6 ms·

I went to school and grew up in Iran. Chanting death to America and Israel and even to poor (already) dead Shah was part of an official ritual every morning in

by homami 7y ago

I went to school and grew up in Iran. Chanting death to America and Israel and even to poor (already) dead Shah was part of an official ritual every morning in the school. As a teenager, you don't grasp what you're saying. You're just part of the crowd. In an environment that there's almost no other forms of entertainment at reach; you feel powerful in these rallies. It's like being in a rock concert and singing the songs. I imagine most people that show up in the rallies these days have nothing else to do. It's a recreational event for most. Actually I think this is exactly what makes this culture most dangerous. There are big crowds of mostly low or unemployed people blindly following their leaders. And they enjoy it the same way that you enjoy a sport event or a concert. I speak Farsi and 'death to America', well means death to America. I even didn't know about the historical reference mentioned in the post. But I doubt that the big majority of the individuals that are shouting death to something truly mean it.

csense 7y ago
Thanks for this comment. This has changed my view somewhat on the Iran situation. I originally thought it was pretty dumb of Trump to tear up the nuclear deal, escalate tensions, and most recently basically try to start a war (by killing a high level government official). But if "death to America" is literally being indoctrinated into their whole society, maybe war is inevitable, and better for it to start on our terms, when we have an advantage, instead of (say) wringing our hands and kicking the can down the road until they have nukes, like we did with North Korea. Maybe Trump's stance on this issue might not be so crazy?
- greendude29 7y ago
  You missed the entire point of the article and your analysis from what you misunderstood is also somewhat daft. Supporting war because "[it] is inevitable, and better for it to start on our terms, when we have an advantage" __is__ insane and is not a defensible position.
  - mc32 7y ago
    Are you arguing it’s better to go to war flat footed? I’m pretty sure the ayatollahs and their commanders would disagree with your strategy, not just the US.
    - jgwil2 7y ago
      I think the parent is disputing the notion that war is inevitable. Obviously if you start with that premise you can justify all sorts of actions that would otherwise seem immoral/insane.
- homami 7y ago
  Even after years of being brained washed by the media and the educational system, a typical middle class millennial in Iran does not hate Western culture or America. Older generations (even in some rural areas) have fond memories of Americanization of Iran in the 70s (which finally led to the Islamic revolution). The problem that I see with Trump's approach is that it alienates these groups of people that had been pro-American before. The country and the economy was thriving for a brief couple of years after the nuclear deal. People used their money to visit Gulf countries, east Asia and Europe. I think Internet speed almost doubled in that period. But new sanctions made the economy collapse. And Muslim ban is a real thing if you are born in Iran. And it does not matter how pro-American you are. Then now we ended up in a situation that even ordinary, middle class Iranians that could've been in American camp, are feeling under attack by a bully. For them everything that the government has been preaching about the great Satan is coming true.
  - Udik 7y ago
    > For them everything that the government has been preaching about the great Satan is coming true. Maybe it's time to realise it had elements of truth from the beginning.
  - leereeves 7y ago
    The Iranian government recently murdered at least 200 (according to the UN and Amnesty International) and perhaps over 1000 (according to US officials) unarmed Iranian civilians. Many were shot in the back as they ran away. [1,2] How can Iranians still support that government? Sanctions are probably the wrong approach - they tend to hurt ordinary people far more than the government - but if I were Iranian, living under a regime that's willing to shoot me in the back, I'd hope for regime change. 1: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-s-says-iran-may-have-killed-1-000-protesters-n1096666 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-s-says-iran-may-have-ki... 2: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/12/iran-death-toll-from-bloody-crackdown-on-protests-rises-to-208/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/12/iran-death-to...
- mattrp 7y ago
  I would like to comment - respectfully - I hope. I do believe death to America is the literal intent. I think the author of the article below is somehow attempting to sugar coat the saying as a means of arming a sympathetic audience on social media. I wonder if those images in the article are even real (upon first glance I honestly couldn't tell). Personally, I am a free speech absolutist. If one feels more comfortable saying death to America, or bah to America, or good will, you idiots, I do not care as none of these sayings are offensive to me. I'd rather you be clear about your feelings than to sugar coat them. I also would say that over the years, my own stance towards Iran has moderated and become more sympathetic. I am ok with an Iran that does not agree with our priorities and I do not think regime change is the optimal outcome. Further, I don't think the killing of Soliemani was intended to signal we intend to change the regime. I think rather it was asking a question in a way that it couldn't be mistaken for anything else. And that question is simple -- "do you really want to do this?" I think Soliemani's funeral can be symbolic (if nothing else) in this respect: It's time for Iran's leadership to give this era of zero sum foreign policy a proper burial.
  - Udik 7y ago
    > I would like to comment - respectfully - I hope. I do believe death to America is the literal intent. You're not respectful, as you're insulting 80 million people by saying they all want to murder you and other hundreds of million. You're not being intelligent either, because you're wilfully ignoring the fact that literal translations from one language to another are incorrect. Even Google translate is in fact smarter than you are: just paste مرگ بر آمریکا into it and see what it prints out. > Further, I don't think the killing of Soliemani was intended to signal we intend to change the regime. I think rather it was asking a question ... It's time for Iran's leadership to give this era of zero sum foreign policy a proper burial. Wait, wait. The Iran had an agreement with the rest of the world, all of it. It agreed to a very strict regime of inspections and halting its nuclear program in exchange for an increased freedom to commerce with the rest of the world. This was a win-win for all, the opposite of a zero sum game. Trump has reneged the agreement, against the opinions of everybody else, and imposed a complete economic embargo on Iran through sanctions on anybody who does commerce with it. It is chocking the entire country. This is a zero sum game. What the US is doing is strangling a country of 80 million- a bloodless death but death nonetheless. And if the dying country kicks and struggles, you say "enough with the zero sum game"? Really?
fatnoah 7y ago
>As a teenager, you don't grasp what you're saying. You're just part of the crowd. This is pretty much how reciting the Pledge of Allegiance felt when I was growing up. We'd stand and recite it at the start of every day of elementary school, but no one really paid too much attention to the words themselves and their meaning.

