How is this possible without explosives? Even with vehicle mounted machine guns it seems like a crazy high number. Did the protestors get boxed in somehow? And across so many locations, that seems to require a crazy amount of coordination to kill so many in so little time.
Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal
61–70 of 844 posts
Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal
#62The source (Iran International) is backed by Saudi money and has a bias to dunk on Iran. That said, I'm sure the death count numbers from the Rasht Massacre are staggeringly higher than the initial tallies of 2-5k.
Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal
#63How is this possible without explosives? Even with vehicle mounted machine guns it seems like a crazy high number. Did the protestors get boxed in somehow? And across so many locations, that seems to require a crazy amount of coordination to kill so many in so little time.
They executed every protestor that was arrested or in the hospital (estimated at ~28k.)
Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal
#64How is this possible without explosives? Even with vehicle mounted machine guns it seems like a crazy high number. Did the protestors get boxed in somehow? And across so many locations, that seems to require a crazy amount of coordination to kill so many in so little time.
As for the numbers:
Interior Ministry reports say security forces confronted demonstrators in more than 400 cities and towns, with more than 4,000 clash locations reported nationwide
it's on the order of 100 deaths at each of 400 locations (clearly not uniformly distributed, some locations would have had many more deaths).As to the how, the article suggests some deaths immediately occurred in crowds - firing, dispersing, funneling, crush injuries, etc. leading to many intakes to hospitals and treatment tents etc ... followed by execution of the injured.
It's grim stuff.
Some years past the waves of the Rwanda massacres saw almost a million people killed in bursts across 100 days, mostly with machetes and hand guns.
The numbers reported here are absolutely feasible, the reporting is certainly questionable; bad things happened, but was it at the claimed scale?
Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal
#65How is this possible without explosives? Even with vehicle mounted machine guns it seems like a crazy high number. Did the protestors get boxed in somehow? And across so many locations, that seems to require a crazy amount of coordination to kill so many in so little time.
Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal
#66Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
That’s quite the claim. Do you have any examples?
Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal
#68[flagged]
Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal
#69This is depressing because we will go to war over this and it’s going to be five years before people realizing they were tricked by “babies in incubators” propaganda.