Pot. Kettle. Black.
And you are reminded that this is the non-political discussion. If you want to discuss files, go to the political room.
Let’s just remember how this started. One of the forum members simply shared his actual first hand experience in Iran, and you were unable to keep yourself from arguing with him about it.
Bottom line is this. Lots of countries have bad policy, act terribly, treat various groups poorly. Direct interaction with the people in those countries can often give a different experience.
Nobody here is defending Iran as a virtuous regime or as an innocent victim. But “Iran” and “Iranian people” are not necessarily the same thing.
2 Likes
Umm i didn’t raise the Epstein files, the person I was responding to did
Perhaps your reminder would be better directed at them 
As for your unnecessary pot kettle black comment please don’t let your personal feeling towards me cloud effective moderation. All my comments about Iran have been based on solid verifiable fact. What a time we live in where fighting against women being raped and treated like animals makes you persona non grata…
He pointed out his experiences under the pretext that the media doesn’t tell the whole story. What is wrong pointing out that the experience of a male tourist may not reflect that of a female, particularly in a country known for its atrocities committed toward women?
Oh please………
Sure, which brings me to my question that has been widely ignored-do the people of Iran support the current regime, or do they want change?
Both
1 Like
If you find yourself in this situation it’s a great indicator that your perception of the argument may not be what’s actually being argued.
1 Like
OK, help educate me. Shown me the posts where this confusion has come from?
From my side I feel I’ve been pretty consistent arguing that it’s a good thing the leadership was killed. I also argued a male tourists experience may not be indicative of a females, again what I thought would have been a reasonable point. Even a female tourist is likely to be treated better, or are we just ignoring the myriad of verifiable and documented atrocities commuted against women in Iran?
I then pointed out that Iran also used rape as a form of fear, punishment and control against women’s groups and that there was no law protecting women from rape, all facts. And was met with some absurd argument about Epstein?
Where have I got it wrong?
If the argument is the majority of Iranians are good and despise the current regime then I do hope that’s true, and if so hope the majority can install a more humane and civilised government. I’d expect they would welcome the efforts to take out their current regime.
My sense reading all your posts here is that you’re tip toeing right up to using the abhorrent treatment of women under the current (/past?) Iranian regime as a reason not to dwell on the morality or even the calculated wisdom of toppling the regime and killing lots of civilians in the process.
You want to put people in two boxes:
- people we care about, even though a lot of them will die, who don’t support the regime, treat women appropriately and therefore welcome the destruction of the regime; and
- people who support the regime and treat women badly and who, accordingly, we don’t need to be concerned with.
Analogies with the US or all the topics discussed in the sunken place are, to my eye, a bit clumsy and unhelpful. But it remains the case that any country of 90m people is going to be a varied place and if other people’s lived experience of that country is uncomfortable for you the response I’d recommend is to sit with that discomfort, not attempt to shoot it down.
It’s quotes like this that make me queasy:
“…either the people are good and want regime change, or they like the current status and don’t, in which case they aren’t good people..”
They were your ellipsis at the end - what’s your intended implication?
“If the people of Iran [again, pretending 90m people are a monolith] don’t want a change, if they are happy and willing for their daughters, sister and mothers to be treated this way then that’s on them I guess. And if that’s the case I’d further disagree with your assertion that the people are good, and argue that its an absolute shithole full of vile disgusting people.”
And what do we do with vile disgusting people halfway round the world that don’t pose a threat to us?
Any answer to that question is one for the other forum but I pose it just to highlight how your comments here come off. It’s one thing to be outraged about the systemic mistreatment of women. It’s another to shrug off the consequences of this war for 90m distinct individuals. I don’t feel equipped to try to the moral math you appear to be happy with.
8 Likes
Why is that a good thing?
A bait, a troll? Gee where do I start, the mass killings of thousands of innocent people killed by their security forces
The violence of repression of women
Femocide on par with genocide
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202407212168
Horrific attrocccities commuted towards women
Rape and torture of women
Shall I go on…?
I said said a number of times that it’s a good thing the leadership have been killed because they are evil evil people, if anything it may give a momentary respite to the thousands of victims detailed in my previous post.
I have never once argued if it is the right thing to do or not. As for regime change yes, either the people support the current regime in which case it is on them, that’s the life they chose for their sisters, mothers, wives etc. If not then any effort to assist regime change would be welcomed no?
Why does it make you quesy? If the people support a violent, evil regime then does that not reflect on them? How can they not share any burden of responsibility for the actions of a government they support?
If I said people who supported Hitler weren’t good people would you also feel ‘queasy’?
Maybe go on as to the reason that we, the USA, needs to deal with this.
If that is how you feel then I guess you feel the same way that the evil people in the US government should be killed? Cause we’ve got a bunch of them too.
Which is typically true.
Nothing, but you didn’t stop there. You’re accusing people of being overly argumentative and of defending the regime based on their accounts of how not everything in Iran is terrible.
As with everything everywhere, it depends. Some of the “people of Iran” support the regime. Some of the “people of Iran” hate the regime. Some fit at various places in between. It’s not different than anywhere else in the world. Some of the “people of the US” agree with some of our policies while others abhor them.
That’s not anywhere close to what is happening, so quit being a drama queen.
Again, I’ve never once said it’s the USA responsibility to do this, you and others are making that argument. I’ve clearly and repeatedly said only that’s its a good thing that they were killed.
The fact that Iran is our enemy and is trying to develop nuclear weapons of mass destruction, supports Russia’s war on Ukraine, has provided technology know how (Shahed drones for example) to our enemies, continues to sponsor terrorism against us and our allies, I think that’s something that should be considered.
Sure it should be considered. But it seems like there was very little considering done prior to all of this.