Slashdot Mirror
Iran Running Out of Physical Currency, Satellite Broadcasts Dropped in Europe
iONiUM writes "In an interesting problem with physical currency, Iran is now running out of hard currency, due to a combination of inflation, and 'Koenig & Bauer AG of Würzburg, Germany, also says it has not responded to an Iranian request for bids to make the presses to print new rials.' Perhaps they should switch to BitCoin."
In addition to not printing money for them, the European currency presses won't sell Iran the equipment needed to print their currency domestically (not unexpected with the embargo). pigrabbitbear adds: "Eutelsat Communications, one of the largest satellite providers in Europe, has just nixed its contract with IRIB, the Iranian state broadcasting company. While IRIB's programming is still mostly up and running in Iran, the decision means that 19 IRIB TV and radio channels have now been axed from Europe and much of the Middle East."
Printing currency is a fundamental human right! Next thing you know, they be telling you and me that we can't print currency anymore either.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
That is what happens when you take with one hand and flip everyone the bird with the other.
One of those Karma things.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
Well at least we can try out our economic theories on Iran about how to manage the money supply. If they are better off without increasing the money supply so as to not risk hyperinflation, we can then analyse what free market responses move to restore productivity.
No, because cash is digital; the paper tokens are just for convenience when you're not using a card or whatever. You're mistaking the symbol for the thing symbolized.
More likely it brings an entire economic system to a halt, with the possiblity of bank collapse. This isn't like in more normal economic situations, where things do tend to find balance. There's a huge, unnatrual, external force at work in the sanctions. Most of the monitary value in modern systems is on paper or in computers in banks. You have money in your savings account, but that money is actually invested in someone else's mortgage, not in a big bag with a '$' on it in the vault. When people fear inflation, they got to the bank and withdraw money so they can spend it. But to do that, you have to have actual physical cash to withdraw. If Iran can't find a way to keep liquidity (printing money may be the only option they have left) then the economy freezes up,similar to what was happening in the US in 2008/9, where businesses couldn't find short term capital. If they can't print money, I frankly don't know what they'll do. I believe this would be unprecidented.
In a society of such unquestionably uncorrupted morals and principals why is a non-repudiable currency even necessary?
"... always going forward 'cause we cant find reverse! "
Iran switch to BitCoin? Noooooo! We can't let them do THAT! According to experts*, if they did that, all their financial troubles would evaporate overnight through the magic of cryptographicalityness! LOOK AT HOW CRYPTOGRAPHIC IT IS!!! Then unicorns would come back and fart rainbows and candy all over the country and they would become as GODS to us mere mortals with our non-cryptographic currency that isn't even SHA-1 hashed! We can't let that happen!
*: Read: "fanatics".
Yes, Iran was suspected of printing Superdollars because the previous regime had the exact same physical machinery as the US Treasury. Perhaps they couldn't buy or fabricate spare parts to keep those presses running.
It's my new virtual currency called BLIT-Coin. It only draws currency on a screen. No printers needed.
Silence is a state of mime.
the huge unnatural, external force in question is depending upon other nations, nations known to be hostile to your ideology, for essential services like printing money
what i am saying is the narrative of blame the west is fake and contrived. blame the iranians for the fruits of their own choices
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Actual question, not rhetorical: Could this be a catalyst that forces more widespread electronic payments adoption - stored value cards, mobile phones, etc. - in lieu of paper currency? If you take away the need to "print" -- and replace it with a plastic card with value on it -- would that potentially be Iran's solution? Just a thought.
I think its funny that "news for nerds" doesn't know that hard currency and physical currency are two different things to businessmen / economists and /. is getting them confused.
Hard currency is someone else's stable currency or gold. You want that when you're doing the hyperinflation thing like Iran's doing now and the US is attempting to do and Germany did about 90 years ago. Foreigners like satellite broadcasters want "real" aka hard money.
Physical currency is the paper bills. Once a stack of bills can't buy a roll of toilet paper, people start using money instead. Ditto firewood/kindling. Again a symptom of inflation. Most legal foreign trade doesn't involve paper currency so the satellite owner probably doesn't care about Iran's paper currency.
It takes pretty high tech to make cutting edge hard to counterfit paper money. Coinage is possible if you have gold. Paper checks, bank accounts, and credit cards don't care how many zeros are on them. Bitcoin would work but its hardly the only solution and requires a lot more electricity than a checkbook. Its not a huge deal.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
That could be an option for a regime like theirs. You could inflate your currency by adding digital zeros rather than printing money with more zeros.
