia, the focus may be on stability now.
I hope that, between the nuclear treaty and Daesh providing a common foe, we can start making more political inroads between western powers and Iran... maybe even Lebanon, too (the Beirut bombings are fresh in memory).
The hard part will, of course, be Israel's influence on western politics, since the situation is worsening there with the recent spate of stabbings and the new walls going up to protect settlements in the west bank.
With Iran and Lebanon's ties to Hezbollah, Israel will (quite reasonably, all things considered) react badly to inroads made between these countries and Israel's allies.
I hope that, between the nuclear treaty and Daesh providing a common foe, we can start making more political inroads between western powers and Iran... maybe even Lebanon, too (the Beirut bombings are fresh in memory).
The hard part will, of course, be Israel's influence on western politics, since the situation is worsening there with the recent spate of stabbings and the new walls going up to protect settlements in the west bank.
> Women in Iran go to university at higher rates than men, can drive, hold office, and vote. Life in Iran for a women is not perfect but is heaven compared to Saudi Arabia
I have been following the politics/culture of the region for a while. I totally agree. Two examples of women, of Iranian origin, being in the news in the recent past for the best reasons.
Maryam Mirzakhani[1], who won the fields medal in Math last year. Remember reading an article, where she spoke about the Math culture at her home and College in Iran.
Another one is this US Entrepneur Anousheh Ansari[2], who also went to the ISS, and identifies herself as a dual national.
I would love to know of any examples of women in Arab (or nearby countries) having made similar achievement. Sadly, I suspect, the culture does not allow it.
Saudi Arabia is also the biggest exporter of Radical Islam
" Indian intelligence says that in India alone, from 2011 to 2013, some 25,000 Saudi clerics arrived bearing more than $250 million to build mosques and universities and hold seminars. "We are talking about thousands and thousands of activist organizations and preachers who are in the Saudi sphere of influence," said Usama Hasan, a researcher in Islamic studies.
These institutions and clerics preach the specifically Saudi version of Sunni Islam, the extreme fundamentalist strain known as Wahhabism or Salafism."
With polygamy being legal, they take underage Muslim girls from cities like Hyderabad on their return journey to Middle East after "buying" them from their parents.
Unbelievable. I didn't think this was true, but you are right. There are 100s of stories of how Women in Hyderabad are being sold to Arab Sheiks. Very disturbing. Found a news item of a Gang busted too => https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0eNGDcBoGM
286 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 253 ms ] threadWe just have "Sharia Law" areas in the UK, honour killings in Canada, people getting shot in France and elsewhere because of drawings, etc
And if someone disagrees I'd like to hear your opinion.
No opinions, only censorship.
However: https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/3tkbpf/man_assaulted_...
Frankly, if a few evangelical Muslims are capable of destroying the secular foundation of your systems, those systems were weak in the first place.
"Evangelical Muslims" might be a misnomer, but I get what you're saying (and I agree mostly)
Honor killings are prohibited Islamically.
Here is an example of ISIS being denounced: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ2HlIYRvCM
Ah so is it wrong? Go tell them. Also look at Apostasy and how it's dealt with in the majority of Muslim majority countries
We have proof that it is prohibited, and it is the onus of those claiming otherwise to demonstrate how it isn't. I don't known where you're saying that any Muslim professes that honor killings are allowed.
> Ah so is it wrong? Go tell them.
Many already are, as how I showed in the video I linked in my last post.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3251787/Muslim-fathe...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/29/canada-honor-killin...
The fact remains, that both of those incidents you posted are 100% against Islamic teachings. Walk to any mosque in your area and ask if you don't believe me.
We also have abortion clinic bombings, shootings and arsons done by christians. There was one recently in Pullman, WA.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence#United_...
Or when the demand for oil diminishes (holding supply constant) as battery-electric transport becomes widespread.
Not only are batteries becoming less expensive every year, but the deployment of autonomous vehicle networks (self driving Ubers) will make battery-electric transport more cost competitive by distributing the high fixed cost of the battery between many users.
That said, Saudi arabia enjoys healthy support from the west and has done so right from its inception. The country is barely 100yrs old and Britain played an instrumental role in creating the country as well as shaping most of the middle east. That has striking parallels to what is going on with ISIS right now.
