| Forum Index > General Forum |
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. | ||
KwarK
United States43212 Posts
On June 14 2025 08:58 Legan wrote: How many countries have successfully been bombed into becoming liberal Western democracies? Especially without any ground forces occupying the country. Yeah, it's not a good strategy for anything other than short term keeping Iran from getting a nuke. | ||
|
Legan
Finland490 Posts
| ||
|
Billyboy
1242 Posts
On June 13 2025 23:11 Gorsameth wrote: Lets be absolutely real, the bill that forces weapon shipments to Israel to resume after Trump stops them as a means of leverage will be the fastest bill to ever pass through Congress and land on the Presidents desk with a veto proof majority. In theory Trump has leverage, in practice he absolutely does not. Interesting choice of words for your unproveable theory. What is it that makes you absolutely sure? Is it that congress has done such a good job of controlling Trump? Secret Cabal of Jews actually running things? Just vibes? Also, what makes you think that Trump did not want this? Or are you just getting in touch with your inner blackjack? On June 13 2025 23:15 WombaT wrote: Trump doesn’t really have that leverage either, and it wasn’t even something Netanyahu had to really work at. Trump went all-in on being Israel’s best buddy even from his first term. I guess it’s Trump and some of his base will forgive almost any U-turn, but how does he make any kinda flip now without annoying a decent chunk of them? He’s remarkably bad at making deals, he really is awful at it. I mean my point is that he did not want too. As for how he could change his mind though, that is kind of his thing. I forget how exactly it was worded recently by one of his allies but something along the lines of, Trump is not very stuck with or concerned with what he has said before. On June 14 2025 09:32 Legan wrote: That sounds like a really good way to make the region even more chaotic and open the door to another ISIS being formed. Like if you want Iran to be incapable of seeking nukes, you probably want them to be incapable of supporting organisations in other countries that could attack Israel. How much of the military and government needs to be killed to achieve this, and how close to dangerous collapse will it get the country? Much of the reason there is so much chaos is Iran. Israel is betting it won't get worse and that is a super low bar. But it does seem bottomless so maybe in 15 years people will be missing Khamenei but I sure hope not. Iranians deserve much better lives than they have now. | ||
|
ETisME
12512 Posts
On June 14 2025 09:32 Legan wrote: That sounds like a really good way to make the region even more chaotic and open the door to another ISIS being formed. Like if you want Iran to be incapable of seeking nukes, you probably want them to be incapable of supporting organisations in other countries that could attack Israel. How much of the military and government needs to be killed to achieve this, and how close to dangerous collapse will it get the country? Well Israel clearly is saying they aren't as concerned about the other events, than a nuclear arm bearing Iran. let's not pretend their concern about Iran getting close is out of nowhere. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/13/is-iran-as-close-to-building-a-nuclear-weapon-as-netanyahu-claims that with their newly revealed hypersonic missile system from last year, would reshape the power balance in the region and destabilising it anyways. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15723 Posts
On June 14 2025 09:32 Legan wrote: That sounds like a really good way to make the region even more chaotic and open the door to another ISIS being formed. Like if you want Iran to be incapable of seeking nukes, you probably want them to be incapable of supporting organisations in other countries that could attack Israel. How much of the military and government needs to be killed to achieve this, and how close to dangerous collapse will it get the country? Clearly not a good idea if we assume there’s zero chance of Iran getting nukes. And also clearly an extremely good idea if it prevents Iran from otherwise acquiring nukes. It all depends on that one critical assumption. And none of us will ever know for sure so it’s kinda not worth speculation. | ||
|
pmp10
3354 Posts
On June 14 2025 09:27 KwarK wrote: Yeah, it's not a good strategy for anything other than short term keeping Iran from getting a nuke. Why? Failed states are incapable of obtaining nuclear weapons or maintaining ballistic missiles necessary to deliver them. Especially if they will be regularly bombed and have it's chief personel assassinated. The real problem with potential Iranian collapse is that once regime is desperate it might do something drastic. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18113 Posts
On June 14 2025 09:09 Mohdoo wrote: I don't think Israel's objectives include trying to make them western or whatever. Focusing only on what Israel is claiming, they want to make sure Iran is entirely incapable of ever making a nuclear weapon. After they rip apart all of the various facilities they have, kill everyone involved with their nuclear programs, kill off all the military leadership, the path to making a nuke is unfathomably long and difficult. To your second point, I don't think Israel minds if regional powers capitalize on Iran's sudden weakness. As you and others have pointed out, converting Iran into some kinda ally simply won't ever happen. But Israel can definitely make Iran totally irrelevant to their military. As I understand, that's the only actual goal they have described. I don't think you can achieve that goal with missiles and black ops assassinations only. You need to invade. And that just isn't happening. So while Israeli missiles can, at great cost, hit some of the targets, they can't do the kind of crippling damage you claim they can. So where do they go from there? They haven't escalated Iran back into the stone age. They've escalated Iran into a place where they will redouble their pursuit of nukes, arming of anti-Israeli militia, and hatred of the west. But now with more of the population supporting their heinous policies, because they were "right" about Israel wanting to kill them all. | ||