The fact that I just wrote that in the light of a positive option makes me realize how fundamentally fucked up they actually are. I think there's a small possiblity the entire country may collapse before the next election, and a substantially higher chance before the next presidential term.
Probably not. When people get nervous about their financial systems, they want real money that they can put their hands on. Which makes sense because if the financial system collapses, you don't want to have to depend on middlemen that could collapse as well. So, it might actually do the opposite. When this passes (not saying how long that will take, but at some point something has got to give) then the people will remember being unable to get hard currency. So, it could be that they will be LESS inclined to use electronic payments than they are now.
Could this be a catalyst that forces more widespread electronic payments adoption - stored value cards, mobile phones, etc. - in lieu of paper currency?
Only if Iran can make the stored value cards, mobile phones, etc., by themselves. Otherwise, it just makes matters worse.
Actually, of course, Iran running out of currency is silly. All they have to do is accept lower quality printing on their currency from cheaper presses. When the Nazis tried counterfeiting English Pounds during WWII they had to reject the first run because their "currency" was so much better than the "real" notes - the implication is that people will accept anything as currency, providing that the government is behind it (and very publicly executes any counterfeiters that they catch :-) .
"It is pretty douchy that Israel didn't have to sign the NPT but gets weapons and reactors."
No one has to sign it, it's entirely option. Note that Pakistan, India, and North Korea all have weapons and reactors but are not signatories either.
The treaty is based on the idea that if you sign up, then if you don't have nuclear weapons, then you don't seek to acquire them, and if you do have nuclear weapons, then you agree to reduce stockpiles with the aim of eventually disarming. In return for agreeing to this, you get access to global nuclear technology and information sharing agreements for peaceful nuclear power generation. The problem with Iran is that it wants access to this information, and the nuclear components market, but it's not fulfilling it's legal obligations to prove that it's not seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.
I hope this clarifies the difference between Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea vs. Iran. The former 4 have basically made the calculation that they'd rather have nuclear weapons and worry about sourcing nuclear enrichment and power technologies outside of international frameworks, or alternatively, simply developing it themselves internally. In contrast, Iran is basically saying they want all the benefits of the NPT, whilst fulfilling none of the obligations. You can't do that, you either sign up to all, or nothing.
One final point I'll make though is that action to prevent states becoming nuclear capable can happen whether the NPT is involved or not, so you shouldn't assume the NPT is a tool used to simply beat nations with, it's not. The reason I say this is because the pressure against North Korea (a non-NPT signatory) is as strong as against Iran (an NPT signatory). As you can see, rhetoric, proposed action, or actual action against a nation is simply to do with global politics as much as it is NPT compliance - in other words it doesn't matter if India/Pakistan/Israel are NPT signatories or not, any action against them will happen, or not happen, regardless of their NPT signatory status so Israel signing up to the NPT, or Iran dropping out of the NPT, would have absolutely no bearing on the pressure (or in Israel's case, lack of) against them.
That requires an infrastructure to support that process. For instance card readers in every market or farm stand. The problem with this idea is that Iran does not own or have the capacity to create that infrastructure without significant imports from external sources. And external sources have been banned from providing this capacity.
Actually that's been a primary reason for Iran's economic collapse so far - both the US and Europe actually put their money where their mouth is for once and actually stopped buying Iranian oil. Whilst China has picked up some of the lost sales, it's not picked up even close to all of it, and worse, because China is no longer competing with the West for Iranian oil, and Iran desperately needs to sell that oil, China has been able to bargain for lower prices for it. Saudi Arabia has increased output to support the loss of Iranian oil to the US and Europe which is why they've been able to pull it off.
Europe (and presumably the US?) have also just this week now extended that to gas too, which will hurt Iran's economy even more.
"why there are all these sanctions against Iran."
The two primary reasons are:
1) Refusing to fulfil it's obligations as an NPT signatory. It is fairly unique in this regard.
2) Sponsorship of groups on US/European terrorism watch lists. This is something other nations do (including the US/Europe ironically).
But it is point 1) that would normally be used as the reason for separating Iran from other nations, though it may be worth reminding you that Syria and North Korea have also both been under sanctions for many years for these reasons also so it's not as if they're being applied to just Iran, though I will agree with you, they are still applied somewhat selectively - for example, Pakistan is also complicit in funding terrorist organisations, and has a nuclear programme (though like North Korea, is not an NPT signatory) but because it's a US ally, it gets away with these things.