Here is a well researched lecture on the subject by Dr Yasir Qadhi:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=659f5wuTgzY
You'll need to watch part 2 as well to get the full picture and if you have time might also want to watch the video on the creation of Israel which is equally damning.
And regards ISIS here's Putin's statement -- that interestingly was not covered by western media -- but is congruent with the lecture and my point above.
http://youtu.be/t1qHORKKLls
Please feel free to do your own independent, balanced research.
The page says "The Opinion Pages"
MSM is full of opinion; I'm just happy when they label it opinion and not "news".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_ibn_Abd_al-Wahhab
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salafi_movement
This was my old cm:
Am pretty angry about what is going on in world , so if you felt insulted , I am so sorry , and You should understand I don't want to insult you or any other person specifically,But I want insult Ideologies pretty badly.
As person who LIVES in heart of middle east (Iran) and I have seen shia militant from very close(I know people who works in IRGC),You are completely and pure wrong , do you know what would generate another generation of terrorist ? another invasion. I am atheist and liberal with a little being gay,I am not gay , but sometime things go wrong - and believe me these are pretty dangerous thing to be in Iran and would get me killed, without doubt - but I can realize the only thing will give terrorist another opportunity is invasion of a country in middle east. This is not your fucking war.This was not west fucking war at all. They shouldn't come here in any circumstance.You know what ? because Paris like terrorism act will happen again and again and again. West should understand they were wrong all the time. What the fuck are you doing in middle east ? You know what ? no body more than me would be glad to live in secular community with secular government, but it seems politician in west do not realize , being in middle east is equal to raising radical movement against them. YOU SHOULD UNDERSTAND , MIDDLE EAST SHOULD FIGHT FOR ITSELF, EVEN IF ISIS KILL ALL OF US, this is not your fucking war.I do not remember reading if any alien did help west during the renaissance. Society should grow.
PLEASE , do for humanity a favor , understand militarism is equal to terrorism. I was talking with one idiot yesterday , and he mentioned I do not believe France invade Iraq. Yes your are right idiot . France did not . but west did . These fucking killers in middle east , do not see countries , they see Islam against West.
Do you know who fights in Iran against mullah's ? Christians ? Are you kidding me, mujaheddin khalgh ? Those fucking traitors, no way.
Academia fights against mullah's, science fights, liberal people fighting against mullah's more effective than any other person in whole revolution history.This regime is almost unbeatable in political sense- because they have money and manpower and oil- but do you know they are seeing liberals in their nightmare. They even don't care about West invasion against Iran(some stupid person like G.W Bush may even consider that option).Because at the end they know the can manage harm West military pretty badly. Worse than maybe Vietnam war.BUT THEY CANNOT FIGHT WITH INTERNET, WITH TOR, WITH STUDENTS who USE TOR. Give them internet , provide them satellite , Facebook/twitter/YouTube/porn , Show them fucking beautiful women in Texas(with respect to women, I just want show sexual incentives), show them there is no need to kill so many people to get those woman , you can f...
It's hard to read, and the all caps are a bit much, but it's nice to get an outside perspective.
What we are seeing is just the result of some bad foreign policy.
about bad foreign policy I completely agree.And that was my whole point . stop killing people and overthrowing regime in Islamic areas and change your policy to show them new way of life. better way and more pleasant way.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
I don't know what you were taught in Iran, but this is 100% false.
I don't know what kind of Islam you taught, but holy book is exclusively about sex and relationship as well as 99% fatwa's. You are just stating something without even explaining it . so nice . I would claim it is 100% true. You can study holy book , it almost exclusively about sex and relationship between men and women with stories -unrelated to relation- between them.
Please before giving such ridiculous answer , provide your reasons .
With all due respect, this sentence alone proves that you don't know what you're talking about. Sorry.
Fatwas are something completely different from the Quran.
> I would claim it is 100% true.
You can claim anything you want, but without proof, it is worthless.
> You can study holy book , it almost exclusively about sex and relationship between men and women with stories -unrelated to relation- between them.
