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

611–620 of 844 posts

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

#611

Post by mikkupikku »

JasonADrury wrote: post #444
mikkupikku wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've got that backward. Intelligence Agents are employed by intelligence agencies. Intelligence Assets aren't.

I think you're confusing "agent" and "officer". An agent is specifically some third party acting on your behalf. It's the same when we speak of real estate agents.

Wiktionary says, regarding 'agent':

> Someone who works for an intelligence agency: whether an officer or employee thereof or anyone else who agrees to help their efforts (for ideology, for money, as blackmailee, or otherwise).

That said, I also asked ChatGPT and it says you're right.

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

#612

Post by direwolf20 »

metalcrow wrote: post #186
bawolff wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Historically there was sometimes the idea that citizens are the property of the sovereign to use or dispose of as he sees fit. A lot of historical international law had the view that states have absolute feeedom to conduct their internal affairs however they saw fit. Luckily we have largely moved past that view. I think as a purely practical matter, moral outrage is shaped by who controls the information space. If yo…

>Luckily we have largely moved past that view. Have we? I don't think the UN is going to invade Iran over this, especially after it went so well the last time with the US. And sanctions for Iran are already at the "you don't get anything" level, i don't think they can be ramped up any more. Morally sure, people now believe this is wrong while in the distant past they may have not cared, but practically not much has c…

The UN can't invade anything as it has no army. It's a forum for talking.

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

#613

Post by thisislife2 »

midlander wrote: post #581
thisislife2 wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What "imbalance"? It is disingenuous to equate the two political situations as the same: 1. Palestine is a settler-colony of Israel, where the Israeli-right currently in power is conducting a genocide of Palestinians in Gaza ( https://www.btselem.org/publications/202507_our_genocide ) while continuing to steal their land and deny them basic rights. ( https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/6/who-are-israeli-set... ).…

> The oppressors and the victim are clear in the Israel - Palestine conflict Only if you zoom in and focus on one tiny sliver. If you look at the bigger picture, Israel is surrounded by dozens of countries 100s of times its size, that have all been ethnically cleansed of Jews, many of them in different stages of open or proxy war with Israel, militarily or politically.

Unlike the west, the Arabs or Persians have never nurtured any hatred of Jews till the British (and later the Americans) forcefully backed the creation of a Jewish state in the middle-east. Even today, muslims around the world don't give a damn about Jews or antisemitism unless it is in the context of Palestinians. This is in stark contrast to the christian west, which still harbours a lot of antisemitism and is the factory that still generates most of the modern Jewish conspiracy political tropes (some of which do find their way to religious fundamentalists in the east too). The Israeli-right, ofcourse, has a vested interest in painting Arabs and muslims as antisemites, because otherwise "Israel" can't showcase itself as a "victim". I do believe the Israelis are victims too though not in the way the Israeli-right depicts it - early Zionists never realised that the bigger plan of the western superpowers in forcing them to the middle-east (instead of giving them their own country in Europe) was part of their "divide and rule" policy for the middle-east. Frankly, Israel and Palestine will never be at peace because it is not in the interest of western superpowers. (The Israeli-right have latched on to this too, and are trying to exploit it to increase their own power and influence in the region. Unfortunately for them, that is undesirable for the west and worse, they did it in a way that brings unwanted attention to the west - the Trump and Blair lead Board of Peace is the western response to cut Israel down to size, in the coming future).

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

#614

Post by rayiner »

selimthegrim wrote: post #566
rayiner wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have family around Jackson Heights and one is reposting stuff from Jamaat-e-Islami (the main Islamist party) on FB. It’s very odd. I saw lots of younger Bangladeshis supporting the overthrow of the Awami League government (the most secular of the parties). I wasn’t sure if it was people who just didn’t realize it would leave a vacuum for Islamists, or or people who wanted that. It seems there’s some of both.

My boss was a BNP supporter (at one point I deduced) and regularly used to tell me that Chhatra league was as bad or worse than Shibir.

Growing up with my militantly secular dad, I've always been shocked to even meet BNP supporters in the wild.

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

#615

Post by direwolf20 »

bdelmas wrote: post #289

I really don’t understand why in the West there is nobody in the streets to protest but there was so many people for Palestine… Where are the people?

There's nothing western governments can do to stop this. There are no demands western people are making to their western governments. While for Palestine, people want our governments to stop giving bombs to the attackers.

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

#616

Post by chimprich »

hersko wrote: post #528
chimprich wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> becaue of the terrorist urban warfare tactics hamas and palestinian islamic jihad are using This is ridiculous. I don't want to be a Hamas apologist; they're certainly brutally cynical enough to use civilians as shields, but in the case of Gaza, what else would you expect them to do? Urban areas are strong defensive structures, and 75% of Gaza is urban. Where else would you expect them to fight? It would be unreali…

So they started a war they knew would cause mass death to their civilian population. How is that not the same thing?

