There is a ramping up of violence between isolated military actions, proxy wars, and outright wars (though all of them are bad and should be opposed). I much prefer dishonesty to escalating violence and death to a vast scale. Iran doesn't do full blown wars (they don't have the resources nor the popular support to do so offensively), the US does so all the time. Iran is seeking to influence nearby countries and is engaging in proxy-warring to do so, though mostly in wars that wouldn't be happening if not for the US. (They could have not invaded Iraq and they could have cut their losses in Syria a long time ago.) The US is seeking to escalate that proxy-war into a full blown war for no reason. As for what their leader chants: while it would obviously be much better not to chant for bringing death to entire countries, and doing so escalates tensions needlessly, he can't make good on such threats. He knows it, you know it, so it doesn't really matter and should be ignored.tstorm823 said:
US-Approved Air Strike Kills Iranian Military Commander Soleimani
- Thread starter thebobmaster_v1legacy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Judge Dredd would have more decorum and could cite the legal authority for his actions, and what laws his target had broken.CaitSeith said:
I am unconvinced President Trump could do likewise.
Does it do it for worse reasons?tstorm823 said:
The USA has, for instance, fucked with a host of central and southern American countries: funding guerillas and insurgencies, launching coups, protecting murderous dictators and other brutal regimes. The USA has oceans of blood on its hands, directly or indirectly. Why? For power and money and influence, to ensure those countries act in accordance with US wishes, to help US trade with those countries, etc. Why does Iran fund militias and terrorists? Surely just the same reason: influence and power.
It's not that this means specific criticism of the USA or excusing Iran. It's just that it is what a lot countries do, and it's simply absurd to think the USA is somehow motivated by positive morality and a better world where places like Iran are not.
We might in ways favour the USA over Iran, because for the most part the sort of society the USA represents is better than that of Iran; thus for the USA to be dominant may represent strengthening of that society in the global milieu over other less palatable ones (bearing in mind this is arguable as the USA is frankly patchy, opposing some democratic and liberal regimes where they have got in the way of US interests). We might also favour the USA if it's a bit more ethical about the way it wreaks havoc with other coutries. But that really can't blind us to the basic fact that what's motivating the USA and Iran is the same principle of self interest.
Haha! You know it's a shitshow when the Israeli PM Netanyahu distances himself from Trump's assassination of an Iranian general.
* * *
I have no idea whether it's true, but some media reports have suggested that what's happened is that the US DoD or intelligence services or whatever have done their usual thing of presenting the president with a range of options he can do (as they are required to, I guess). These are given with an expectation the president responsibly considers, discusses, debates, takes advice and carefully reasons such that the extreme and risky ones should not be done.
Unfortunately, the current president is Donald Trump.
This is kind of a pattern, isn't it? Following on stuff like the premature announcement of troop withdrawal from Syria, abandoning the Kurds to the Turks... Once it looks ike an error, along comes the absurd, thundering posturing and threats to try to cover the underlying cock-up - in this case threatening war crimes of destroying civilian and cultural targets if Iran takes any action in response.
* * *
I have no idea whether it's true, but some media reports have suggested that what's happened is that the US DoD or intelligence services or whatever have done their usual thing of presenting the president with a range of options he can do (as they are required to, I guess). These are given with an expectation the president responsibly considers, discusses, debates, takes advice and carefully reasons such that the extreme and risky ones should not be done.
Unfortunately, the current president is Donald Trump.
This is kind of a pattern, isn't it? Following on stuff like the premature announcement of troop withdrawal from Syria, abandoning the Kurds to the Turks... Once it looks ike an error, along comes the absurd, thundering posturing and threats to try to cover the underlying cock-up - in this case threatening war crimes of destroying civilian and cultural targets if Iran takes any action in response.
Not an argument.tstorm823 said:
And to the extent that what you're saying is true, I'm correct.
