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

Iranians describe scenes of catastrophe after Tehran's oil depots bombed

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 220 posts

Re: Iranians describe scenes of catastrophe after Tehran's oil depots bombed

#121

Post by carefree-bob »

lwansbrough wrote: post #116
carefree-bob wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a very, uh, idiosyncratic reading of history. You are conflating the Cuban Missile crisis of October 1962 -- which was the USSR placing nuclear weapons close to the US in Cuba in early 1962, in response to the US placing nuclear weapons close to the USSR in Turkey in 1961, and in your mind you have blended that crisis, which was a close call in which both sides ultimately agreed to withdraw their nukes, with…

I never mentioned the Cuban Missile Crisis. You’ve misinterpreted what I said. The USSR getting nukes in the first place lead to several incidents which were a judgment call away from armageddon. With the benefit of hindsight the correct call would have been to exhaust all options to prevent the soviets from acquiring nukes. We just got lucky. Whether it was the Cuban Missile Crisis, the soviet early warning system m…

I assumed you meant the Cuban missile crisis since that is the only tenuous connection that can be made between "USSR acquiring nuclear weapons" and "end of humanity". If you generally meant "any nation acquiring nuclear weapons" then the statement would kind of make sense, but there is no reason to fear just the USSR, and not, say, the US, China, India, Israel, Pakistan, or North Korea. Maybe some information made it into the popular press about the USSR, but it is unlikely that there is something especially dangerous about the USSR compared to all these other nations.

And in any case, the genie is out of the bottle. There is not gonna be a situation in which a small group of nuclear powers endlessly bomb and attack other countries with impunity. The other nations will get nukes to defend themselves against the existing nuclear powers, it's just a matter of time.

Re: Iranians describe scenes of catastrophe after Tehran's oil depots bombed

#122

Post by throwaway132448 »

Gud wrote: post #119
throwaway132448 wrote: post #62

Why are threads on this topic (and its adjacents) always full of Americans blaming Israel for their own country’s actions? Is it a coping mechanism to not accept any moral accountability? Israel is minuscule in every way compared to the US.

Israel wields a lot of power over the US.

They said, without any justification at all, merely reinforcing my own point.

Re: Iranians describe scenes of catastrophe after Tehran's oil depots bombed

#123

Post by MrBuddyCasino »

spiderfarmer wrote: post #11

Surely: This will make the US safer. This will make stuff cheaper. This is a well thought out war. It will improve the US economoy. It will not destabilise the region. This will make life better for Americans. It will in no way make people hate the USA.

"the reason iran is a geopolitical threat is because they could block the strait of hormuz and cripple the world’s economy, something they have never done. so we bombed them until they did that"

https://x.com/questionableway/status/2030020476689318046

Re: Iranians describe scenes of catastrophe after Tehran's oil depots bombed

#124

Post by [deleted] »

spankalee wrote: post #42
keiferski wrote: post #27

This whole situation made me realize that the mechanism for holding presidents accountable for campaign promises really doesn’t exist. None of this is what people voted for, and is almost directly the opposite. That isn’t a new thing, of course, but this seems like a pretty huge turnaround from what the campaign was about. This seems like a fundamental problem with the system to me. If you can’t count on the candidat…

The US needs a parliamentary system. Trump would have been dumped already. Instead we have to wait 3 more years to end this insanity.

[deleted]

Re: Iranians describe scenes of catastrophe after Tehran's oil depots bombed

#125

Post by gehwartzen »

keiferski wrote: post #46
Neil44 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty big assumption you're making, that you know what people voted for.

I’d be glad to see evidence that people voted for interventions in the Middle East, if you have any. My impression is that a key part of Trump’s campaign was ending excessive foreign wars. There are lots of clips going around with him saying this.

Trump is a known liar. He had been for his entire adult life. It looks like the people got exactly what they voted for.

Re: Iranians describe scenes of catastrophe after Tehran's oil depots bombed

#126

Post by kelipso »

tgma wrote: post #93
orwin wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every weeks that number increases. Two weeks ago it was 30k, a week ago it was 35k, now it's 40k+, but OSINT sources keep the number around 15k (including 1.3 k from the Iranian government own forces) and don't move it up. I'm pretty sure the real number is higher than the one OSINT resources can give, considering the uprising and repression also happened in small, less connected cities, but the constant increase is…

There have been numbers as high as 90k reported initially, so I wouldn't say it is "moving up" across time but across sources. There is no clear data, but at this point 30-32k appears to be the lower bound estimate over which there's a consensus. Likely to be higher.

