Quote:
33 years after the Iranian revolution
All claims to objectivity out the window (and I know you have no idea why that is)
EDIT: OK, I'll spell it out for you.
These protests didn't take place in Iran. They are far, far, far from Iran (about as far as the distance from DC to Panama) and the people in question are of an unrelated ethnic group and do not speak the same language. They have no common history. Their way of life is very different. The only thing they have in common is that they are Muslim (although no more similar in faith than Protestants and Orthodox), they're sitting on oil, and we are at odds with them because we're trying to get their oil.
So why bring Iran into this?
There are a surprising number of American foreign policy hacks and corporate interests still bitter we lost control of the country in 1979. Never mind that the reason the revolution succeeded was not because of the appeal of radical Islam but because the Shah's government and its brutal Savak secret police was despised by most mainstream secular Iranians. Acting on the basis of this butthurtness, these hacks have resisted normalization of relations with the new government and obstinately continue to bitterly antagonize and persecute it, maintaining the embargo and supporting spies and subversion within the country (and demonizing the Iranians for their periodic executions of CIA agents operating in the country).
Meanwhile, India and the EU have normalized relations. Curiously, despite the fact those countries also have a shared history with Iran (and not entirely a friendly one - Iran is also allies with India's archnemesis, and the EU ruled Iran for over a century), they don't have a problem with the Iranians. Although you have no knowledge of any of the countries or their history (or even our own), I'm sure you have some obtuse rationalization why the fact we can't get along with the Iranians like everyone else is somehow due to our being amazing and the Iranians being obsessed with doing us harm.
Iran has no power over what happens in Libya, nor do they have a reason to care. They had no involvement in the embassy attacks, having gotten out of that business some decades ago when they felt they had progressed far enough economically that they had something to lose and wanted to rejoin the international community.
Aside from American obtuseness, the Iranians were largely successful in doing so. But now some American and Israeli interests want to continue antagonizing Iran, or perhaps even make war on them, at a crucial juncture where it's becoming increasingly obvious that the status quo isn't working. Ironically enough, the American embargo and bitter persecution of the Iranians has united the country behind their government and its assertive policies, encouraged them to develop the bomb, and, alone amongst the oil states, to funnel their earnings into civil development, with the net result that Iran is eclipsing Israel in wealth and prestige, as the Israeli economy is beginning to falter (lol yogurt riots - you don't know about that either) and American help is looking like less and less of a sure thing. In short, this is a case of violence being the last refuge of the incompetent.
Bringing up Iran gets at what the article is really all about which is trying to turn what are wars over resources into somehow being about American values. You are ignorant of the reasons why this is so and as such prove you are in fact being manipulated.