The Quran does have passages about marriage, divorce, inheritance, and the like. But in no way do those constitute the majority of the Quran like you are saying.
It is sad how Iran is using religion to control the people. They picked parts of what they liked, fabricated some parts, and left out other parts. I had several Iranian colleagues when I was in school, and I could see how some of them were very displeased with the government. Please don't take it out on the religion.
Can I ask you if you were taught by the Iranian government to hate (or at least look down on) Arabs?
Wtf? I taught by Iranian government to hate Arabs? Dude Iranian government is Arab.they dont give fuck about Iran.they spend money for Arab countries more than they do for our own country.they build their whole ideology on this.if any one had clue what is going on Iran , they would understand how much and how deep you are ignorant in term of Iranian government policy.
First of all I don't give fuck about race.then I don't care you are Arab or Jew or anything else.Human are humans, I don't believe in race.we are all some kind of advanced animal.
>With all due respect, this sentence alone proves that you don't know what you're talking about. Sorry. Fatwas are something completely different from the Quran.
Did you even read my comment? where did you get that? Fatwa and guran is the same thing? Are fucking kidding me.I compelled to study religon simultaneously with other thing in 12 years. I am not religious scholar , but I have read Quran , and some main text for hadith and sunnat. Have you read guran? I read it.two different translation.very approved and good translation to Persian.Khorasani and Ghomshei.
With respect I feel sorry for you.guran is not about sex? Dude the whole book is about sex and power.
>fabricated some parts
fabricated the religion? The whole religion is about lie and fabrication .
I respect you personally. But I don't give fuck about guran or your religious believe which is lie.
Does that include Rouhani and the Ayatollas? This is something new. Or are you just saying that they are allying with the Arabs?
> I don't care you are Arab or Jew or anything else...
I'm not talking about you, I was just asking about what the Iranian government is teaching its population. One of my Iranian colleagues told me how they taught them that Arabs are backward and barbarics, and that only Islam saved them. I wanted to get another anecdote.
> Have you read guran? I read it.two different translation.very approved and good translation to Persian.Khorasani and Ghomshei.
Yes, I read it in Arabic.
> With respect I feel sorry for you.guran is not about sex? Dude the whole book is about sex and power.
Again, not true. Should I pick out random passages from it to prove you wrong?
> fabricated the religion? The whole religion is about lie and fabrication .
Unfortunately, there are many fabricated stories that exists in the Twelver books. We know this because we have a strict way of classifying which narrations are authentic, which are weak, and which are fabricated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categories_of_Hadith
Both. Yes they are Arabs. for example you can search Iraqi people in Iran's regime. or People they call "Seyed".which means they have arab roots.Which is more than 20+ of people.and for specific people in root of power you can search about Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi .(or Mohammad Reza Naqdi or so many others) And second one is true also, They are ripping Iran in favor of Arab countries which Iran's people naturally don't give fuck about them.
They are basically trying to be hero in middle east , because they don't have option other than that, because whole region is dominated by sunni Muslims who basically hate shia.They are trying to be hero in Palestine issue, not because they give fuck about Palestine . because they want impose their hegemony to other countries.and being hero is always best figure.
>I'm not talking about you, I was just asking about what the Iranian government is teaching its population. One of my Iranian colleagues told me how they taught them that Arabs are backward and barbarics, and that only Islam saved them. I wanted to get another anecdote.
Are fucking kidding me ? last time I checked you comment , your sentence was "Can I ask you if you were taught by the Iranian government to hate (or at least look down on) Arabs?"
This only can show how much your claims and statements are stupid and meaningless . When you use "YOU" in your sentence. This means you are pointing to your next person.
>Yes, I read it in Arabic. Then if you don't lie (which I cannot believe), then you should know they only incentive for people for being good is sex and 72 virgin . that's all . the whole stupid religion hinges on that .
>Unfortunately, there are many fabricated stories that exists in the Twelver books. We know this because we have a strict way of classifying which narrations are authentic, which are weak, and which are fabricated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categories_of_Hadith
You seem have problem with reading my comment , and with out reading it trying to answer , which most of the time are false.Again , seems you have problem with understanding logical statement (as most of religious people, sadly and respectfully). I did claim simple thing, but you turn it to completely other thing, and your in imaginary world you make an answer up and give it to me.
