Iran vows 'no leniency' against wave of protests over Mahsa Amini's death

[GreatWmR]

 

[Oldfut]

Something slightly frustrating in a topic really for interest only (although I personally do not like the seeming human rights abuses) is that no one will explain or even try to defend it. saturn dismisses my question as "all modern day governments as terrorist organisations" in his opinion. Not too useful and definitely not nuanced or selective, just a generalisation without reasoning. In part I almost agree - most governments are infested with people who are in it for power or personal gain; SA is a poster child for this. But just venal parasites, not really terrorists. I place Iran here as well.

But it doesn't explain the ideology that leads to this type of event. I do not believe democracy is the size that fits all and that the US should stay out of most of the Middle East; their exception may be Israel. Looking at Iraq and Libya, maybe these countries are "better off" with the style of government they "enjoyed" with limited interference?

 

[JuliusSeizure]

Looking at Iraq and Libya, maybe these countries are "better off" with the style of government they "enjoyed" with limited interference?

It gets messy but all politics IMO is about the lesser of two evils. The US have done some very messed up things that they won't really tell you about which are on par with the "evil" people they claim to fight against. There was a Reddit AMA some time back with an ex CIA agent who confirmed this.

Saddam was an evil guy but under him, Iraq was better and had the US not caught him, it's unlikely that ISIS would have formed. They caused that mess.

 

[Polymathic]

 

[Bonywasawarrioraway]

What next? USA created Sharia Law ?

In this case he is quite correct. The US created all those assh****

 

[Bonywasawarrioraway]

It gets messy but all politics IMO is about the lesser of two evils. The US have done some very messed up things that they won't really tell you about which are on par with the "evil" people they claim to fight against. There was a Reddit AMA some time back with an ex CIA agent who confirmed this.

Saddam was an evil guy but under him, Iraq was better and had the US not caught him, it's unlikely that ISIS would have formed. They caused that mess.

The significance of saddam was that he was at least nominally a sunni in a majority shia country. He led a mostly secular govt and formed a usefull buffer between saudi (sunni) and Iran (shia) who were mortal enemies. In this he was at least a useful madman. Until, that is, he instigated the iran iraq war, bled his country dry and had to grab kuwait. Even usefull madmen have a shelf life.

 

[JuliusSeizure]

The significance of saddam was that he was at least nominally a sunni in a majority shia country. He led a mostly secular govt and formed a usefull buffer between saudi (sunni) and Iran (shia) who were mortal enemies. In this he was at least a useful madman. Until, that is, he instigated the iran iraq war, bled his country dry and had to grab kuwait. Even usefull madmen have a shelf life.

He was a madman but the West warmed up to him even when they knew what he was doing. It was quite similar to Mugabe. The West loved him in his early days when they knew full well he was massacring the Ndebele's but suddenly turned against him when he went against their interests.

At the end of the day, the West stuffed up there causing ISIS to form and the situation to get much worse. The US should have just let him get deposed by his own people as Saddam did the guy that came before him. At least had that happened, the guy who would have taken over would have known how to contain the Islamists as Saddam did.

He was apparently hardly religious, he just adopted some sunni images towards the end for political purposes.

 

[surface]

They call it Hijab spring but it doesn't look like Iranian men are really interested in this. It looks like their balls were cut in the religious genital mutilation ceremony.

Likely to die same death as the so called Arab spring.

 

[ForceFate]

They call it Hijab spring but it doesn't look like Iranian men are really interested in this. It looks like their balls were cut in the religious genital mutilation ceremony.

Likely to die same death as the so called Arab spring.

I think they're largely against the protests. They probably see them as attack against the religion itself and not against government.

 

[Cray]

It gets messy but all politics IMO is about the lesser of two evils. The US have done some very messed up things that they won't really tell you about which are on par with the "evil" people they claim to fight against. There was a Reddit AMA some time back with an ex CIA agent who confirmed this.

Saddam was an evil guy but under him, Iraq was better and had the US not caught him, it's unlikely that ISIS would have formed. They caused that mess.

Yeah, it's a hard situation, I don't think anyone in the world would have disagreed that Saddam was evil and deserved to be ousted, the problem is you just cannot control what people then replace him with.

The mistake is that the US assumed that Iraq's would simply embrace Western Democracy but their cultural and religious background should have warned them of the possibility of an ISIS. I mean look at what happened when they inflicted a CIA backed coup on Iran, that turned a solid democracy into a state run by religious zealots.