I'm sorry I wasn't clearer. I didn't mean that people were interested in this story because it mentioned Bitcoin. I meant that people on Slashdot seem interested in how currency works in general, at least in part because of Bitcoin.
One of the criticisms of Bitcoin is that it does not inflate after a certain point - so in theory it could stifle an economy that outgrows it. And along comes a real-world example of a fiat currency that is unable to inflate. Personally, I find that to be very interesting.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
In short, the embargo is working. I'm actually quite pleased at all of this. It's very good to see diplomacy working in place of - and, really, better than - war.
The English word fart is one of the oldest words in the English vocabulary.
Iran Sanctions Now Causing Food Insecurity, Mass Suffering
It may be worth reading this, iranian are now facing severe food shortages and lack of medicine, this will physically weaken the population and have an actual death toll. Who are we to impose such misery, and why is the EU doing this? It's a shame, and possibily an act of war. The population won't overthrow the regime either, because they're being weakened and growing dependant on the regime for their survival. These sanctions are absurd, abject and only useful if the US/Israel intend to attack the country thereafter.
And where do you propose they get their hands on large quantities of gold/silver through the embargo? Plus, the only real way such a thing *might* work is if you smelted the coins using some crap metal like tin with a vanishingly small amount of precious metal. Because trading in pure precious metal would require salt sized grains (at best) for any reasonable transaction, with the price of metal in today's market.
The gold standard and similar ideas are moronic for a variety of reasons, but even ignoring their inherent faults those systems have to use paper notes backed by some scarce item (be it gold, gems, whatever) due to the fact that trading items that are by definition scarce in small amounts is difficult at best. Maybe when there were a few million people actively involved in the economy of the day (think Rome at its peak) this was doable, but a few billion? Not a chance.
About the time you hit the industrial era, you'll have the option to discover the printing press. And banking. Now unfortunately looking at your civilization's profile, you haven't even made it to the renaissance yet, so you still have a ways to go, but in a couple hundred turns, you'll be set!
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
It wouldn't be the first time that a country has started a war to take pressure off a domestic situation.
Yes, that probably is what Obama and Netanyahu are trying to do.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
My point is exactly that the people should be deciding what money is
Yes, yes, and now I have to spend 30 minutes on every transaction making sure that the gold coin I've been given is a) really gold b) hasn't had any shaved off c) etc etc etc. Works fine for everyone with scales and a water bath to whip out at the grocery store checkout as everyone in line behind you groans (and you thought the person with 200 coupons was bad!)
Using cheap metals for coins was the fix for Gresham's law. All money is "bad" money, so scraping a little off each coin won't get you much more than metal splinters.
They are free to build their own printing presses.
The EU is simply refusing to give them one.
China should say fuck you to sanctions, supply Iran with yuans and score big time in the region. The US and Israel would be pretty unhappy having China in the other team.
With all due respect, your information is either out of date, or in place, completely and utterly wrong.
"As a signatory to the NNPT, Iran has every right to develop nuclear power, enrich uranium and have access the full nuclear fuel cycle."
It has the right to obtain peaceful nuclear technology, whilst it is also fulfilling it's obligations under the NPT. The problem is, as it's not currently fulfilling it's obligations under the NPT, it also does not have the right to obtain peaceful nuclear technology via NPT supported mechanisms.
"Israel and the USA are attempting to deny this capability to Iran because they *might* build a nuclear weapon."
It's not about might, it's about the fact that as an NPT signatory to gain the benefits of NPT mechanisms for transfer of peaceful nuclear technology you have to fulfil certain obligations. Iran is currently in breach of those obligations and it's nothing to do with what the US or Israel thinks as the IAEA is a multinational organisation staffed by as many of US/Israel's foes as it is their allies. If you do not believe me that it is the IAEA condemning Iran for not fulfilling it's obligations and simply US/Israeli say-so, then see here, read it directly from the horse's mouth:
http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/iaeairan/index.shtml
Or specifically the most recent report here, asking Iran to fulfil it's obligations:
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2012/gov2012-50.pdf
"National Intelligence assessments concluded that Iran had abandoned its weapons program 10+ years ago."
This is true, but only a half-truth. You've missed the fact that the IAEA believes there is some evidence the programme may have restarted, and it is up to Iran to fulfil it's obligations to prove otherwise if it wants to be in compliance with the NPT. So sure they did abandon it, but that doesn't mean they didn't start it again.