I should end this conversation . Sadly and respectfully , because as always . religious people. instead seeing simple claim, they turn it to whole another thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Rouhani#Early_life_and_...
Where does it say Rouhani is Arab?
> because they want impose their hegemony to other countries.
So you're saying they are trying to take over the region?
> Are fucking kidding me ? last time I checked you comment , your sentence was "Can I ask you if you were taught by the Iranian government to hate (or at least look down on) Arabs?"
I think you're having a hard time understanding what I wrote, maybe I could have phrased it better. You said you don't hate anyone, but that doesn't mean that the Iranian government didn't try to teach you to (and failed).
> Then if you don't lie (which I cannot believe), then you should know they only incentive for people for being good is sex and 72 virgin
Can you show me where it says about the 72 virgins in the Quran?
> I did claim simple thing, but you turn it to completely other thing, and your imaginary world you make an answer up and give it to me.
You said the religion is about fabrication, I responded that no, we don't fabricate our religion, and I showed you proof.
I see where you are coming from, and I am in agreement with this element of your comment. Backward, unproductive ideologies will not stand the test of time and will eventually crumble under the pressure of globalization unless they can bring tremendous force to bear against the rest of the world. I think what you say will be useful in the future, but the question is what do we do right now? Do we sit back and let ISIS attack Europe without responding? Do we let Russia deal with the issue? Are we willing to allow further areas to be destabilized?
Yet they still kill.
In fact if most of the isis fighters do co e from the west, that goes for most of them too.
So imho this explanations doesn't work.
Let middle East alone.West has 50 year of stupid policy history in middle East.invasion a country, are you fucking kidding me.do you want bring democracy with that.yeap,of course invasion will generate Osama bin laden and like those.
It's even more insular than it used to be. Saudis used to send their kids to the US to go to college, with Government funding. Now Saudi Arabia has enough educational institutions that they don't do that.
Years ago, I met a Saudi girl finishing Stanford who mentioned she was going to drive to New Orleans. That route meant a long drive through the boring part of the US. She said it was the only time in her life she'd be allowed to drive on a long car trip. That was decades ago, and Saudi Arabia still doesn't let women drive.
Here's a good set of articles by a Saudi expat in Britain: http://muttawa.blogspot.com/
The US southwest is the boring part? You don't get those desert views anywhere else.
Virtual drive: http://www.brianfolts.com/driver/#origin=stanford&destinatio...
Either way, the US southwest desert is quite a bit different than the Saudi Arabian desert.
So no, I don't expect that a non-geologist would find the American southwest so very novel compared to Saudi. But I've never, ever been bored in the American southwest in tens of thousands of hours of travel there.
US southwest vs Saudi Arabia @ same scale http://imgur.com/a/OkRuI
I think at high levels they realize their reliance on oil will be their downfall. And they are making huge investments in education (in my experience mostly for men) and I believe renewables as well.
But the actual people in the Saudi Arabia, the commoner, is very fundamentalist.
It's a dysfunctional country propped up with a deal with the devil. The fundamentalists get most of what they want, while the royal family keeps their money and their land.
It's not an easy fix. If the world turned on the royal family, they'd fall from power and be immediately replaced by fundamentalists. Fundies now backed with the worlds largest supply of oil.
Also, the fundamentalist cancer they spread is now too far gone. Even if Saudi's went back to total poverty like they were in 100 years ago, the roots of radicalization are already in other countries.
Moderate Islam needs an organized response, but there has been none.
The sooner we figure out how to make petroleum irrelevant, the sooner places like Saudi lose their influence. Gas == War.
[1] http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_...
[2] http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MC...
I can't wait, the world can't wait any longer to end our dependence on fossil fuels. The world / middle east will be a better place if we reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.
May the force be with Elon Musk / Telsa ;)
Just look at our political debates. All of the talk is dumbed down, feel-good, wishy-washy moral statements about religion, God, pretentious ideologies about "freedom", "being the beacon of the world", etc.
Our leaders came from society. All of this is our collective fault. We all can and need to do better.