[tweet t="https://twitter.com/shaunking/status/1214282946896629764"]
Apparently Soleimani was killed while on a mission to deescalate tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia?
https://thegrayzone.com/2020/01/06/soleimani-peace-mission-assassinated-trump-lie-imminent-attacks/
Oh look, another example of mainstream media just being pro-war propaganda.
[tweet t="https://twitter.com/adamjohnsonNYC/status/1214488071711932422"]
https://thegrayzone.com/2020/01/06/soleimani-peace-mission-assassinated-trump-lie-imminent-attacks/
Oh look, another example of mainstream media just being pro-war propaganda.
[tweet t="https://twitter.com/adamjohnsonNYC/status/1214488071711932422"]
*heavy sigh*
So, between trump's threats to destroy cultural sites (which would have civilians near them, which would make those bombings literal terror attacks)...
And the fact china and russia are doing joint military exercises (probably in preparation for if this turns into WW3)...
AND the fact people are still defending the killing of a top government official in Iran as a totally good thing that will have no real negative consequences and HAD to be done, while absolving the US of all wrongdoing despite its EXHAUSTIVE list of invasions and drone bombings of other nations, LET ALONE the fact that the current Iranian regime is THEIR fault, because the CIA provably overthrew their democratically elected leader and put in a puppet (leading to a revolution against him)...
AND the fact that Mike Pence just tried to sell "Iran was in part responsible for 911"
...I'm just glad Canada has legalized recreational weed. I may need to go buy some in the near future so I can hardcore de-stress so that I don't have a panic attack watching the world tap dance on the very edge of World War 3 while an incompetent idiot is at the head of the largest military on the planet, and the nuclear launch codes at his fingertips.
So, between trump's threats to destroy cultural sites (which would have civilians near them, which would make those bombings literal terror attacks)...
And the fact china and russia are doing joint military exercises (probably in preparation for if this turns into WW3)...
AND the fact people are still defending the killing of a top government official in Iran as a totally good thing that will have no real negative consequences and HAD to be done, while absolving the US of all wrongdoing despite its EXHAUSTIVE list of invasions and drone bombings of other nations, LET ALONE the fact that the current Iranian regime is THEIR fault, because the CIA provably overthrew their democratically elected leader and put in a puppet (leading to a revolution against him)...
AND the fact that Mike Pence just tried to sell "Iran was in part responsible for 911"
...I'm just glad Canada has legalized recreational weed. I may need to go buy some in the near future so I can hardcore de-stress so that I don't have a panic attack watching the world tap dance on the very edge of World War 3 while an incompetent idiot is at the head of the largest military on the planet, and the nuclear launch codes at his fingertips.
So this happened today
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/irans-news-parliment-approves-bill-designating-u-s-military-terrorist-organizations-qassem-soleimani/
The Iranian parliament designated the US military and the Pentagon as terrorist organizations. Which ya know...fair. Realistically I don't think this will amount to much for now, other than any form of diplomacy being off the table. It makes the Secretary of Defense's statements today look all the more comical though. Esper asking for talks without any conditions is fucking funny considering what we did. Especially as Pence and Pompeo are openly undermining him by saying that Iran did 9/11. No one is on the same page and it's because a few fucking psychopaths in the White House are having wet dreams about an open war with Iran.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/irans-news-parliment-approves-bill-designating-u-s-military-terrorist-organizations-qassem-soleimani/
The Iranian parliament designated the US military and the Pentagon as terrorist organizations. Which ya know...fair. Realistically I don't think this will amount to much for now, other than any form of diplomacy being off the table. It makes the Secretary of Defense's statements today look all the more comical though. Esper asking for talks without any conditions is fucking funny considering what we did. Especially as Pence and Pompeo are openly undermining him by saying that Iran did 9/11. No one is on the same page and it's because a few fucking psychopaths in the White House are having wet dreams about an open war with Iran.