"Iran has bent over backwards to accommodate UN (i.e. USA) demands for access to its facilities"
No it hasn't, you've got a number of things wrong here:
1) Iran hasn't bent over backwards to accomodate the UN (IAEA), on the contrary, the IAEA has bent over backwards to accomodate Iran. Specifically, Iran barred a number of IAEA inspectors from it's site from countries it has a distaste for (including the US). A country is not meant to be able to pick and choose what inspectors it allows in as that defeat the object of impartial observations of a nuclear programme. Despite this the IAEA let it do it and got on with it's job anyway. If there is any bending over backwards, it's from the IAEA not Iran.
2) The UN isn't the USA, and the USA isn't the UN. I think you'll find there are a number of UN members, including Iran themselves who'd take offence to you determining that their UN votes are controlled by the USA.
3) There are a number of facilities and sections of facilities the IAEA has requested access to, but have had their request deny. This is one of the reasons the IAEA has determined Iran non-compliant. See the most recent report here for evidence of this complaint by the IAEA:
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2012/gov2012-37.pdf
Specifically, near the top of page 3:
"Iran has not responded to the Agencyâ(TM)s initial questions on Parchin and the foreign expert; Iran has not provided the agency with access to the location within the Parchin site to which the Agency has requested access; and Iran has been conducting activities at that location that will significantly hamper the Agencyâ(TM)s ability to conduct effective verification."
"but EVERY TIME Iran has compromised, the USA and Israel create another hoop for them to jump through."
Again, it's nothing to do with the US and Israel, the US's
Get a rat in a corner, you don't know what it is going to do.
And if you're a cat, you really really want the rat to try something. The rat will die in a while anyway, when it runs out of energy or the cat tires of "playing" with it. The cat will be unharmed, and won't even exert itself too much while having fun.
I had a pet cat when a kid. We lived beside a large railway embankment which had lots of rats - big ones, but not as big as the cat. She would be sitting beside a line of three to six dead rats on the lawn almost every morning (after we learned to fully close the windows so she could not bring them into the house to be proudly shown to us). Several times, I saw her "playing" with surprisingly large rats corralled into a corner of the garden, and killing them with a neat bite to the neck only when they were too exhausted even to attempt escape. After a couple of years, there were no rats left anywhere near our house.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
the huge unnatural, external force in question is depending upon other nations, nations known to be hostile to your ideology, for essential services like printing money
what i am saying is the narrative of blame the west is fake and contrived. blame the iranians for the fruits of their own choices
Riiight. Because the situation Iran is in has nothing to do with the West. The US and its allies have been trying to take down Iran since they tried to nationalize their oil companies in the early 1950's. Iran has been demonized in the western press to encourage public support for attacking them. This hyperinflation situation is one more aspect of the full-court press being put on Iran by the US and its allies. Iran is under enormous pressure to play ball the way Washington and London want them to.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
Those who don't listen to us will feel our wrath. Example Iran. This may seem off topic but I think it's relevant to the underpinning factors of this piece of foreign policy. I'm going to be pragmatic and honest rather than ideal here.
It's my opinion that land and its resources belongs those who conquer it. Who ever gave anyone ownership of oil and/or land? No one, you conquer it then you defend it. I don't care if your God gave/promised it to you, or that you have been there for centuries/millenia. History has shown this time and time with European colonization of Africa and Americas, the mongol conquest of central Asia, the Islamic conquest of Northern Africa and Europe, the Israeli settlement of Palestine. In this regard, Palestine, Saudi oil, etc. all are up for grabs if you ask me, if you wish to take up the conquest.
As an American, I have no problem supporting a questionable foreign policy as long as it serves OUR national interest. I don't have a problem with double-standards, forcing our will, nor do I care whether it is fair, just, and righteous. What does bother me is the masses eating up the propaganda fed to them by our gov't and media and regurgitating it as the noble path. What we are doing to Iran is immoral, unfair and an act of war. Save me the BS of "spreading democracy", "doing the right thing", or speaking of this "world's/international community's" which is only made up of a minority group of nations.
Patriotism/nationalism is irrational, ideological and dangerous and it's running wild in the USA more than ever. The whole society/political spectrum has shifted to the right, xenophobia, intolerance and attacks on secularism are on the rise. Combine this with our hostile approach and disregard to just about any country save a few, we are perpetuating our own decline.