Don't get me wrong. I am sure Saudi Arabia is much worse. They don't even allow women to vote and treat them like objects. Well, we were there not that long ago.
So like I said, we're most likely better, but not angels.
Apparently, then the death of dozens of innocent civilians which had no choice other than getting trapped between bombs falling from the sky or ISIS militants controlling the city borders, is justified because "look what happened in Paris!".
And what about France's own colonial and terrorist in Africa that no one wants to talk about?
2) goto 1
Pretty much covers it I reckon
And with the kind of international "attention" it's getting lately, this won't change soon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation#Dist...
If Muslims in the West got the legal system they* sought (polls indicate the majority support lawful recognition and enforcement of sharia law), it's a good bet that they* would start.
* = note, I know I am generalizing millions of people here, and a sizable proportion of the Muslim population is not applicable here.
"Estimate that there are 66,000 victims of FGM in England and Wales and warns that more than 24,000 girls under 15 are at risk. More than 2,000 victims of FGM sought treatment in London hospitals alone in the past three years."
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/06/female-genita...
I'm not condemning Islam necessarily and certainly not Muslims but I think we need to stop dancing around and confront the issue of what an ideology is teaching. Is it appropriate for our world? If it isn't what do we do about it?
Per the guidelines, it would be totally okay to talk about it if you had something interesting to say about it, but you don't.
That aside, I find the hypocrisy of _your_ flaming of my post and general lack of content... amusing.
Unless you are actually a moderator, I'd feel better if you kept your moderation to yourself.
I don't think there's anything new to understand here. Outlaw it where we can, conduct diplomacy to try to get countries that don't outlaw it to outlaw it. War is a last-ditch option, one that I don't think should be off the table, but we need to go into it clear-headed with a sane understanding of what we can and cannot accomplish.
The Middle East is practically defined by war. Bringing more of it to that region isn't really going to do anything.
I actually think of Isreal as a model to work off of. Build bastions of Western ideals in the region and let the locals decide for themselves which ideology they want to be a part of. Isreal's main problem in this regard is how they treat the Palestinians, but I'm optimistic that they'll eventually work it out. If Isrealis can figure out how to adopt welcoming stances to non-Jewish immigrants, they could become an even bigger magnet for youth than the terror organizations.
Which was brought by the Western nations since WWI.
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Female...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yV0QXO6YfzA
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10603582 and marked it off-topic.
Of course, none of this is officially documented, just like how not a dollar its whereabouts, of the 40 billion dollar cash the United States sent to Iraq circa 2004, is documented.
It is no secret the United States have selectively supported "freedom fighters" and militant groups when they deemed that would be more productive for the petrodollar and their Zionist friends than putting their own boots on the ground. Saddam, Osama Bin Laden, Gadaffi, ISIS and countless of others have all been supported by the United States and their removal has always been justified either because they turned their back on the United States and their allies (with Zionists being the most prominent) - or because they could be replaced by a better/cheaper/more productive puppet.
--edit: if you are downvoting this reply, consider offering substantial content to the discussion instead of trying to cloak statements which do not strike well with your opinion or observation of geopolitics. Thanks in advance.
Not really. United States sponsored other opponents to Assad, which were then sufficiently marginalized as to be either annihilated or convert to Daesh, but they clearly weren't Daesh at the time.
Here, educate yourself on how wars work: https://www.facebook.com/UniversalFreePress/videos/110928687...
As an aside, The Mersault Investigation by Kamel Daoud (author of this article) is a very interesting book. I recommend it to people who have liked The Stranger.
Iran has geopolitical conflict with the West, but it's a false equivalent of Saudi Arabia. Iran is a theocracy trying to control a population that growingly wants to be secular. Women in Iran go to university at higher rates than men, can drive, hold office, and vote. Life in Iran for a women is not perfect but is heaven compared to Saudi Arabia.
Iranian sponsored militias like hezbollah are in geopolitical conflicts as Iran wants more regional influence. They want regional islam. They are not trying to establish a global Shiite islamic state.
Like most things it comes down to money and power. Saudi plays ball with America economic hegemony and Iran does not. So rather than allying with the more moderate/educated nation with huge potential to be progressive, we ally with the one that is best for big business and willing to cede military control of the region to us.
