Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal

iranintl.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 844 posts

Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal

#121

Post by Braxton1980 »

k1m wrote: post #50
caminante wrote: post #19

The 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.

[flagged]

"Western media" is not an organization it's a description of a group. Trust should be connected to organizations or businesses.

This is such a dangerous manipulation technique that uses the output of one media source like Fox News as an attack on the reputation of all. CNN and the BBC have reported on Israel's offensive and the massive suffering and death multiple times.

"Study disputes Gaza genocide charges, finds flawed data amid Hamas-driven narrative"

https://www.foxnews.com/world/study-disputes-gaza-genocide-c...

#--------------

"Gaza death toll has been significantly underreported, study finds"

https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/09/middleeast/gaza-death-toll-un...

"More than 70,000 killed in Gaza since Israel offensive began, Hamas-run health ministry says"

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8e97kl240lo

Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal

#123

Post by fwipsy »

LAC-Tech wrote: post #85

[flagged]

Iran is the 17th most populous nation in the world, with 93 million people. These protests seem to be occurring across the entire nation. Another comment mentioned over 4,000 separate clashes. Other sources have already corroborated a lower bound in the mid-thousands. I think the burden is on you to refute these numbers by showing that the sources are deliberately misleading or finding a flaw in the methodology. Simply saying that you find them "not credible" and that some people might have a political motive behind sharing them is not an argument.

Note, I'm not saying that they have been confirmed, but I do not think that you have given sufficient cause for rejecting them out of hand.

Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal

#124

Post by mapontosevenths »

maest wrote: post #71

[flagged]

> "Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic." [0]

However, it also says:

> "Please don't complain that a submission is inappropriate. If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it." [0]

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal

#125

Post by baubino »

PlatoIsADisease wrote: post #74
bawolff wrote: post #29

That's crazy. That's like ~40% of the deaths in the current gaza war, except over just 2 days instead of 2 years.

I've read a ton of philosophy and something I don't really understand is that one nation killing another is more immoral than when a nation does this to their own domestic population. Sure you will get some nay-sayers who say 'a life is a life', if moral particles existed, they might be correct. But for some reason, humanity doesn't seem to care as much. What makes intra-state politics more acceptable to use violence…

> something I don't really understand is that one nation killing another is more immoral than when a nation does this to their own domestic population.

I don’t know that anyone thinks a state’s violence against its citizens is less immoral. It’s more that countries are more hesitant to get militarily involved in the domestic affairs of another country because it would mean essentially declaring war against that state. But in a conflict between states, an outsider can more easily support one side militarily without declaring war against the other side.

Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal

#126

Post by [deleted] »

PlatoIsADisease wrote: post #74
bawolff wrote: post #29

That's crazy. That's like ~40% of the deaths in the current gaza war, except over just 2 days instead of 2 years.

I've read a ton of philosophy and something I don't really understand is that one nation killing another is more immoral than when a nation does this to their own domestic population. Sure you will get some nay-sayers who say 'a life is a life', if moral particles existed, they might be correct. But for some reason, humanity doesn't seem to care as much. What makes intra-state politics more acceptable to use violence…

[deleted]

Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal

#129

Post by dismalaf »

EngineerUSA wrote: post #94
dismalaf wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Such a ridiculous take. Get off your hate wagon. Also I argue no "leftists" support opposing ICE or Palestine out of "leftism". Only hateful bigots would support the execution of our people on our streets, or denying Palestinians their rights to exist and to freedom, free from a zionist ideology that has no respect for property or for life. Maybe if our "right wingers" and "Zionist" friends put humanity first and not…

??? There's an obvious trail of money from Russia and Iran that influences current world events. Which is why there's no outrage over Iran murdering tens of thousands of protestors.

I'm on the side of the Iranian protestors, not the murderous Islamic regime and terrorists, nor their murderous Russian allies.

What's vile is not being opposed to the murder of 36000 people.

Re: Over 36,500 killed in Iran's deadliest massacre, documents reveal

#130

Post by rngfnby »

fwipsy wrote: post #123
LAC-Tech wrote: post #85

[flagged]

Iran is the 17th most populous nation in the world, with 93 million people. These protests seem to be occurring across the entire nation. Another comment mentioned over 4,000 separate clashes. Other sources have already corroborated a lower bound in the mid-thousands. I think the burden is on you to refute these numbers by showing that the sources are deliberately misleading or finding a flaw in the methodology. Simp…

[dead]
Post reply on HN