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

Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 658 posts

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#581

Post by donkeybeer »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #578
donkeybeer wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's nothing, Israelis happily kill their own Prime Ministers. But obviously I condemn Iran and I condemn Israel killing peaceful civilians, the law and the morality applies to all. I mentioned killing civilians in foreign countries as it is strictly worse, as bad as killing innocent people in your own country is, at least it also does not involve the violation of sovereignty and peace of random foreign countries.…

But what if the Mahsa Amini's case is not just a sad death in the hands of the regime, but also a violation of a treaty which Iran has signed ?

If it is the ICCPR, then it appears Israel is also a signer and as I said Israel is equally prone to violations of human rights on and off of its territory. So again I do not see what was the point of specifically calling out Iran for it.

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#582

Post by JumpCrisscross »

srean wrote: post #546
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> only attacked countries that host US bases, correct? No. Azerbaijan hosts no U.S. bases. Also, the Gulf hosts U.S. bases in part to protect against Iran. Blowing up hotels while missing American warships underlines why Iran is a shit neighbor.

Iran has said it was not them. So far Iran has been quite conscientious about taking responsibility of the targets they have hit or attempted to hit. Israel on the other hand has a history of not being so.

> Iran has said it was not them

They’ve given mixed messages. You see the new talking points being echoed down thread [1].

> Iran has been quite conscientious about taking responsibility

There is no singular Iran. The President apologized. Then the IRGC hit more targets in neutral nations. (Again, unless we use the new definition of neutrality which means everyone is an enemy.)

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47474297

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#583

Post by JumpCrisscross »

GordonS wrote: post #555
upcoming-sesame wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Religion extremism

Such "religious extremism" that Iran had a religious decree against nuclear weapons? And another about the maximum range of their missiles? Such "religious extremism" that they've plainly had the capability to end Israel for many years, and yet have shown incredible restraint? No, there are religious extremists involved for sure, but mostly of the Israeli variety.

> that Iran had a religious decree against nuclear weapons?

One cleric issuing a prohibition while another pursues them isn’t particularly interesting from a political perspective.

> they've plainly had the capability to end Israel for many years

They plainly have not. Their proxies were insufficient. And their kinetics prone to interception and destruction at source.

> there are religious extremists involved for sure, but mostly of the Israeli variety

They’re both extremist. Iran has been funding extremists around the Middle East, in Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis. Israel has a religious nutter wing in charge turbocharged by America’s own camp of evangelical idiots.

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#584

Post by JumpCrisscross »

thrance wrote: post #513
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> US/Israel are losing the war This is incorrect. It’s grinding to a stalemate.

The US just allowed Iran to sell their oil [1]. If that's not a sign that Iran has the upper hand, I don't know what is. [1] https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-authorizes-tempor...

> If that's not a sign that Iran has the upper hand

It’s not. The military history of trading with enemies doesn’t provide any clear guidance to advantage.

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#585

Post by JumpCrisscross »

cardanome wrote: post #414
leereeves wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems to be a fairly well thought out war that's already killed many Iranian leaders, including: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei – Supreme Leader Major General Abdolrahim Mousavi – Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces Major General Mohammad Pakpour – Commander-in-Chief of the IRGC Brigadier General Aziz Nasirzadeh – Minister of Defense Mohammad Shirazi – Head of Supreme Leader’s military office Ali Larijani – Senior nation…

Many of these leaders decided to not hide underground but to become martyrs. It is really not an accomplishment to murder someone in their own house when they have not been hiding. Khamenei was already very old. His security begged him to evacuate but he asked them if they can evacuate all Iranians. If they can't why should he get special treatment? He knew he could serve his country best by becoming a martyr. Meanwh…

> really not an accomplishment to murder someone in their own house when they have not been hiding

A win is a win. Irrespective of whether the enemy’s fuckup put it on a silver platter for you.

> He knew he could serve his country best by becoming a martyr

And taking down his inner circle with him. Brilliant man.

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#586

Post by GordonS »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #583
GordonS wrote: post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such "religious extremism" that Iran had a religious decree against nuclear weapons? And another about the maximum range of their missiles? Such "religious extremism" that they've plainly had the capability to end Israel for many years, and yet have shown incredible restraint? No, there are religious extremists involved for sure, but mostly of the Israeli variety.

> that Iran had a religious decree against nuclear weapons? One cleric issuing a prohibition while another pursues them isn’t particularly interesting from a political perspective. > they've plainly had the capability to end Israel for many years They plainly have not. Their proxies were insufficient. And their kinetics prone to interception and destruction at source. > there are religious extremists involved for sur…

> One cleric issuing a prohibition while another pursues them isn’t particularly interesting from a political perspective.

Except there's no evidence that any in Iran were pursuing nuclear weapons - Joe Kent has said every intelligence agency in the US agrees with that. British intelligence has agrees with that. Even the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) agrees.

It's plain that this war was started at the behest and benefit of Israel. And Israel is also using it as cover to annex Southern Lebanon, just as they want a slice of Iran.

> They’re both extremist. Iran has been funding extremists around the Middle East, in Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis.

See, those groups would call themselves resistance against Israeli aggression - afterall, resistance against constant Israel aggression is the only reason they even exist!

> Israel has a religious nutter wing in charge

Oh, it's much more than one nutter. Netanyahu may well be dead (he hasn't made any public appearance in a while, and Israel has been releasing AI videos of him), yet the genocide, ethnic cleansing and aggression continue, unabated. And let's not forgot about Israel and US' proxies in the region, ISIS and Al Qaeda.

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#587

Post by DoctorOetker »

donkeybeer wrote: post #581
DoctorOetker wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what if the Mahsa Amini's case is not just a sad death in the hands of the regime, but also a violation of a treaty which Iran has signed ?

If it is the ICCPR, then it appears Israel is also a signer and as I said Israel is equally prone to violations of human rights on and off of its territory. So again I do not see what was the point of specifically calling out Iran for it.

I am referring to a different treaty, which you would realize if you took over from beedeebeedee to look up the video of Mahsa Amini's death and analyzed it critically.

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#588

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #571
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Asking a question about how Mahsa Amini died is not trolling or propaganda, its not even a statement, but a question. Indeed, it is trolling, even if you think it's not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

[flagged]

> By such definition, all of science is "sealioning"

You are taking an overly literal interpretation of my comment and offering more sophistry in response. Apologies for the short reply but none of the rest seems relevant.

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#589

Post by scottyah »

vasac wrote: post #232
ttul wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strategically, it seems like a dumb move. Right now, Congress is unlikely to approve Trump’s request for $200B to fund the war effort. But if Americans can be convinced that Iran could somehow hit American cities, they would call their members of Congress in a heartbeat and that money would presumably flow without interruption. Why time the medium range missiles now? It seems like yet another own-goal for this desper…

Americans can be convinced of anything without too much effort so that isn’t really a factor here.

They just don't need to be convinced of anything. It's not like normal people have a say in this, just a few leaders doing what they want. A few fake news stories saying that there's so much support.

Re: Iran launched unsuccessful attack on UK's Diego Garcia

#590

Post by Schmerika »

UltraSane wrote: post #508
gzread wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right? Same logic - if correct - would give Iran the moral right to first strike the US.

I hate Trump also but he is a saint compared to the Iranian Shia Theocracy

By what metric?

Certainly not by lives lost, damage done, or dollars embezzled. Not by interference in other countries, or apocalyptic rhetoric.

So, what exactly is your opinion based on?

Post reply on HN