The Iranian theocracy is fucked, don't get me wrong. But we really have our priorities in a mess.
Iran held US personnel as hostages for a year and imprisons our visitors. They are also sworn enemies to US Allies like Israel.
Iran is "bad" because they are our enemy. And they see the US as "bad" because we've been their enemy in the past.
There is absolutely nothing strange about the hate-filled relationship between Iran and the US. It is simple politics and history.
American was at war with Japan and Germany not to long before as well. Now we are best buddies. Things can change if the money's right.
Neither of those solutions was 'all good' so at some point the people will say 'enough'. It can take a while.
The purpose of the Guardian Council [0] is precisely to prevent such a turnaround.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardian_Council
All countries (or other groups) can find reasons to hate or love each other. Look at France and Germany, close allies now but plenty of opportunity for hate. All it takes is an effective political leader to manipulate the public in whatever way suits them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOR38552MJA
The beginning of Mohammad Reza's reign was in 1941 and had nothing to do with the US. The coup (by both the US and UK) was about reversing the nationalization of Iran's oil industry, not about installing Mohammad Reza as king. Britain and the Soviet Union did that in WWII.
What is your reasoning behind this claim?
They will eventually transform into a relatively free society if we don't interfere.
I just comment on the fact that there is obviously a conflict between the well educated masses in Iran and the strict religious laws.
Can't just imagine your society will still be cutting of hands of thieves and hanging homosexuals publicly in 50 years.
Also I would appreciate it if you wouldn't insult me. -- A non-nationalist guy
As for being a slave to credit card companies and banks: that's optional where I live.
I'm not claiming other nations are completely free, they're not. But Iran is free? Not even close.
you know why? Because they are only threat to nature of this unbeatable regime(which have money manpower and religion).but west politicians keep ignoring this fact.Iran society is way ahead of its regime.Maybe far better than turkey in term of progressiveness And regime knows perfectly. Not Isis.not USA.not Israel.non of them is serious threat for them in long term.but a huge young population with secular believes is THE most threat for regime nature.people who use internet and spend time behind porn sites and don't give fuck about Islam is the most threat (and lose) for Iran regime.
You want change middle east . change their fucking -stupid- culture with internet, with porn.
This notion from an etiquette guide to foreign culture I think is relevant.
2. It's the same here in the U.S. With all the nagging cost of education is not that high. I'm paying for my wife college.
3. You are attacking me for no reason. Once you called me dumb. But you know how the entry exam works, it is certainly not the best system for pickup up the most talented people. I'm not saying I'm talented or anything but your basis of judgment is wrong
Back to your original point in which you suggested we have decent education for cheap of free in Iran. I still disagree with you. There is only a handful of schools (Sharif and maybe Tehran) with decent teachers and some decade old equipments, other than that most of schools in Iran are inefficient and I consider them a waste of time. Azad university is more like a religious school than an art and science college. So no, we don't have "free or cheap" "decent education" "for everyone". If we had we wouldn't have such terrible society. You went to a "decent" school and living in Canada. You're considered "elite" or counted in brain drain stats! Yet, you are attacking people on internet for no reason. That's why I'm saying we have a terrible society.
To be a good contributor to this site it's best to make sure you've read the following:
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
We don't want to ban you! Your comments indicate a perspective that doesn't often show up here. Diverse perspectives are good for HN. But to participate effectively, you need to learn and follow the local conventions, and also understand that HN has rules, the foremost of which is civility.
I don't think you were intentionally uncivil. I do think you were unintentionally uncivil. That's nowhere near as bad, but still needs correcting.
If you want to change the West's attitude towards Iran, a good first step would be to push for the release of Jason Rezaian, and the end of state support for terrorism.[3]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terro...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_involvement_in_the_Syr...
[3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/pb/stories-jason-rezaian/
That's not the sort of thing that is easily forgotten and it is one of the cornerstones of West/Islam conflict.
After that it was mostly a downward spiral, with some recent relaxation on both sides of the line.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_myth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta...
