The petrodollar system is why the USD was able to retain status as the international reserve currency even after Bretton Woods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrodollar_recycling
Why should the US be able to do that?
Whether one side or the other has in the past acted immorally is irrelevant. You don't win the argument by saying "America has done bad things too", as if that should persuade it to change its behavior. It's a category error; nothing but ineffectual emotive fluff. You'd have more traction arguing that sanctions are, in fact, not in America's long term best interests.
The problem with that angle is that without caring about morals, military invasion is probably better for America's interests than sanction relief.
In reality, beneath the surface, is a complex web of relationships and competing/aligned interests.
A good example is the Israel-Palestinian conflict. It may seem like an Israel-Arab conflict, but many Arab countries are aligning with Israel to counter the Shiite threat from Iran. But those same Arab countries can’t abandon the Palestinian cause either. So they walk a tightrope of tacitly supporting Palestine, often hollow public statements about the “on-going fight for a Palestinian state” all the while strategizing with Israel on how to contain Iranian influence. They can’t support Palestine 100% because that would mean severely weakening themselves with regards to Iran.
One can argue that’s two faced and they should be ashamed of partnering with the enemy of a group they support, but in reality every country does it. It’s about practically protecting your interests. And sure you might seem like you flip flop in your statements, but alliances and enemies are created and disappear all the time.
The US cares about the Syrian deaths about as much as they do about those in Yemen. Morals play absolutely no role here. And when a politician howls something about humanitarian reasons you can be sure it’s a farce.
What matters is giving head to the right person. Do that, and anything is fair game.
Especially since they fueled the war themselves. Regime change is less risky if you can just pay people on the ground to do it for you.
Also, the supreme leader is at the top of Iran's power structure and is not elected by the iranian population.
I don't know the history super well but I would speculate that either Iran wanted to sell oil in another currency, or the other oil exporting countries we got in bed with (OPEC) didn't like Iran, or another one of our allies (Israel) didn't like Iran.
Brought (unwillingly) into power by the US once more:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta...
>I’m not exactly sure the Iranian government are particularly nice people.
One could say that about the CIA and the US-Government too.
I'm not saying the Iranian government doesn't do bad things - it absolutely does, though you could (easily) argue that the US has done far worse. Hell, you can also (again, easily) argue that the US and UK are largely responsible for many of the past wrongs of Iranian governments.
As a singular anecdote from 21 years back, I spent a couple of weeks in Iran way back in 2000 (my father was working there as a geologist for an oil company and I joined him during the summer holidays) - things seemed very different than I'd been led to believe. I felt completely safe wandering Tehran alone, and everyone I came across seemed extremely friendly and curious. They seemed to know how their country was portrayed outside of Iran, and wanted to show me otherwise. People talked freely about politics too, expressing likes and dislikes just like any western nation. And the food, my word the food...
When the US kidnaps people they call it "extraordinary rendition" so you don't think it's just a simple kidnapping + torture. It's extraordinary somehow.
And Guantanamo is not the only one. https://www.google.com/search?q=abu+ghraib+photos&tbm=isch
My point is simply that things are absolutely not as black and white as we are led to believe, and the whole "axis of evil" rhetoric was ludicrous.
Iran is a remarkable place with a highly educated population. Of course they’re nice and friendly and curious, most people in most countries are. The Iranian people aren’t the enemy (re: prevailing paradigm of thought from the US), it is the regime. And let’s face it both governments severely dislike each other, the destruction of the US is literally a rallying cry of the Iranian regime
Not quite. What they chant is roughly equivalent to "down with". On the other hand, the US has damaged Iran so much that you can't blame them for being very angry at it.
This government didn't install itself.
"As Iran sentences Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe to a further two years in Iran, her husband outlines why the UK’s secretive, unaccountable arms trade is a danger to British citizens and why his family remains haunted by an unkept promise made by the UK government."
https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-05-01-nazanins-...
1: Propaganda or a lie
2: The Truth
3: Something in between (most often that is the case)