I find it very hard to believe that Iran - the famous bastion of Shia Islam - significantly backed an extremist Sunni organisation that is (partially) dedicated to wiping out Shias, who they believe to be heretics. It's possible, of course: terrorist groups tend to share in ways (the IRA had links to Islamic and Basque terrorists, for instance), and I certainly think Sunni and Shia groups will collaborate in various ways especially in convenience with a greater common enemy. And if it really had been a significant backer of Al-Qaida, isn't a bit surprising it took 18 years for anyone to notice or care?trunkage said:
Or is this "in part" in the same way we can equally argue that the USA is "in part" responsible for 9/11, for funding all that militia training and sowing chaos in the Middle East beforehand? "In part" in the same way that Saddam Hussein was accused of backing Al-Qaida with no reasonable evidence as a new justification for the Iraq invasion once the WMD bollocks started to fall apart?
This is post-truth politics, though, isn't it? Who cares what's said and what relation it has to reality as long as it shifts a few voters the right way.
So if, like me, you had no idea who Qassim Suleimani was few days ago, here's an article. Not that it matters much now.
Now, if i was into conspiracies, i could theorize of the Saudis arranging this whole supposed deal to lure Suleimani into open... Except he was never in hiding, afaik? So what would be the point?
Agema said:
I've heard about that, but i have trouble buying it. Saudi Arabia was the only country, besides Israel, that explicitely congratulated Trump on the hit, apparently.Seanchaidh said:
Now, if i was into conspiracies, i could theorize of the Saudis arranging this whole supposed deal to lure Suleimani into open... Except he was never in hiding, afaik? So what would be the point?
The "funny" bit is that we labeled the Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization specifically so we could "get away" with something like that assassination. It was a bullshit designation to be used as an excuse. I figure Iran thinks they're just returning the favor with that designation which, again, fair. However it does go to show how fucking dumb it all is.CaitSeith said:Nedoras said:It would be funny if it weren't for all the lives they are putting in danger."You are the real terrorists!"
"No, you are!"
This whole situation is infuriating on so many levels. This assassination fanned the flames on so many issues in the region and they fucking knew it would. I imagine the protests and calls for a more moderate government within Iran are going to die down. They gave the right wing in Iran a big banner to rally around. And their militias in the region are going to get more aggressive, which has been pretty damn fatal for the Iraqi protesters and the general populace at large. And who the hell knows what the US military is going to do at this point. Something that's been lost in all of this, is that Iraq wants both the US and Iran out of their fucking country. They've both been causing havoc in the region. Their country is being used as a proxy front and it's going to get a hell of a lot worse for everyone there.
EDIT:
Two US bases were hit by a couple dozen rockets a short while ago. The damage is still being assessed. Iran has said that this attack was their "vengeance". I imagine it was more a show of force than anything else. I don't think they were aiming to kill anyone and I'd be surprised if there are any casualties. Who the fuck knows how this administration will respond though.
EDIT 2:
Okay apparently they weren't just rockets, there were also ballistic missiles, which is something they haven't done before.
https://www.smh.com.au/world/middle-east/the-plane-is-on-fire-ukrainian-airline-crashes-near-tehran-airport-20200108-p53pu9.html
Okay, this is probably unrelated but the timing could not possibly be fucking worse.
Okay, this is probably unrelated but the timing could not possibly be fucking worse.
Allegedly, Iran provided warnings before the strikes. This would suggest a strike to uphold their honour and claim satisfaction, but minimalising casualties to prevent excessive inflammation. This would suggest they are attempting to call it quits, but it remains to be seen what the US administration will do in response.Nedoras said:
I certainly think the US response will tell us what their objectives from all this are. If violent, it suggests Trump and team have a policy aim of inciting conflict. Anything else, it's "mere" sabre-rattling and posturing.
In before the intelligence agencies are coming out here going "Iran did it!!!!! We need to fight them!!!" while they gleefully clap their hands at the opportunity for easy war propaganda. -_-Gordon_4 said: