# Iran: More sanctions now or wait? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 19, 2013, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300 "2013-11-19T22:23:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 9:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/161 "2013-12-02T09:50:45Z")
> [@bldysabba](#): > > While saying anything to you is usually a lost cause, I don’t think the whipped up anti-American passion in Pakistan has much of anything to do with the facts of American behaviour. It’s religious fundamentalism and local geopolitics interacting with politicking that drives the anti-American hate. If you’d expand on what you think the US has ‘been doing there’, I’ll rebut with cites. Don’t be silly, our constant drone attacks are public knowledge. And claiming that the Pakistiani people aren’t angry about it is basically the same as claiming they aren’t human; _of course_ they are angry. Who _wouldn’t_ be? > [@bldysabba](#): > > Because what’s incredible to me is, given what _Pakistan_ has been doing, how the US manages to stay on relatively good terms with them. > > _\_ > > And they actually have nukes, and have done most of the proliferation to so called ‘rogue countries’, yet relations with Pakistan are better than those with Iran. How does that work? You largely answer your own question; they have nukes. And the Pakistani government sucks up to the US more than Iran does, which is the rest of the reason. America hates Iran mainly because they’ve never rolled over and submitted like we wanted, and even overthrew our Shah-puppet. > [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Lots of people in Poland, Hungary and Romania would disagree with you. Following the collapse of their communist governments they became democracies. The collapse of a government isn’t the same as the collapse of a nation. Destroying Iran economically will do the latter, not the former; you don’t get democracy from a mob of starving, desperate people. And them becoming a democracy would just invite further hostility from us when they failed to turn themselves into an extension of the US. America has never been pro-democracy except in its rhetoric. America has always wanted puppet dictatorships, not democracies. ---
**Author:** ![bldysabba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecccb3/32.png) [@bldysabba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bldysabba)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/162 "2013-12-02T12:38:04Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Don’t be silly, our constant drone attacks are public knowledge. And claiming that the Pakistiani people aren’t angry about it is basically the same as claiming they aren’t human; _of course_ they are angry. Who _wouldn’t_ be? Lots of Pakistani people. > **[You Say Pakistanis All Hate the Drone War? Prove It](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/01/you-say-pakistanis-all-hate-the-drone-war-prove-it/267447/)** > > Only a fraction of them are even aware it exists. > [@](#): > > Among those who had heard of the program in 2012, 17 percent said that drone strikes are necessary to defend Pakistan from extremist groups (when done in conjunction with the Pakistani government), whereas 44 percent opposed the strikes. While 41 percent who were familiar with the program believe that they are being conducted without their government’s approval; 47 percent correctly believe that their government has given its approval for these strikes. Clearly, Pakistani public opinion is not as informed and much less unanimous as commentators often presume. > **[Drop the pilot](https://www.economist.com/asia/2013/10/19/drop-the-pilot)** > > A surprising number of Pakistanis are in favour of drone strikes > [@](#): > > One man from South Waziristan heatedly told her that he and his family approved of the remote-controlled aircraft and wanted more of them patrolling the skies above his home. Access to the tribal regions is very difficult for foreign journalists; but several specialists and researchers on the region, who did not want to be identified, say there is at least a sizeable minority in FATA who share that view. > > Surveys are also notoriously difficult to carry out in FATA. A 2009 poll in three of the tribal agencies found 52% of respondents believed drone strikes were accurate and 60% said they weakened militant groups. Other surveys have found much lower percentages in favour. But interviews by The Economist with twenty residents of the tribal areas confirmed that many see individual drone strikes as preferable to the artillery barrages of the Pakistani military. They also insisted that the drones do not kill many civilians—a view starkly at odds with mainstream Pakistani opinion. “No one dares tell the real picture,” says an elder from North Waziristan. “Drone attacks are killing the militants who are killing innocent people.” Check out comment sections in Pakistan dailies. There are many in favour of the drone strikes. But the crux of the issue is that the anger is not based on facts. The drone strikes have legitimacy - the Pakistani government approves of them and enables them to be carried out although it denounces them in public. The collateral damage if the military were to try and do it for themselves would be higher by far than that caused by the drone strikes. The anger is manufactured because the Pakistani military and intelligence establishment have used Islamic militants for almost as long as Pakistan has existed and it still believes in good and bad terrorists. Those it can use against Afghanistan and India are good, and those that fight it are bad. It has little to do with the actions of the US, apart from the fact that allying with the US created the ‘bad’ militants for them in the first place. And that was my point - if you think anger against the US in Pakistan has much of anything to do with US actions, you’re mistaken. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/163 "2013-12-02T12:52:22Z")
> [@bldysabba](#): > > Lots of Pakistani people. An approval rating of 17 percent is tiny. > [@bldysabba](#): > > Check out comment sections in Pakistan dailies. There are many in favour of the drone strikes. And check out the news reports of massive protests against them. > [@bldysabba](#): > > But the crux of the issue is that the anger is not based on facts. The drone strikes have legitimacy - the Pakistani government approves of them and enables them to be carried out although it denounces them in public. It’s called “sucking up to America”. That isn’t legitimacy, that’s being bullied. > [@bldysabba](#): > > The anger is manufactured because the Pakistani military and intelligence establishment have used Islamic militants for almost as long as Pakistan has existed and it still believes in good and bad terrorists. No, the anger is perfectly predictable because foreigners bombing people tends to make people angry. > [@bldysabba](#): > > It has little to do with the actions of the US, apart from the fact that allying with the US created the ‘bad’ militants for them in the first place. And that was my point - if you think anger against the US in Pakistan has much of anything to do with US actions, you’re mistaken. That’s just standard right wing rhetoric. It’s pretending that non-Americans aren’t human enough to care if you kill their friends and relatives. It’s the same kind of reasoning that led us to invade Iraq under the assumption they’d love us despite having bombed Iraq into rubble. If some other country did this to America, Americans would go berserk. But they seem totally incapable of admitting that other people would feel the same. ---
**Author:** ![bldysabba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecccb3/32.png) [@bldysabba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bldysabba)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/164 "2013-12-02T13:26:11Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > An approval rating of 17 percent is tiny. 17 vs 44 isnt quite that tiny, no. Check out some of the other cites from The Economist article from places closer to where the drone strikes actually occur. > [@](#): > > And check out the news reports of massive protests against them. Heh. You’d be surprised at how little it takes to organise a ‘massive protest’ in these parts of the world. > [@](#): > > That’s just standard right wing rhetoric. It’s pretending that non-Americans aren’t human enough to care if you kill their friends and relatives. It’s the same kind of reasoning that led us to invade Iraq under the assumption they’d love us despite having bombed Iraq into rubble. I’m not even American. My reading of the evidence is that the actual people in areas close to where the drone strikes happen are more likely to support the drone strikes. I’m just telling you from a somewhat neutral standpoint (I’m Indian. I’m glad that Pakistan is hopefully and at long last learning that terrorism is not a good tool to use, but I have no dog in how the Americans are viewed. I couldn’t care less.) that Pakistani anger isn’t really based on American actions. It’s just convenient politics. > [@](#): > > If some other country did this to America, Americans would go berserk. But they seem totally incapable of admitting that other people would feel the same. That’s a false equivalence. If Pakistan dealt with the Islamic fundamentalists that use its territory to launch attacks in other countries, there would be no need for anyone else to step in. Instead, if you’re feeling charitable it is either incapable, or as almost everybody believes, it actively abets them. See the BBC documentary called Secret Pakistan if you don’t believe me or American sources. There’re plenty of others too. If the US were doing something of the sort, I’d be perfectly happy to call it that way. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/165 "2013-12-02T13:45:29Z")
> [@bldysabba](#): > > 17 vs 44 isnt quite that tiny, no. Check out some of the other cites from The Economist article from places closer to where the drone strikes actually occur. > > Heh. You’d be surprised at how little it takes to organise a ‘massive protest’ in these parts of the world. You can’t have it both ways. If massive protests can be faked, so can polls. > [@bldysabba](#): > > I’m just telling you from a somewhat neutral standpoint (I’m Indian. I’m glad that Pakistan is hopefully and at long last learning that terrorism is not a good tool to use, but I have no dog in how the Americans are viewed. I couldn’t care less.) Being Indian is hardly neutral given the longstanding hostility between Pakistan and India. And they certainly aren’t learning that terrorism is bad; the drone strikes are terrorism. They are simply expensive and high tech terrorism, instead of poor people’s terrorism; they just aren’t called that, in a classic example of “terrorist is what the big army calls the little army”. > [@bldysabba](#): > > That’s a false equivalence. If Pakistan dealt with the Islamic fundamentalists that use its territory to launch attacks in other countries, there would be no need for anyone else to step in. As if that would stop us any more than it stopped us from attacking Iraq. Drone strikes are about “looking tough”, not about actually accomplishing anything. ---