It’s just an NPC accusation thrown at Iran to justify killing millions of civilians. Why even entertain this shit from people who are just pretending to care about it. Everyone knows what they want to do is raze Iran.

Re: Iranians describe scenes of catastrophe after Tehran's oil depots bombed

#127

Post by davkan »

ikr678 wrote: post #40
keiferski wrote: post #27

This whole situation made me realize that the mechanism for holding presidents accountable for campaign promises really doesn’t exist. None of this is what people voted for, and is almost directly the opposite. That isn’t a new thing, of course, but this seems like a pretty huge turnaround from what the campaign was about. This seems like a fundamental problem with the system to me. If you can’t count on the candidat…

This used to be the job of the third estate, but traditional media has all been captured and the algorithms have done the rest, drowning us in a sea of content.

The media is the fourth estate. In the modern US the first three are often interpreted as the branches of government. Historically estates were often some combination of the nobility, the clergy, and the commoners.

Re: Iranians describe scenes of catastrophe after Tehran's oil depots bombed

#128

Post by kelipso »

lwansbrough wrote: post #89
kakacik wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well now they have to, given that a single nuke ownership (and its never a single one, is it) would prevent any such actions. I don't think anybody sane at this point thinks any sort of regime change is going to happen in this century. The bigger problem is - current war won't prevent them from obtaining it. It may delay the date, but also will make them work smarter, hide things better and give them much more resolv…

We can agree that starting a war with Iran is sort of the magnum opus of the worst administration in American history. But I do feel obligated to interrogate the idea that the US is responsible for this escalation. Iran is seeking to expand its power and influence in the region, and employs violent means upon people - even its own people - to achieve these goals. The regime is, fundamentally, amoral. The US gets to d…

Unipolar being the key here. The world will get more dangerous with a stronger US in the current multipolar world.

Re: Iranians describe scenes of catastrophe after Tehran's oil depots bombed

#129

Post by thunky »

keiferski wrote: post #27

This whole situation made me realize that the mechanism for holding presidents accountable for campaign promises really doesn’t exist. None of this is what people voted for, and is almost directly the opposite. That isn’t a new thing, of course, but this seems like a pretty huge turnaround from what the campaign was about. This seems like a fundamental problem with the system to me. If you can’t count on the candidat…

> If you can’t count on the candidate to at least attempt sticking to campaign promises, then the entire process is irrational.

And then people wonder why the voter participation rate is so low.

Re: Iranians describe scenes of catastrophe after Tehran's oil depots bombed

#130

Post by Al-Khwarizmi »

applfanboysbgon wrote: post #103
Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But will they still support him if gas prices and general inflation spike hard, as is nearly a given if Trump doesn't back out from the war? My impression is that most of his voters are selfish and couldn't care less for other people's woes (migrants, sexual abuse victims, Iranians or whatever), but will care if his antics hit their own pockets. I'm not American so I may well be wrong, though.

Yes, they will still support him. Republicans dying of COVID would still deny its existence on their deathbed, so you can be sure there is no consequence that is too far for them. Farmers bankrupted and people who lost jobs because of Trump's policies continue to support him. Inflation is bad when Democrats do it, but it is fine if Republicans do it, as with all things, because that is how their hierarchy works. Thei…

> As an aside, I don't think there is any backing out of this war. If somebody launched a missile at your country and killed hundreds of schoolgirls, and destroyed ships on diplomatic missions while leaving the survivors to drown, while also assassinating your country's leader (but not out of any intention of liberation), would you just let things go because they stopped bombing? Of course you wouldn't. Your country would continue to retaliate. And it is trivial to punish America. Even if America unilaterally decided to "declare peace" and withdraw from attacking Iran, Iran has every reason to continue locking down the gulf and making Americans pay the price. Unlike with tariffs, there is no backing down from these price increases even if Trump gets cold feet. But, even so, there is no reason to believe it will move the needle on his base. There is already talk of "short term pain for long term gain" among those who realise this.

Yeah, that's a good point. And the fact that the new leader's closest family members were killed in the attack won't help. But I suppose the Iranian regime might want some stability, and the Gulf countries are very interested in the end of the war because for them it's pretty much an existencial treat. So maybe there's a scenario where Trump gets to declare a GREAT VICTORY because he supposedly destroyed Iran's nuclear capability or whatever, Iran gets money from the Gulf countries and the regime gets stability, and the Gulf countries get... well, avoiding ruin.

Post reply on HN