But that didn't happen in a vacuum either. The U.S. engineered or facilitated the overthrow of a mostly democratic Iranian leader in 1953, and put in his place a mini-dynasty of dictators who brutally oppresssed Iranians, with U.S. support, until that day in 1979. I'm not saying the Iranians should have taken those innocent Americans hostage but they didn't pick the American embassy and take hostages in a random act of violence.
... and I'm sure the 1953 coup didn't happen in a vacuum either.
If you mean "US/Iran resentment" means "US resentment of Iran but not Iranian resentment of the US", I now understand what you intended. Unfortunately, your syntax is undocumented and not defined in the language standard. :)
I personally believe there is no answer to this question other than Iran's own population.
You cannot believe me , but I can see with my own eye. Every time USA or international community interfere in something all people are suspicious and whole community turn to regime supporters (you may know , being against foreign powers in middle east is one of the effective way to stay in power , and Iran's supreme leader does this in extremely effective way).
If you want to fight you can only throw this regime with only academia and liberal people through a push for reform. There is no other alternative.They cleverly managed to stop and destroy every other opposition in country.Even parties which was more than 100 years old.
I will guarantee you other way of fighting against this regime is not effective and will not effective.You want military invasion ? hell no , they will harm your military very badly , they will turn Iran worse than Vietnam and Germany in second WW.Even after changing regime they will remain active force like Al-Quada , suicidal force in society, which can change or throw government very easily.
But the increasing liberal force in Iran want reform more than ever , they pushing even badly. I am not saying it is going to be successful.No , not yet, but I am saying it can be if west does not provoke people against reform and provide platform for free information flow (which is regime nightmare)
Speaking generally, in any such situation the challengers appear to be behaving badly because they are disruptive - they have to disrupt the status quo to bring change. In the end, neither side necessarily has a more legitimate claim to power and both would do the same in the other's shoes.
I'm also not sure either side behaves better. Remember the U.S. played a major role in overthrowing a (mostly) democratic Iranian government in the 1950s, then supported a dictator who brutally oppressed the people of Iran for decades. The U.S. supports insurgent groups in and near Iran, sabotages their infrastructure (the nuclear program), imposes crippling economic sanctions, and very likely participated in the assassination of Iranian scientists. I happen to think the actions against Iran's nuclear weapons program are necessary, and Iran's government is generally a danger to many people's lives in the Mideast, but the West can hardly complain about Iran behaving badly. (And don't forget the U.S. misleading the world and invading a neighboring Mideast country for no good reason.)
US killed a lot more of the American soldiers since. You make it seems like 1000 US soldiers' concerns somehow makes huge difference in the overall geopolitics. That is just propaganda.
Many of those solders were killed in Iraq and Afghanistan invasion. Others were sent home traumatized mentally and physically.
> soldiers killed by Iranian proxies in Iraq
In general mentioning "killing by proxy" and US in the same comment is not a good idea if it is supposed to support the US position. US has killed by proxy a lot more and supported brutal regimes and dictators for many decades on almost all continents.
I believe they find in each other an enemy that helps with their narrative, without the detriment of having to deal with the danger of an erratic or unreasonable enemy.
Hang on... the USA sent armed forces 9,500 km across the globe to unilaterally invade a country literally across the border from Iran, and you reckon it's Iran's fault they were killed?
Of course Iran was going to take advantage of the situation. It's their backyard, the USA was thrashing around aimlessly and they saw an opportunity to achieve an objective to their benefit. After all they have to live beside the self-imploding remains of Iraq, they can't just climb into C-17s and say it's over.
And how 'bout all the Iranian soldiers killed by our friend and alley, Saddam Hussein, during the Iran-Iraq war? We didn't even get upset at Saddam for the USS Stark incident!
The U.S. did not 'set up' the Shah; he was the legitimate ruler of Persia. Nor did the U.S. overthrow a 'democratically-elected leader'; the Shah's legitimate government successfully defeated a coup attempt by his prime minister Mossadegh, who died peacefully under house arrest years later.
Temper runs high and patience is thin when it comes to questions like this, so it's understandable when people boil over—but it also breaks the rules of this site, which are there for good reason. Please don't post comments unless they are civil and substantive.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
I'm asking because I don't see any markers indicating that it is and I get this wrong every 3rd comment or so.