**Author:** ![bldysabba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecccb3/32.png) [@bldysabba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bldysabba)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/166 "2013-12-02T14:07:32Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > You can’t have it both ways. If massive protests can be faked, so can polls. > > Being Indian is hardly neutral given the longstanding hostility between Pakistan and India. And they certainly aren’t learning that terrorism is bad; the drone strikes are terrorism. They are simply expensive and high tech terrorism, instead of poor people’s terrorism; they just aren’t called that, in a classic example of “terrorist is what the big army calls the little army”. > > As if that would stop us any more than it stopped us from attacking Iraq. Drone strikes are about “looking tough”, not about actually accomplishing anything. I’m not saying the protests are being faked - I’m saying the emotions that lead to them are being whipped up by political interests. And I freely admit I cannot _easily claim_ neutrality in the case of Pakistan, but I do on the issue of how and why the US is viewed the way it is in Pakistan. It doesn’t matter to me one whit if the US actually is conducting evil acts that make it deserve every bit of condemnation the righteous can dredge up. As for Pakistan learning terrorism is bad, what makes you think I’m referring to the drone strikes doing the teaching? The extremists they have supported for decades have finally decided to bite the hand that fed them. The terrorism that Pakistan itself has been facing from the Taliban has at least brought a competing narrative - that using Islamic fundamentalism and jihadis may not be a great idea - into their public sphere where earlier there was none. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/167 "2013-12-02T14:17:19Z")
I believe it was Charles the emperor of Spain who said “Fracis [King of France] and I want the same thing; we both want Milan.” It was understood that it was a power struggle and there was no need to justify it morally. What makes America a dangerous menace today is the belief of the American people who believe they are on the side of good while the others are on the side of evil and that this gives America a right to rule the world. It is no different from the belief of Muslim fundamentalists who believe _they_ are on the side of good and their enemies are evil. They are just two sides of the same coin. I never cease to be amazed by the capacity of humans to rationalize and justify anything and everything _our_ side does and to condemn and fail to understand anything and everything the other side do. In the last 150 years America has not ceased in their attacks on nations which had done nothing to provoke or deserve it except be weak and have resources America wanted. Iran, having oil, has suffered several attacks from the west. First invaded by the British. Then their regime overthrown by the CIA and the Sha puppet installed. Then, when the Iranians overthrew the Sha, America waged a war against them using Iraq as a proxy. That war caused Iran untold misery and death. Iran has never been the agressor in all these things, it has always been the victim trying to defend itself. And yet Americans say Iran are the bad guys? Really? What world do we live in when just defending yourself from American aggression makes you the bad guy? > [@](#): > > It is an evil animal, > if attacked it will defend itself Americans manage to discount all facts and justify America’s aggression because someone said “death to America”. Really. Iran need and deserve to have nuclear weapons because it is the only way they can be safe from America. And I expect they will get them and have them and then America will quiet down and stop messing with them. Iran has never come to attack us in the west, we have gone to attack them in their homes and they are defending themselves. Enough is enough. Let them live. Guarantee their safety and security and they will be friends. We are the ones making enemies, not them. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/168 "2013-12-02T15:07:41Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Well Pakistan isn’t constantly ranting about our destruction so I’m not sure why you’re more worried about them then Iran. The difference between Pakistan and Iran is that in Pakistan the government likes us (well, tolerates us as long as we pay them off) and the people hate us, whereas in Iran, the government hates us (or pretends to) and the people like us. Let’s not forget that it was the Pakistani government that created the Taliban in Afghanistan, and we know where that lead. > [@](#): > > Certainly Saudi Arabia and other countries near Iran fear them more than Pakistan. Pakistan is largely Suni, so that’s not much of a shock. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/169 "2013-12-02T15:16:16Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > What makes America a dangerous menace today is the belief of the American people who believe they are on the side of good while the others are on the side of evil and that this gives America a right to rule the world. It is no different from the belief of Muslim fundamentalists who believe _they_ are on the side of good and their enemies are evil. They are just two sides of the same coin. :rolleyes: I guess that explains why the US has dropped nuclear bombs on every country we don’t like, specifically targeting civilians in the process. Please produce a cite that Americans think we should “rule the world”. Note that, for the topic under discussion, most Americans want to pursue a peaceful solution to the Iranian nuclear issue. If Iran does get nuclear weapons, it’s not just the US that will looking at a possible military solution, all of NATO will be on board, and last I checked, Spain was a member of NATO. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/170 "2013-12-02T15:44:38Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > :rolleyes: I guess that explains why the US has dropped nuclear bombs on every country we don’t like, specifically targeting civilians in the process. So All those countries which have been attacked by America, including Iran, should be grateful America has only used conventional weapons and not nuclear weapons. They are so ingrateful! Gotcha. And rolleyes right back at you. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > Please produce a cite that Americans think we should “rule the world”. How about 150 years of recent history where America has not ceased invading and attacking other countries? How about thousands of threads like this one where Americans support attacks on Iraq, Iran or any other country which crosses the USA? How many times has Iran attacked us (western countries) in the last 150 years? Zero. How many times have we attacked them? Pretty much non stop. And they are the bad guys? It takes a really distorted point of view. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/171 "2013-12-02T15:58:26Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > So All those countries which have been attacked by America, including Iran, should be grateful America has only used conventional weapons and not nuclear weapons. They are so ingrateful! Gotcha. And rolleyes right back at you. Well, if you’re going to compare the US to Islamist terrorists, I suppose they should be grateful. Look, I am not going to defend the myriad terrible things the US has done over the years by interfering in other countries, but if you see no difference between al Qaeda and the US, then I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on that one. > [@](#): > > How about 150 years of recent history where America has not ceased invading and attacking other countries? How about thousands of threads like this one where Americans support attacks on Iraq, Iran or any other country which crosses the USA? > > How many times has Iran attacked us (western countries) in the last 150 years? Zero. How many times have we attacked them? Pretty much non stop. And they are the bad guys? It takes a really distorted point of view. “How about NO, Scott.” I guess you don’t have a cite, then. And where the hell are you getting the “150 years” from? I can see that you’re now just spouting any negative thing you can think of, whether factual or not. We’ve attacked Iran “nonstop”? Nonstop? How many times has Iran attacked the US? Well, a certain attack on the embassy and kidnapping of the Americans there constitutes an attack on the US. At any rate, if you want to start a thread that “The US is teh EV1L!!!”, go ahead. Otherwise, it’s a hijack of this thread. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/172 "2013-12-02T16:09:20Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > \*\*John Mace \*\* isn’t a neocon. That’s silly. Don’t look now, your grudge from months ago is showing. I am not saying Mace is a neocon. You are wrong. Mace makes a neocon argument on Iran and Mace is denying that the argument is not a neocon argument. I believe it is detrimental to diplomatic efforts to declare that Iran is only throwing the West a bone in negotiations. That is a neocon ploy to ridicule and disrupt the West’s attempts at gaining a diplomatic solution to the nuclear issue with regard to Iran. And Mace has expressed it here. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/173 "2013-12-02T16:14:44Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > Iran has never come to attack us in the west, we have gone to attack them in their homes and they are defending themselves. Sure, Iranian financed and training terrorists bombed the US Embassy and the Marine Barracks in Beirut in 1983, killing nearly 400 people, most of whom were associated with a UN peacekeeping mission. Plus, Hezbollah has conducted numerous attacks in the West, including attacking embassies in London and Argentina, hijacking planes, and god knows what else. But the Iranian terrorists were surely just defending themselves, and they really just want to be friends. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/174 "2013-12-02T16:16:50Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > I am not saying Mace is a neocon. You are wrong. Mace makes a neocon argument on Iran and Mace is denying that the argument is not a neocon argument. Then you’re just poisoning the well, which is a equally poor form of argument that should be dropped as well. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/175 "2013-12-02T16:19:14Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I never said anything like that. I’m firmly against any use of force against Iran. Put that in your “neocon” pipe and smoke it. You have written in agreement with the neocon argument that Iran is throwing the West a bone in these negotiation just like Assad did in Syria. You are ridiculing the West for negotiating when you wrote that. That helps the neocon cause. If you didn’t mean it when you wrote it why not just say so and explain it? ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/176 "2013-12-02T16:21:19Z")