 

[Polymathic]

They call it Hijab spring but it doesn't look like Iranian men are really interested in this. It looks like their balls were cut in the religious genital mutilation ceremony.

Likely to die same death as the so called Arab spring.

Only I see the regime falling is if the Revolutionary Guard deposing the Supreme Leader.

 

[Cray]

I think they're largely against the protests. They probably see them as attack against the religion itself and not against government.

I think the two are very closely linked in Iran, an attack on one is seen as an attack on the other.

 

[rietrot]

Catch and hang the open society guys behind the protest and it will stop tomorrow

 

[Cray]

Catch and hang the open society guys behind the protest and it will stop tomorrow

Trolltrot at his finest.

 

[JuliusSeizure]

Yeah, it's a hard situation, I don't think anyone in the world would have disagreed that Saddam was evil and deserved to be ousted, the problem is you just cannot control what people then replace him with.

Yeah, if they wanted Western democracy there, it would have been better to let Saddam's guys continue and play the long-game.

Saddam's guys were secularists and he himself was not religious. He apparently drank like a madman and only adopted some aspects of religion for his own purposes.

Evil guy but very gifted politician.

He was power hungry and old so chances are that another Baathist would have ousted him and it would have had the same ending, except on better terms and the radical sunni's would not have formed ISIS

 

[Cray]

Yeah, if they wanted Western democracy there, it would have been better to let Saddam's guys continue and play the long-game.

Saddam's guys were secularists and he himself was not religious. He apparently drank like a madman and only adopted some aspects of religion for his own purposes.

Evil guy but very gifted politician.

He was power hungry and old so chances are that another Baathist would have ousted him and it would have had the same ending, except on better terms and the radical sunni's would not have formed ISIS

I think Saddam's gift was that he could be equally charming and ruthless when the situation demanded it. I don't think you can be a moustache-twirling madman 24/7 without someone close to you putting you in the ground. You have to be able to cultivate loyalty among a set group of people who will help shield you from attacks as their positions would depend on your surviving.

To a lesser extent it's what Zuma does, he isn't a sociopath like Saddam, but he kept people close to him that realized their entire elevation was thanks to him, it made them extremely loyal, just look at Carl Niehaus.

I read the book, "A Prisoner in his Palace"(highly recommended), written by US guards who watched over Saddam during his trial and they all grew really fond of him. It's hard to say how much of that was genuine or just Saddam doing his manipulation thing but it's clear he had a talent for reading people. Uday Hussein, however, was just a complete psychopath with none of his father's mastery of politics to soften him.

 

[Polymathic]

Yeah, if they wanted Western democracy there, it would have been better to let Saddam's guys continue and play the long-game.

Saddam's guys were secularists and he himself was not religious. He apparently drank like a madman and only adopted some aspects of religion for his own purposes.

Evil guy but very gifted politician.

He was power hungry and old so chances are that another Baathist would have ousted him and it would have had the same ending, except on better terms and the radical sunni's would not have formed ISIS

Any sign of weakness by the Baathist would have resulted in Iranian backed Shia Militias at the very least taking over the Southern part of Iraq.

 

[Bonywasawarrioraway]

He was a madman but the West warmed up to him even when they knew what he was doing. It was quite similar to Mugabe. The West loved him in his early days when they knew full well he was massacring the Ndebele's but suddenly turned against him when he went against their interests.

At the end of the day, the West stuffed up there causing ISIS to form and the situation to get much worse. The US should have just let him get deposed by his own people as Saddam did the guy that came before him. At least had that happened, the guy who would have taken over would have known how to contain the Islamists as Saddam did.

He was apparently hardly religious, he just adopted some sunni images towards the end for political purposes.

That is absolutely correct. This is what made his govt essentially a secular state and therefore a very usefull bulwark to keep saudi arabi and Iran at arms length from each other. Until he went completely off the rails. The chances of a popular uprising NOT led by and in the interests of shia islam were slim and the last thing the world needed.

 

[surface]

I think they're largely against the protests. They probably see them as attack against the religion itself and not against government.

Yes, what if someone's wife goes to toilet outside the house and man other than husband looks at her hair. That would be very scandalous.

 

[Craig_]

LOL, morality police, how ironic.