General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsEscalation seems inevitable. Iran's leaders can't be deterred by threats of destruction.
In their eyes they are God's anointed representatives on Earth. The God they think they serve embraces vengeance as much as mercy, and martyrdom more than happiness and life itself. In the name of God they have slaughtered tens of thousands of their own citizens, in order to maintain their grip on power. They virtually care nothing whether the U.S. kills thousands more innocent Iranians. Martyrdom, they believe, will reward the innocent in the afterlife to come.
They have no absolutely no trust in negotiations with America. Twice already the U.S. unleashed military force against Iran literally while negotiations were ongoing. Israel and America are actively targeting them for assassination already. What more do they have to lose? There is no good faith basis for negotiations, only power (and of course God's Will) can prevail, and there is no power in surrender, only in resistance. If they agree to lessen the pain Americans, and the greater world must endure, they have no means left with which to resist. To Iran's leadership it must seem more likely that the American people, once their economic suffering becomes intolerable, will depose our current leadership than that the Iranian public will depose their theocratic regime which Allah, they believe, has blessed. The suffering of their own people will no more deter Iran's current leaders than the suffering of the people of Gaza deterred Hamas. But unlike Hamas, Iran's mullahs have identified the means needed to deliver mass suffering onto their foes and on those they believe to be complicit in the war against Iran. Why, in the name of God, would they hesitate to use it? Unlike Trump, they have nothing to conceivably gain by bluffing.
leftstreet
(40,881 posts)Tom Rinaldo
(23,191 posts)Dave says
(5,433 posts)
that American democracy operates similarly to Iranian democracy in the following sense (tl;dr version):
No candidate gets to run for leadership in Iran except those approved by the Ayatollahs. This narrows the frame in which their democratically elected leaders can operate.
Similarly, no one gets to meaningfully run for President in the U.S. except those that get (at least implicit) approval by our capitalist oligarchs. This narrows the frame in which our leaders can operate.
Which has better outcome for the majority of its citizenry?
Id choose us, but we dont exist on some shining city on a hill upon which we can look down at the rest of the world, and that includes Iran. There are an awful lot of similarities amongst all of us, I would think, and its those similarities that peace can be built upon.
Tom Rinaldo
(23,191 posts)In Iran the screening mechanism is explicit, here it is more implicit, built into the fabric of our how economy functions, and the power dynamics that it rests on. But as the role of Christian Nationalism grows in Trump's regime, even that explicit/implicit distinction becomes more blurred.
cachukis
(3,976 posts)Many know little about the Shia, Sunni rivalry.
dalton99a
(94,355 posts)Tom Rinaldo
(23,191 posts)A significant minority of Iranians will harbor a lifetime simmering hatred of America, and some number of them will try to act on that. The number who do will increase dramatically if Trump continues to target bridges, universities and critical civilian infrastructure, with all of the deaths that will entail.
JCMach1
(29,217 posts)Shia Islam.
https://share.google/EZwv3XyFxsA5EnkZS