This choke hold on Iran to me, is doing the bidding of our ally Israel based on fickle evidence that is at best propaganda. In addition, we are also doing the bidding of the Saudis and other satellite Saudi kingdoms . I see this as the USA outsourcing its might. I don't believe this serves our national interest. The damages of our hostile actions will hurt us economically, politically and make us less safe. We are walking a tight rope over stagflation should the oil prices rise not to mention of sending more Americans in harms way.
Bank collapse is not a bad thing. Honestly they should have let the banks collapse here in the USA.
Yeah, it went pretty well for Iceland.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/08/top-economists-iceland-did-it-right-everyone-else-is-doing-it-wrong.html
People just don't seem to get that when you see a sharp horse trader who is the richest man in town, you know he's going to screw you in any business dealings you have with him because that's how he got to be the richest man in town. So, when he tells you "I refuse to do business with you", the correct response is "Thank you".
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Iran is under enormous pressure to play ball the way Washington and London want them to.
Washington, London, and much of the Middle East. In addition to most of Europe. And a lot of Asia (along with Australia). I'm not sure if most of Africa or South America really care either way.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
The problem with that is we don't have enough precious metals to back all the currencies in the world. It's one reason we left the gold standard behind.
21st Century Renaissance Man
I am by no means a supporter of Iran or its current government, but I do believe in facts. President Ahmadinejad has never said that Israel must be wiped off the map. The entire issue arose from a mistranslation of his statements, which is more accurately translated as "this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time." If you're going to use this statement to support actions against another country, please get it right.
Source here.
A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
Actually, my thought was "OK, now China picks up a bit more business."
I suppose they *could* build their own, but I doubt that there's only one supplier, and I doubt that China would trust a western country will something so essential to government operations. But China is large enough that it's reasonable to build their own. Which means that it's reasonable to sell them for increased profit (in some form, not necessarily cash).
OTOH, check out China's concept of foreign aid. The US etc. gives or loans money, which needs to be spent on US etc. corporate goods. China gives projects, which they build. (Local labor usually is minor.) Then there's this useful project already there, which requires help from China to keep running. It benefit China in a few other ways, too. This does cause local resentment, as locals can't get hired to do the work (except as low level workers), but not to the extent that US loans do, which need to be paid back, and often result in local "austerity measures" being forced on a country that is already nearly broke and operating on a shoestring. And it's cheap for China, compared to the costs to the western governments of equivalent help. (Of course, in the west many financial groups get large payoffs, which the Chinese approach doesn't provide. They take their payment in other ways.)
So if a typical scenario happens, China will offer to install locally a currency printing press, in return for some concessions. (Probably political rather than financial, but no guarantees. They could also ask for resources.) They will install the plant, but it will be dependent on Chinese parts and Chinese experts. No overt threats will be made, even afterwards, but it will be clear to the government that they have been partially 0wn3d. And they will blame the Europeans for forcing them into the position.
It may not play out that way, but if it does you read it here first.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
After finally ending the puppet regime installed by the U.S. and Britain, when we overthrew Iran's peaceful, secular government. Anytime neocons want to whine about the theocratic government of Iran, they should start with the nearest mirror.
Repeating a Big Lie doesn't make it true. Not only has Iran never said anything of the kind, they haven't attacked another country in 200 years. As opposed to the real belligerent powers here: the U.S. and Israel, who have both launched dozens of first strikes or wars of choice since WWII.
If you set items to have a price based on an ounce of gold, that's great, but it does mean that if you keep price stability, you need to have enough gold to pay for things. Wikipedia tells me that we have mined 142,000 metric tons of gold, which is about six trillion dollars worth of gold at current rates, not even close for supporting the dollar, let alone every other currency out there. Presumably there is more to be mined, but like oil, it isn't limitless and there is a rate of production. That rate of production becomes a factor that could be, and eventually *will be* a limit on the growth of an economy.
Even if you were to say that you are now setting the value of the dollar to less gold than it used to be, after that point, you can't change it or you inflate or deflate the currency. So, you get to say that an ounce of gold is worth 1 million dollars just once, after that, you have to live with it.
Further, unlike money created via digital data, gold can be hoarded and its market cornered like any other commodity. We've already seen what can happen if someone forms an oil cartel, and there is absolutely nothing that prevents a gold producer's cartel from forming. There are also actual uses for gold in industry which would have some effect on the value of gold.
