Live data from Hacker News

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

iranintl.com

671–680 of 844 posts

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

#671

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is always different when a foreign group kills children/starves over extended time like Israel did to Palestinians, as opposed to a dictatorship (think Syria before its revolution succeeded or Iran right now) kills their populace. Syrias civil war cost 600-800k lives by many figures. It is difficult to cover civil unrest or civil wars within the same group, vs. genocide or wars between nations. Think just of how h…

[flagged]

[flagged]

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

#674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Today, Jews are denied entry to many Muslim countries - not just Israelis, anyone who looks Jewish. The excuse that “some other people of this religion did something bad” does not justify hating and ethnically cleansing everyone who shares that religion.

As for the ban on Jews by some Arab / muslim countries - remember that the west was actively encouraging Jews, with Zionist movements all over the world, to migrate to the middle-east and occupy muslim-Arab territory. Sure, it began with a narrow focus with only Palestine. But who knew where it would stop if it was successful? Most of these countries are former western colonies who immediately understood what the west was trying to do by sending foreign Jews to occupy their land - the "divide and rule" policy was how they were subjugated too in the first place, to become colonies, and the newly independent Arab states understood that by driving Jews to the middle-east, their former masters wanted to use the Jews to foment a conflict between Jews and Muslims which they could then use to break the newfound unity amongst the Arab states and use as an excuse for interventionist politics. It had (and still has) nothing to do with antisemitism and everything to do with making sure that former imperialists doesn't exploit any political vulnerability in their country and endanger their (then) newfound independence. (It also doesn't help matters that Israel acts like a western puppet, further reinforcing the view that Israel is just a pawn of the west in the middle-east).

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

#675

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where’s the data to support your extraordinary claim?

You could start with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_supplying_ar...

You’ve given a list of countries selling weapons to Israel. If I sell you my car, I am not “funding” you.

What an exercise in utter futility.

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

#676
post #633

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those countries literally attacked Israel on the day it became a state, and many times thereafter. Israel is definitely not perfect, but their neighbors have been trying to wipe them out for no good reason for a long time.

What was the process that made Israel a state? What was there before Israeli state was? Who were the allies of that country?

I'd suggest the Wikipedia article as a very good starting point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Israel#Ancient_Isra...

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

#677
post #639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the Palestinian and Iranian situations It's simple. One is a genocide. The other is not. The more "israelis" ( or is it "iranian expat" ) like you try to pretend to be "westerners" and skew the conversation, the more obvious it becomes.

[flagged]

This is pretty much entirely false. Maybe you don't actually know or talk to any progressives? Or the ones you're around are very bizarre. Or maybe you're extrapolating from impressions you've gotten on Twitter?

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

#678

An iranian expat here. I have been following the news closely, mostly getting my data from my friends in Iran before the internet shutdown and after it was (sort of) lifted. The death toll is way above this number, you have to consider the fact that Iran is a big country with many small cities, and in my city alone (which is very small and rarely has any protest going on) many people have died (i don’t have the exact…

[deleted]

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

#679

An iranian expat here. I have been following the news closely, mostly getting my data from my friends in Iran before the internet shutdown and after it was (sort of) lifted. The death toll is way above this number, you have to consider the fact that Iran is a big country with many small cities, and in my city alone (which is very small and rarely has any protest going on) many people have died (i don’t have the exact…

> those who are committing this massacre are MUSLIMS and support PALESTINE so this is a moral dilemma for the left lovers

I'm not sure if you're making this argument in good faith, but just in case. The iranian government has no love for socialists/anarchists many of whom have been executed (especially in the years after the islamic revolution) or live in exile.

From what politically active iranian comrades told me (in exile), the social movement in Iran is very much alive and there is an underground left-wing scene (for example an anarchist/punk scene). Likewise, the Jin Jiyan Azadi movement following the execution of Mahsa Amini is very much on the left wing, inspired by Rojava's democratic confederalism.

From a western european perspective (eg. me), the dilemma is not the one you presented. Sure some fringe groups have campist [1] tendencies, but that's far from representing the Left as a whole (which has historical links with the anti-islamist left-wing in Iran). The dilemma would be: how to support a people's revolution without supporting our own western empires making the situation even worse? The most moderate/imperialist liberals have learnt the lessons from the Taliban's comeback in Afghanistan and the return of black slavery in Libya: we can do better than bomb a foreign people.

Still, the demonstrations here in France supporting the uprising in Iran (at least those who are not organized by the fascists trying to bring the Shah's son to the throne) pretty much have the same crowd as the pro-palestinian demonstrations. I'd be curious, apart from obvious propaganda, where you'd find the idea that left-wingers wouldn't support overthrowing a tyrannical government.

(cue history course about the history of secularism and why opposing islamophobia is not incompatible with opposing islamism or any theological tyranny)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campism

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

#680

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is always different when a foreign group kills children/starves over extended time like Israel did to Palestinians, as opposed to a dictatorship (think Syria before its revolution succeeded or Iran right now) kills their populace. Syrias civil war cost 600-800k lives by many figures. It is difficult to cover civil unrest or civil wars within the same group, vs. genocide or wars between nations. Think just of how h…

[flagged]

You both have been breaking the site guidelines badly. We ban accounts that do that. Please don't do it again.

Also, please don't use HN for nationalistic/ideological/religious flamewar (or any flamewar). It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN