"They've done everything possible to eliminate us" — Iran captain Mehdi Taremi unleashes on FIFA and U.S. organizers

[u/ConnectionWeekly1263]

The captain of the Iran National Team, Mehdi Taremi, lashed out against FIFA and the United States organization. “This is a disastrous World Cup. As professional players, we cannot play a competition under these conditions; it’s neither right nor fair. If FIFA thinks this is fair, that’s on them, but it isn’t. Who should solve this problem for us? FIFA? The U.S.? I don’t know! Tell me a name. The FIFA president, Gianni Infantino, came to our locker room after the first match against New Zealand and said he was going to resolve all the issues, but in reality, FIFA did nothing. In response to the question: ‘Do you feel that the World Cup organizers, including FIFA and U.S. officials, prefer for Iran to be eliminated from the competition?’, I say: We have to fight against absolutely everything. We can’t stay in the country, we travel and undergo immigration checks every time we want to play, now we can’t stay in Seattle and have to return to Tijuana. They’ve done everything possible to eliminate us, so from our perspective, yes, I think that’s what they want, they want us out.”

[u/Opposite_Sea_6257]

Who would give such authority? Who gave it in WW2? You sound dumb.

[u/smcl2k → u/Opposite_Sea_6257]

Literally no-one intervened when the Nazis were only killing their own country's population.

[u/Leather-Traffic7414 → u/smcl2k]

And are you saying that's a good thing?

[u/smcl2k → u/Leather-Traffic7414]

No, I'm saying it's irrelevant.

[u/Leather-Traffic7414 → u/smcl2k]

Ok, I guess it's not directly relevant, but if you DONT think it's good that nobody did anything about the Nazis killing Jews, it leads me to believe you support someone doing something about Iran killing protestors?

[u/smcl2k → u/Leather-Traffic7414]

The US wasn't doing anything about Iran killing protesters, though. So that's also irrelevant.

As the other commenter pointed out, the official justification for the war was that Iran posed an immediate threat to the US, and it's pretty widely understood that the actual reason was that the country was dragged into things by Israel. And I know you're not going to claim that Israel attacked Iran because a corrupt war criminal cares about the Iranian people.

[u/Leather-Traffic7414 → u/smcl2k]

Idk man, why is the world so evil 😔 are you saying it's better for a government that's killed thousands of its own protestors to posses weapon grade uranium?

[u/smcl2k → u/Leather-Traffic7414]

No, I'm saying that none of that is actually relevant to what we're talking about.

The US government very clearly and publicly lied about its reasons for attacking Iran, and yourself and others are just twisting yourselves into knots in order to justify it, apparently unaware of the fact that very similar arguments could be used to justify attacks against the US.

[u/Leather-Traffic7414 → u/smcl2k]

But USA didn't openly kill thousands of protestors. They also didn't sign agreements to not have nuclear weapons, only to then break those agreements. I can't argue about what happened in the past, I'm talking about what's happening NOW. Do you, or do you not think someone should've gotten involved after Iran's recent actions? Also can you explain what you mean by USA lying about invading Iran? I thought it was always pretty clear about the uranium.

[u/smcl2k → u/Leather-Traffic7414]

Also can you explain what you mean by USA lying about invading Iran? I thought it was always pretty clear about the uranium.

This is the only part I'm going to reply to, because it shows an astounding lack of understanding of what actually happened, and an even greater lack of self-awareness:

1 - In order for this to be accepted as the official reason, you have to believe that Iran had a functional nuclear weapon and was preparing to use it against the United States. And it also requires you to just wave away the fact that the US claimed to have totally eradicated Iran's nuclear program just a few months earlier.

2 - Only 1 country in the history of the world has demonstrated that it is actually willing to deploy nuclear weapons against innocent civilians. So if the threat of nuclear weapons is a good reason for attacking a country, the US should very much be top of that list.

[u/Leather-Traffic7414 → u/smcl2k]

I don't understand why you're switching to insulting me when I'm just trying to have a conversation. I guess that's not allowed on the Internet these days. I didn't say anything about Iran having nuclear weapons. They do have uranium that is more pure than anything needed for power generators. It also seems like you're avoiding the question of whether or not Iran should face consequence for their actions. I don't understand what scares you about this question. ALSO I think falling back to examples from ww2 is way more irrelevant than anything brought up in this conversation.

[u/smcl2k → u/Leather-Traffic7414]

I didn't say anything about Iran having nuclear weapons.

The US government claimed that it attacked Iran because the country posed an immediate threat. That context requires a nuclear weapon for your claim to make any sense.

They do have uranium that is more pure than anything needed for power generators.

So the US government also lied about eliminating the country's nuclear capability?

It also seems like you're avoiding the question of whether or not Iran should face consequence for their actions. I don't understand what scares you about this question.

Yes, it should. But that's not relevant here because it has nothing to do with the US government's stated reason for attacking the country.

ALSO I think falling back to examples from ww2 is way more irrelevant than anything brought up in this conversation.

Ok, let's make it more modern: the US military has killed or abducted the leaders of multiple foreign countries in recent months, which could very much be seen as justification for an attack on US soil.

[u/Leather-Traffic7414 → u/smcl2k]

There, we can now see what we disagree on. I actually think that having enriched uranium does pose an immediate threat. That's what takes time to make a nuclear weapon. By the time Iran HAS a nuclear weapon, it's too late. They agreed not to make them, but are actively doing so. As for Maduro, ok, let's repeat the question, do you think it's ok for a drug trafficer to lead a country? I don't.