If it isn't sarcasm you are somewhat mis-informed. If it is sarcasm then please ignore this comment.
As for the Shah, he was very much there with the support of the oil industry, but that doesn't make him all bad. He wanted to make Persia a modern state and in doing so upset the Mullahs which culminated in the return of banished Ayatollah Khomeini (who resided in Paris, of all places during his exile), and how that ended we probably all already know.
IIRC, he oppressed, imprisoned, tortured and killed people in large numbers, for decades.
An Introduction to the Modern Middle East: History, Religion, Political Economy by David S. Sorenson (Page 202) http://bit.ly/1S9HrTA
The Cold War Museum http://www.coldwar.org/articles/50s/OperationAjax.asp
If the U.S. didn't overthrow Mossadegh, why did the CIA admit to doing so years later in declassified documents?
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB435/
The Ahwazi Arabs (Sunni, coincidentally) are stripped of nearly all basic human rights, enclosed in their own state essentially within Iran's borders [1]. Even the Shia in Saudi Arabia are treated better than how Iran handles the Ahwaz region.
Further, Iran loves fighting wars by proxy for some reason. Hezbollah and the Revolutionary Guard are roaming around Syria like they own it. Hezbollah's hold on Lebanese politics is undeniable. And of course, the funding of Houthis in Yemen who hilariously failed to execute an easy coup, the result of which started a full-blown war.
The region is in turmoil, and both sides are at fault. I personally believe that the US is entirely aware of the troubled sectarian relations in the region, and is using that as a way to get cheap oil and sell arms, which is a valid strategy.
This has to stop. The only lasting solution is dialogue.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahwazi_Arabs
I think lessons learned in Iraq changed the calculus for Tehran and Washington. Keeping in mind there are at least 18m Sunni muslims in Iran vulnerable to ISIS message and good number of disaffected Shia, the focus may be on stability now.
So you would rather have ISIS expanding in Syria? That's what the Iranians are fighting there.
Furthermore they were invited by the legitimate and UN recognized Syrian government to help fighting the Sunni extremists.
The hard part will, of course, be Israel's influence on western politics, since the situation is worsening there with the recent spate of stabbings and the new walls going up to protect settlements in the west bank.
With Iran and Lebanon's ties to Hezbollah, Israel will (quite reasonably, all things considered) react badly to inroads made between these countries and Israel's allies.
The hard part will, of course, be Israel's influence on western politics, since the situation is worsening there with the recent spate of stabbings and the new walls going up to protect settlements in the west bank.
Source: four generations in the state department. With a majority of my father's familiar peers living in Tehran in the late 60s, fluent in Farsi...
Iranians are amazing people. Fuck that, people are amazing people... Some People are horrid humans.
I have no mercy for said horrid humans...
What people lack is a true measure of what makes a sound or terrible human in an objective way...
I have been following the politics/culture of the region for a while. I totally agree. Two examples of women, of Iranian origin, being in the news in the recent past for the best reasons.
Maryam Mirzakhani[1], who won the fields medal in Math last year. Remember reading an article, where she spoke about the Math culture at her home and College in Iran.
Another one is this US Entrepneur Anousheh Ansari[2], who also went to the ISS, and identifies herself as a dual national.
I would love to know of any examples of women in Arab (or nearby countries) having made similar achievement. Sadly, I suspect, the culture does not allow it.
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryam_Mirzakhani
[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anousheh_Ansari
US and Saudis are both funding ISIS, and the latter cannot do it without the permission of the former.
" Indian intelligence says that in India alone, from 2011 to 2013, some 25,000 Saudi clerics arrived bearing more than $250 million to build mosques and universities and hold seminars. "We are talking about thousands and thousands of activist organizations and preachers who are in the Saudi sphere of influence," said Usama Hasan, a researcher in Islamic studies.
These institutions and clerics preach the specifically Saudi version of Sunni Islam, the extreme fundamentalist strain known as Wahhabism or Salafism."
Source: http://theweek.com/articles/570297/how-saudi-arabia-exports-...