You can't give all the blame for the deaths to Hamas. They gave Israel a monstrous provocation, but the decision to kill tens of thousands of civilians, and collective punishment by denial of food, water and medical care was the Israeli government's.

If party A is using a human shield, and party B decides to kill the human shield to get revenge on party A, then who is culpable for the death? I don't think it's an entirely obvious answer. I don't think anyone who can easily and automatically put all the blame on party A or B has really thought it through.

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

#617

Post by hearsathought »

hluska wrote: post #600
hearsathought wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This is my only comment on this entire subject. Why are you being so defensive? A death toll cannot possibly be negative no matter how defensive you are.

> This is my only comment on this entire subject.

Sure it is... You insta-responded to my comment as if you are part of a propaganda campaign.

> Why are you being so defensive?

Pathetic propaganda tactic. You sure seem like an honest commenter here.

> A death toll cannot possibly be negative no matter how defensive you are.

A death toll can't be negative? You can't kill -100 people. TIL. You are why I visit hn. Get to learn something new every day.

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

#619

Post by epsters »

diffs wrote: post #572
epsters wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mentioned many conflicts and many countries so this is very broad to cover in one comment but i will try, briefly. I have heard many theories given over the years to justify these interventions - democracy, capitalism, liberalism, oil, minerals, gas-pipelines, gas-fields, neoconservatism, neoliberalism, neo-colonialism, fighting terror, WMDs, fighting rogue states, checking expansionism, checking communism, counter…

Completely crazy. Not only had the war in Iraq hurt Israeli security, rather than improving it, Israel opposed the war knowing that it would be damaging rather than beneficial. What you have is not "the Israel Theory", what you have is a conspiracy theory.

>Israel opposed the war knowing that it would be damaging rather than beneficial

Here's a video of Benjamin Netanyahu doing the opposite of opposing the Iraq war in front of Congress in 2002.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVPauUOVrmk

>Not only had the war in Iraq hurt Israeli security, rather than improving it

I am aware there was internal debate in Israel on relative benefits of taking out Iraq's conventional military capability, its economic potential, remnants of its WMD program and breaking apart Iraq's territorial integrity versus the risk of Iraq falling under Iran's influence. Evidently Netanyahu's faction prevailed in the debate. Though both sides would have preferred taking out Iran first before going after Iraq.

>what you have is a conspiracy theory.

You can call it whatever you want. The true test of a theory is if it fits the evidence and its ability to predict events. Do you have a better theory of why Americans and Europeans repeat the same failed policies over and over in the middle-east?

Here's my prediction on Iran : I don't know what Trump will do ,if he will ultimately accede to Israel's wishes, but if a 'civil war' breaks out or If Trump or any future American regime decides to invade Iraq. It will conservatively lead to a decade of war, one million deaths, millions of refugees (from Iran, Iraq). If the Islamic Republic collapses I am doubtful on whether Iran will survive as an integral nation. But Israel will get what it wants. which will be - taking out Iran's nuclear program, breaking Iran apart and Israel becoming the regional uncontested power (until Turkey or Egypt emerges but thats the next round). Israel will likely formally annex more of Syria, and Southern Lebanon as well or create a buffer zone rump state. Palestinians will never see sovereignty. They will be ethnically cleansed or live in a glorified bantustan. Iraq may not survive in its current form. It will be a bloody, expensive mess for everybody else. Likely American lives will be lost. I struggle to see how a regime change would be achieved without US boots on the ground. The Iranian people will be all but certainly worse of. Just like the people of Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, etc.

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

#620

Post by throwaw12 »

breppp wrote: post #569
throwaw12 wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because they see Mullah’s regime as one of their biggest allies when it comes to attack West/Israel/Free market you are looking it differently, I disagree, I am one of those who supported Palestine. Reason we are silent, because our governments already did what's needed from our side: heavily sanctioned the Iran, if I go and protest, what do I ask? To sanction Iran? They would laugh at me. Obviously, I am not going…

> if I go and protest, what do I ask? To sanction Iran? They would laugh at me. That's a very weird take I see repeated over and over again You don't protest only to get your government to do something, the protests against Israel expectedly did not meaningfully change US relations with Israel yet you still presumably went out you can express solidarity with Iranians, you can protest the massacre, or just make people…

I do protest the massacre, but I don't know what to expect as a result. What do I ask our gov. to do?

Sanction them? To stop sending them weapons? Isolate them diplomatically?

Surprisingly, all is done already

Post reply on HN