by homami 7y ago

csense 7y ago

Thanks for this comment. This has changed my view somewhat on the Iran situation. I originally thought it was pretty dumb of Trump to tear up the nuclear deal, escalate tensions, and most recently basically try to start a war (by killing a high level government official). But if "death to America" is literally being indoctrinated into their whole society, maybe war is inevitable, and better for it to start on our terms, when we have an advantage, instead of (say) wringing our hands and kicking the can down the road until they have nukes, like we did with North Korea. Maybe Trump's stance on this issue might not be so crazy?

greendude29 7y ago
You missed the entire point of the article and your analysis from what you misunderstood is also somewhat daft. Supporting war because "[it] is inevitable, and better for it to start on our terms, when we have an advantage" __is__ insane and is not a defensible position.
- mc32 7y ago
  Are you arguing it’s better to go to war flat footed? I’m pretty sure the ayatollahs and their commanders would disagree with your strategy, not just the US.
  - jgwil2 7y ago
    I think the parent is disputing the notion that war is inevitable. Obviously if you start with that premise you can justify all sorts of actions that would otherwise seem immoral/insane.
homami 7y ago
Even after years of being brained washed by the media and the educational system, a typical middle class millennial in Iran does not hate Western culture or America. Older generations (even in some rural areas) have fond memories of Americanization of Iran in the 70s (which finally led to the Islamic revolution). The problem that I see with Trump's approach is that it alienates these groups of people that had been pro-American before. The country and the economy was thriving for a brief couple of years after the nuclear deal. People used their money to visit Gulf countries, east Asia and Europe. I think Internet speed almost doubled in that period. But new sanctions made the economy collapse. And Muslim ban is a real thing if you are born in Iran. And it does not matter how pro-American you are. Then now we ended up in a situation that even ordinary, middle class Iranians that could've been in American camp, are feeling under attack by a bully. For them everything that the government has been preaching about the great Satan is coming true.
- Udik 7y ago
  > For them everything that the government has been preaching about the great Satan is coming true. Maybe it's time to realise it had elements of truth from the beginning.
- leereeves 7y ago
  The Iranian government recently murdered at least 200 (according to the UN and Amnesty International) and perhaps over 1000 (according to US officials) unarmed Iranian civilians. Many were shot in the back as they ran away. [1,2] How can Iranians still support that government? Sanctions are probably the wrong approach - they tend to hurt ordinary people far more than the government - but if I were Iranian, living under a regime that's willing to shoot me in the back, I'd hope for regime change. 1: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-s-says-iran-may-have-killed-1-000-protesters-n1096666 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-s-says-iran-may-have-ki... 2: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/12/iran-death-toll-from-bloody-crackdown-on-protests-rises-to-208/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/12/iran-death-to...
mattrp 7y ago
I would like to comment - respectfully - I hope. I do believe death to America is the literal intent. I think the author of the article below is somehow attempting to sugar coat the saying as a means of arming a sympathetic audience on social media. I wonder if those images in the article are even real (upon first glance I honestly couldn't tell). Personally, I am a free speech absolutist. If one feels more comfortable saying death to America, or bah to America, or good will, you idiots, I do not care as none of these sayings are offensive to me. I'd rather you be clear about your feelings than to sugar coat them. I also would say that over the years, my own stance towards Iran has moderated and become more sympathetic. I am ok with an Iran that does not agree with our priorities and I do not think regime change is the optimal outcome. Further, I don't think the killing of Soliemani was intended to signal we intend to change the regime. I think rather it was asking a question in a way that it couldn't be mistaken for anything else. And that question is simple -- "do you really want to do this?" I think Soliemani's funeral can be symbolic (if nothing else) in this respect: It's time for Iran's leadership to give this era of zero sum foreign policy a proper burial.
- Udik 7y ago
  > I would like to comment - respectfully - I hope. I do believe death to America is the literal intent. You're not respectful, as you're insulting 80 million people by saying they all want to murder you and other hundreds of million. You're not being intelligent either, because you're wilfully ignoring the fact that literal translations from one language to another are incorrect. Even Google translate is in fact smarter than you are: just paste مرگ بر آمریکا into it and see what it prints out. > Further, I don't think the killing of Soliemani was intended to signal we intend to change the regime. I think rather it was asking a question ... It's time for Iran's leadership to give this era of zero sum foreign policy a proper burial. Wait, wait. The Iran had an agreement with the rest of the world, all of it. It agreed to a very strict regime of inspections and halting its nuclear program in exchange for an increased freedom to commerce with the rest of the world. This was a win-win for all, the opposite of a zero sum game. Trump has reneged the agreement, against the opinions of everybody else, and imposed a complete economic embargo on Iran through sanctions on anybody who does commerce with it. It is chocking the entire country. This is a zero sum game. What the US is doing is strangling a country of 80 million- a bloodless death but death nonetheless. And if the dying country kicks and struggles, you say "enough with the zero sum game"? Really?

fatnoah 7y ago

>As a teenager, you don't grasp what you're saying. You're just part of the crowd. This is pretty much how reciting the Pledge of Allegiance felt when I was growing up. We'd stand and recite it at the start of every day of elementary school, but no one really paid too much attention to the words themselves and their meaning.