So in a thread about sanctions on Iran any post questioning whether we have any moral right to use measures of force to make Iran comply with our wishes is a hijack? So this thread is only about all the perceived bad things Iran may have done to deserve our displeasure? Like being in bed with Al Qaeda? Like Saddam before them? OK then. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/177 "2013-12-02T16:24:30Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > I am not saying Mace is a neocon. You are wrong. Mace makes a neocon argument on Iran and Mace is denying that the argument is not a neocon argument. > > I believe it is detrimental to diplomatic efforts to declare that Iran is only throwing the West a bone in negotiations. That is a neocon ploy to ridicule and disrupt the West’s attempts at gaining a diplomatic solution to the nuclear issue with regard to Iran. No, it’s not, and I’m not ridiculing the West’s diplomatic efforts. You need to stop seeing everything that you disagree with as some neocon plot. Besides, neocons are sooooo last decade! ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/178 "2013-12-02T16:29:07Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > So in a thread about sanctions on Iran any post questioning whether we have any moral right to use measures of force to make Iran comply with our wishes is a hijack? Nice try. It’s a hijack to turn this into a debate about whether the US is the most evilest country that to exist, everrrrrr!! The US is not alone in this negotiation with Iran, nor is the US the most hawkish. The sanctions are international in nature, and have nothing to do with what the US may or may not have done 150 years ago. However, if you **don’t** think it’s a hijack and would like to continue that discussion here, we can invite a mod into this thread and ask him or her to decide that point. Should we do that? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/179 "2013-12-02T16:36:40Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > So in a thread about sanctions on Iran any post questioning whether we have any moral right to use measures of force to make Iran comply with our wishes is a hijack? You’re aware that Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and thereby legally and voluntarily surrendered any pursuit of nuclear weapons? You known damn well that if the United States were undertaking some actions that were inconsistent with – though perhaps not a black-and-white violation – a major international treaty, you’d be hopping up and down, screaming about US imperialism and how America is so duplicitous that you can’t trust the nation’s treaty commitments. But when it’s a non-Western country in that position, you basically argue that the evil West forced them to do it and everyone should be more understanding about the whole matter. I am usually dismissive of the right-wing talking canard about “the blame America first crowd,” but your posts in this thread confirm that Rush Limbaugh and other knuckleheads like him aren’t always exaggerating. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2013, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300/180 "2013-12-02T16:45:01Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > You’re aware that Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and thereby legally and voluntarily surrendered any pursuit of nuclear weapons? In exchange for the assurance that they would not be attacked. > [@Ravenman](#): > > You known damn well that if the United States were undertaking some actions that were inconsistent with – though perhaps not a black-and-white violation – a major international treaty, you’d be hopping up and down, screaming about US imperialism and how America is so duplicitous that you can’t trust the nation’s treaty commitments. America has reneged on its international committments whenever it has suited them. Often. And I hop whenever I feel like hopping without need for America’s permission. > [@Ravenman](#): > > But when it’s a non-Western country in that position, you basically argue that the evil West forced them to do it and everyone should be more understanding about the whole matter. I am usually dismissive of the right-wing talking canard about “the blame America first crowd,” but your posts in this thread confirm that Rush Limbaugh and other knuckleheads like him aren’t always exaggerating. No, I am dismissing the American propaganda which blames its victims to justify its crimes. The fact is that in the history of USA-Iran relations the USA is the guilty party and yet American propaganda make them out to be the villains. It is all made up shit just like it was when America attacked Iraq or many other countries it has attacked without any other reason than “we want to steal their shit”. Years later historians recognize the truth but by then it is too late as the deed has been done. America has a long history of spoiling for fights and this is just one more case. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iran-more-sanctions-now-or-wait/674300.md?page=10)