The free market allows for hoarding of resources, and because gold does not lose value due to spoilage, there is no pressure to sell. That means that *anyone* can hoard. You might want a bank for your gold, but if you were untrusting of banks, you could just periodically set aside gold to bury as your savings. Since (initially) stable value exists, there is no reason to invest and the gold is just as safe there as in a bank, but with the added problem that the bank cannot make loans based on the gold, and neither can you.
And let's be clear, nothing prevented governments from debasing coinage when they were on a standard. Of course, you could just trade weights of gold, but then every vendor needs to be able to prove that they are getting the weight in gold as opposed to gold coating a slug of lead. Welcome back to the Wild West. I'll be over here setting up my scale and touchstone business.
The reason we dropped the gold standard was deflationary shocks to the economy, which were generally considered to be worse than the sort of shock you would get based on a floating currency. There are suggestions that this is was a major cause of the Great Depression and certainly, the value of gold did cause economic problems around the turn of the century, so much so that American politics was filled with discussions of the gold or silver standard or bimetallism.
We do need to get control over monetary policy, that's for certain, but I don't think anything is going to work in the long run without curbing the desire to spend more than we have without increased economic strength to support it. I am definitely not against free market operation, but I think you may well be unaware or underestimating what would happen today if we shifted to a metal standard without a lot of rethinking of how it was going to work. While I understand that decreasing value of money has problems, those who trade in commodities that are perishable (like crops futures) still manage to make money and produce profits over time and their goods are always in the process of becoming worthless. In some ways, the need to "use it or lose it" is very instructive on how economies work.
At some point you are going to have to notice that the Cold War ended over 20 years ago and the CIA meddling in Iran happened over 50 years ago. In your mind, that is a causative action. That what the regime does today, is a reflection of that event. In 2012.
So let's just keep playing this game, shall we?
In 2001 Al Qaeda attacked the USA with hijacked planes (oh, right, sorry, i forgot: this is because the USA gave Bin Laden a Stinger missile in the 1980s). In 2045, a fascist rises in the USA, and declares war on Mexico and Canada. But: this is the fault of Bin Laden because of 2001, right? I mean I'm just trying to follow through on your logic here.
Of all the events that happened in and to the USA in fifty years, we are going to selectively choose 9/11 as the formative, causative, and the ultimate point of blame, responsibility and accountability upon which to hang everything the USA does. Right? I think this is great: the USA has no more responsibility for its actions. It can do horrible vile things, and we will have people like you explaining to us it is because of what Bin Laden did ten years ago. twenty years ago, thirty, forty.
Look: the USA did plenty of evil in the Cold War. So did the USSR. Why can't we creatively explain Bin Laden as the fault of Putin and Moscow? Isn't it that he was fighting the USSR in the 1980s?
Does the absurdity ever enter into your mind?
The USA nuked, NUKED Japan. I mean this is truly horrible by orders of magnitude compared to the kind of things the USA did in Iran, right? That's why the Japanese are a theocracy that suppresses it's own people (2009 green revolution... oh wait! Tehran regime says that's the West's fault! of course!). That's why the Japanese threaten it's neighbor with annihilation, right? That's why the Japanese have murals of the great Satan USA everywhere and march every year to chant down with the USA. It's completely understandable. It's not like the Japanese are real people with their own thoughts and motivations, they are just empty avatars of revenge in line with your own prejudices, right? Why claim responsibility for your own actions when we have such a wonderful narrative of perpetual victimhood?
This is you: you dislike the USA. That's fine. That's your right to dislike the USA. It's the bullshit alternareality you construct with your prejudice that's the problem. In the constant web of causes and effects in the world, you latch onto certain events out of hundreds of thousands. You ignore the 999,999 other events, and selective construct a creative fantasy cause and effect chain to match your predisposed opinions. Doesn't matter if the event is from fifty years ago, it just has to fit your Hollywood narrative. You ignore everything since. You ignore everything before. You point to this event as the ultimate formative cause, ever. In all of Iranian history. Of all the actors on the world stage. Because it has to match your prejudice.
Then, and here's the part where my mind blows up: you use the fantasy cause and effect chain to disavow the theocracy in Tehran of all responsibility since 1979 (the revolution happened decades after the CIA meddling, but never mind, pesky details). Today, Tehran is now innocent of anything it could have ever possibly have done wrong. Because CIA 1950s. Duh. And, here's the wonderful zinger: all that Tehran does is also clearly the blame of the USA! Awesome!
Doesn't the stink of the laughably absurd cognitive dissonance ever get to you?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it