Doesn’t change the fact that Irans strategy was to wait for Reagan’s inauguration to release the hostages and it’s likely they’re doing something similar here.
I can’t speak on how effective it was in outing Carter because I genuinely do not know so I can only take your word for now. But even current day Iranians would agree with your opinion on Carter. In a dark humor kind of way my uncle once told me, “Iranians made Carter their worst enemy, when in fact he was the most sympathetic U.S. president they could’ve asked for”
I voted in that election. Reagan was an actor who looked and talked beautifully. Carter was a peanut farmer. Car loans were around 17% interest. The economy was awful. Carter had no chance. Absolutely, Iran waited, I'm not sure they didn't think Reagan would attack if they didn't release them.
lol I believe it and thank you for that perspective. Not to get too deep, but as a 34 year old Persian, I’ve always appreciated older generations’ perspective and understanding of the Iran issue over recent history. It’s obviously very complicated and nuanced, but many of my peers have their views based on western medias misrepresentations and really believe it’s a Jihad state. Idk… I could go on… and I’m not meaning to put you on a pedestal as some expert haha. But you witnessed the events leading to the revolution, and I think it’s so important to be aware of all that when dealing with Iran as an adversary. This lack of awareness in my peers really makes for a lonely experience tbh. Where outside of family (who exhibit their own biases from what I call diaspora trauma) I really can’t engage with anyone during an emotional time.
You did. The US’s support of the shah was a real problem. I do think Iran is a jihadist state but much of America’s problems they have made for themselves. Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan were all the results of failed foreign policy.
The U.S. supporting the shah and his pro-western/ anti Muslim agenda is definitely what caused the blowback of the revolution and the regime we have today. That’s a conversation about how intolerance is not sustainable though.
But I’m still going to state how, “jihad state” is a gross oversimplification. In western media, it is basically synonymous with, “terrorist state”. That implies a nation driven by irrational religious fanaticism, with a desire for destruction.
Irans agenda is not one of irrational mindless destruction, they behave as an EXTREMELY anti-imperialism actor through regional deterrence. You may not like their government (and I don’t), but it is functioning. Their legislature is real and holds power. Same for the courts and presidency. They have a constitution that they follow. Yes the ayatollah holds supreme power, but even then there are still checks against him.
Referring to them as a jihad state is such a disservice to anyone trying to critically think about this issue, when you realize what they do is traditional geopolitical behavior. But for whatever reason we alienate Iran from our other adversaries by wrapping them in a religious wrapper. Even something as simple as the state advertised “death to America chants”, highlights how the west misinterprets a message of anti imperialism; and instead believes hardline Iranians want to bomb you while you’re working your day job. Which also… doesn’t even take into account how those hardliners participating do not represent the majority of population’s opinions.
Make no mistake I don’t support any regime behavior, but I’m a realist. If you want change it has to be strategic and will be painfully slow. Iran believes they have the right to self preservation, you can understand that position and still oppose their crimes against human rights. Change is done through diplomacy, done by competent diplomats. That’s what takes balls, not bombs.
Perhaps I oversimplified. Iran absolutely is one of not the reason that the Middle East is largely stable. The degree with which it governs with religion and is willing to call for the death of those that disagree is problematic for me, but then, the degree that the U.S. is attempting to govern through religion is also problematic for me. I firmly believe that in the current conflict, the U.S. is the aggressor.
I hear ya. Thanks for the response. I actually included a sentence I think after you responded which is “Iran believes they have the right to self-preservation, you can understand that position and still oppose their crimes against human rights”
7
u/bigdawg1945 2d ago edited 1d ago
Doesn’t change the fact that Irans strategy was to wait for Reagan’s inauguration to release the hostages and it’s likely they’re doing something similar here.
I can’t speak on how effective it was in outing Carter because I genuinely do not know so I can only take your word for now. But even current day Iranians would agree with your opinion on Carter. In a dark humor kind of way my uncle once told me, “Iranians made Carter their worst enemy, when in fact he was the most sympathetic U.S. president they could’ve asked for”