Hacker News Reader

Comment by amasad | Hacker News Reader

The ban on Iranians has nothing to do with terrorism. I might be wrong but I don't think there are any real Shiite terror group. And yes I don't think it's fitting to call Hazbollah as a terrorist group -- the same label that you'd give Al Qaeda or ISIS. I honestly can't think of a time where a Shiite group was responsible for indiscriminate killing.

View on HN

The State Department has long called Iran "the most active state sponsor of terrorism", but as far as I know, the US has not been their target.

> Designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism in 1984, Iran remained the most active state sponsor of terrorism in 2010. Iran’s financial, material, and logistic support for terrorist and militant groups throughout the Middle East and Central Asia had a direct impact on international efforts to promote peace, threatened economic stability in the Gulf, and undermined the growth of democracy.

https://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2010/170260.htm

Hmm, Iran actively supports ~100 Shiite terror groups in Syria and Iraq. If you speak Arabic, here is an article in Al-Hayat.

http://www.alhayat.com/Articles/9542195/

And of course Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Al Hayat has a pro Saudi bias. But even if we left that aside the article opens with the claim that Iran sponsored militias equal in atrocities that is of ISIS -- which is obviously false.

Not sure if you speak arabic or if you're from the middle east but hate for Shiites from Sunnis are more extreme than their hate for Israel -- in fact many clerics actively ask for genocide against them.

Here are two examples of what I think the world would objectively call terrorism where Iran/Hezbollah was involved: 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMIA_bombing 2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Burgas_bus_bombing

There are of course countless more examples.

>I don't think there are any real Shiite terror group.

Hezbollah is a banned Shia outfit that is involved in killing in many countries including Syria.

Killing is different than terrorism, US military is involved in killing in many countries as well!

Are you seriously equivocating the US Military which has specific RoEs and people who deliberately target civilians as a means to achieve their goals? That argument does not pass the smell test.

Iran has been sponsoring and supplying if not actively participating in terrorist attacks going back decades.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-sponsored_terro...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quds_Force#Activities

Anyone saying Iran does not participate in terrorism either has not read enough or is willfully blind.

I am not saying Iran is not involved, I am just saying US is doing the same thing. Keep in mind, Iran is not doing the bombing herself, it supports groups that are doing the attacks. US is supporting groups and governments that killd lots of people. How they are different?

You specifically called out the US Military in this case and now you're applying your comments to the entire US. Which one are you actually criticizing?

Broadly speaking the US does some shady shit no doubt. Last I checked though we don't train people to walk into markets and blow themselves up. Arguing that because the US has blood on its hands, that makes it morally equivalent to people who actively support people who use non combatants as human shields and so on is some real weak tea.

> Last I checked though we don't train people to walk into ?>markets and blow themselves up.

Check again.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/737430/CIA-ISIS-Wikileak...

> Killing is different than terrorism, US military is involved >in killing in many countries as well!

Terrorism is a relative term.

Thanks for downvote. However it was nice if you could educate why is it not.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com