521–530 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Seriously did you buy this? Uh yes, water shortages and inflation have a habit of pissing people off.
The CIA, as its tradition demands, never meddles when the conditions are ripe to promote American interests. They just let nature take its course from afar.
Straw man. Nobody argued American interests were unrepresented on the ground.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes you think they will give nuclear weapons to terrorists or use those weapons at all? This does not happen even in the most insane examples like North Korea. The more likely outcome would be that they would be able to avoid getting their schools/hospitals etc. bombed. In your mind US should just nuke iran so there is regime change? Can you calculate how this would play out after that happens?
> What makes you think they will give nuclear weapons to terrorists or use those weapons at all? a. They have armed and financed their terrorist proxies (Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, and others), who used those arms and capital to commit acts of terrorism against their regime enemies (the US and Israel). b. Witkoff literally offered them free nuclear fuel forever for civilian purposes and they turned him down, bragging…
Can we believe anything that the senior people in the current US administration say, at this point in time?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was certainly notable that so many HNers seemed absolutely certain that the Kurds would come to the USA's aid, ignoring the fact that America had facilitated the one-sided ceasefire imposed on Rojava just weeks before. A few more sceptical voices brought this up, and were told repeatedly that it didn't matter because the Kurds in Syria and Turkey are very different from those in Iraq & Iran. And there's certainly…
Turkey- a key US ally- will never allow the formation of an independent Kurdish nation near their borders.
I will never forgive Saudi Arabia for the content of the 28 pages. Those who did 9/11 on us remain unpunished because geopolitics demands that we keep good relations with their "royal family".
I'd be happy to abandon whatever "alliance" we have with Turkey/Hungry, and a few other states that have shown evidence that they don't like democracy and are hostile to it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, Joe Kent resigning in protest over the war with Iran is admirable, but Joe Kent is also a vocal anti-Semite who was upset that US policy was being directed by Israel. And I don't mean that Joe Kent dislikes the Israeli government or its actions specifically, I mean he engages in anti-Jewish conspiracy theories and associates with anti-Semites like Nick Fuentes.
These days conflating criticism of israel with anti semitism is a very clear, very obvious and very reliable racist calling card. Mitch McConnell (adherent of the great replacement theory) accusing Joe Kent of anti semitism gave the accusation the same gravitas it would have if Strom Thurmond or the Grand wizard of the KKK did it. i.e. it only serves to underscore the accuser's racism.
No it isn't. There are lots of anti-Semites who just don't like Jews irrespective of Israel's foreign policy. There are also a lot of people criticising Israel who are idiots, alongside the–I believe–majority who have thought deeply about the issue and concluded dispassionately.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The failed revolution a month prior may have been the US too. It's after the ramp up in production of weapons used in the shooting war started.
> The failed revolution a month prior may have been the US too Probably not. History has practically zero examples of foreign- caused popular revolts. When you want your person in power, you do a military coup. What history is littered with is adversaries (a) constantly fomenting dissent in each other and (b) levelling up convenient revolutions. America has been doing the former in Iran since basically 1979. But to s…
You should go take a look at what Lenin and many other communists was doing and where he was physically right before the October revolution...
Also, Haiti slave revolt was heavily influenced by the French revolution.
Also, uhh the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I've never seen Iran care one bit about influencing or bothering any country outside of its sphere of influence Its sphere of influence includes Israel, Gaza (Hamas), Yemen (Houthis), Iraq (various Shia splinter groups), and Lebanon (where Hezbollah refuses to accept the sovereignty of the Lebanese government). You are being willfully ignorant.
Nope, not ignorant. I know that. And I don't care one bit if Iran dominates that area. I'm at a point where I'd prefer it because it's absolutely better than the mess the first country on that list causes, with hacking, election interference, terrorism, war, and ethnic cleansing to name a few. I think a growing number of people globally are sick of it. And funny you mention Lebanon. Iran isn't the country bombing Leb…
Hezbollah also assisted the Assad regime in Syria during the Syrian Civil war - participating in laying siege to entire villages for long enough that people starved to death.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2017/11/syri...
You are willfully ignorant. There is tremendous anger at Hezbollah even within Lebanon, especially since they restarted the war on Iran's behalf in recent weeks, giving Israel the causus belli to resume their bombing campaign against them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The failed revolution a month prior may have been the US too Probably not. History has practically zero examples of foreign- caused popular revolts. When you want your person in power, you do a military coup. What history is littered with is adversaries (a) constantly fomenting dissent in each other and (b) levelling up convenient revolutions. America has been doing the former in Iran since basically 1979. But to s…
"History has practically zero examples of foreign-caused popular revolts" You should go take a look at what Lenin and many other communists was doing and where he was physically right before the October revolution... Also, Haiti slave revolt was heavily influenced by the French revolution. Also, uhh the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom?
To what effect? The only other successful Communist revolution prior to the conclusion of the October revolution was the one in Mongolia [1]. It built on decade-old revolutionary ground [2]. (Finland, meanwhile, was seceding from White Russia.)
Trying to cause a revolution from abroad just doesn't work. Exhibit A: right now.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_revolution#Successfu...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they'll form a coalition against iran and do what?
> and do what? Bomb shit. The Saudi and UAE militaries aren't anything to sneeze at. (The area cross the Strait from the UAE is majority Arab [1].) I think it's generally good strategy to not provoke new belligerents against oneself. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnicities_in_Iran
https://www.reddit.com/r/WarCollege/comments/19ckc6l/saudi_a...
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/qhmbog/why_i...
https://www.reddit.com/r/WarCollege/comments/hqfatn/why_are_...
https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/fbd97k/is_...
A war continuous until one side has caused the other more suffering than it can take. When dealing with the Middle East we keep underestimating the amount of hardship the people I these countries can endure or be forced to endure.
> A war continuous until one side has caused the other more suffering than it can take. The article is in large parts about how that's not true. It makes the point that the very existence of the Iranian regime hinges on its opposition to the US, to capitulate would mean for the leaders to lose all support, be overthrown and likely die: so there's no level of suffering that it "can't take anymore". And similar in the…
Trump has more flexibility. Really all he needs is an endpoint that FOX News is willing to describe as a US victory. He cares more about image and perception than reality. So, in that space, there is probably room for some negotiated outcome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It really is crazy that environmentalists were like, "hey look, free energy," and suddenly everyone started screaming "No, boo! We like the way things are!" I have a friend who has never used an induction range before that is dead set that he never wants one. I just don't get it.
To be fair induction ranges aren't without issues, not due to the concept itself but failures in implementation. Touch screen controls are rife and not only become impossible to use when, say, grease is splattered on them or your hands are wet/wearing gloves (common when cooking on a stove top), they can even be falsely activated by such things. Cold spots can also be a concern depending on your cookware. Unfortunate…