|
Legan
Finland490 Posts
| ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6248 Posts
On June 14 2025 15:59 Acrofales wrote: I don't think you can achieve that goal with missiles and black ops assassinations only. You need to invade. And that just isn't happening. So while Israeli missiles can, at great cost, hit some of the targets, they can't do the kind of crippling damage you claim they can. So where do they go from there? They haven't escalated Iran back into the stone age. They've escalated Iran into a place where they will redouble their pursuit of nukes, arming of anti-Israeli militia, and hatred of the west. But now with more of the population supporting their heinous policies, because they were "right" about Israel wanting to kill them all. Will they? We saw the same predictions when they struck Iraqs nuclear programme but they never recovered. The same when they attacked Hezbollah yet now we see the Lebanese army regaining some control and Hezbollah watching this exchange from the sidelines. It's certainly possible that Iran will redouble their pursuit of nukes but the Iranian leadership might also conclude that the costs are too high after weeks of Israeli strikes and take a deal for sanctions relief. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21951 Posts
On June 14 2025 13:00 pmp10 wrote: Creating generations of people who hate you because your bombs killed their family has never worked out long term.Why? Failed states are incapable of obtaining nuclear weapons or maintaining ballistic missiles necessary to deliver them. Especially if they will be regularly bombed and have it's chief personel assassinated. The real problem with potential Iranian collapse is that once regime is desperate it might do something drastic. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43212 Posts
On June 14 2025 16:00 Legan wrote: If the collapse happens, I would hope that you would heavily blame Israel for causing the suffering of the people, but I highly doubt that. It will be just another case, nothing wrong done and no consequences. The Iranian government has actively pursued conflict with Israel, a country with which they have no overlapping or conflicting interests, as a matter of policy. They’re sovereign, they’re not children, they’re allowed to be fully responsible for their choice to start a war and then lose it. Every day Iran wakes up and decides that continuing this war is something they want to do and yet only Israel bares responsibility? | ||
|
Legan
Finland490 Posts
On June 14 2025 17:28 KwarK wrote: The Iranian government has actively pursued conflict with Israel, a country with which they have no overlapping or conflicting interests, as a matter of policy. They’re sovereign, they’re not children, they’re allowed to be fully responsible for their choice to start a war and then lose it. Every day Iran wakes up and decides that continuing this war is something they want to do and yet only Israel bares responsibility? And the same applies to Israel regarding the Palestinian genocide, right? They are not children, right? They know what they are doing and what happens to people when they do not have food and their homes are bombed to ruins, right? They also know that if they trigger nuclear strikes on their cities, it is because they decided not to give any other options to their opposition? Nothing else seems to stop them, so surely it is understandable that the opposition takes their only chance to stop them, just like this is taking the risk to prevent Iran from getting nukes. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43212 Posts
On June 14 2025 17:55 Legan wrote: if they trigger nuclear strikes on their cities Wanted to specifically highlight this part because it’s important for people, including you, to see exactly how broken your brain is. You’re describing Iran as putting a nuclear warhead on a missile, fueling it, targeting it at an Israeli city, and then launching it. The words you’re using to describe that process are Israel pulling the trigger to strike their own cities. But on the broader subject of which party is responsible for damage in an ongoing war, it really depends why they’re at war. A state of war happens when the parties have conflicting goals that they can’t resolve without resorting to war and so the reasonableness of those goals is the heart of the matter. If one side demands that you stop hitting them or else they’ll hit you back then that’s pretty reasonable. If one side demands that you let them hit you or else they’ll hit you harder then that’s not as reasonable. Israel and Iran are both choosing to fight the war but that doesn’t mean both made equally unreasonable demands that resulted in the state of war. We have to look at how we got here and that’s almost entirely on Iran. The Islamic Republic of Iran has, from its founding, attempted to position itself as the natural leader of the Islamic world. One key pillar of this has been leading state level efforts for the destruction of Israel. Iran doesn’t have competing interests with Israel over any of the normal drivers of conflict such as land or resources, this is a crusade. And like any crusade it’s not even really about the place you’re crusading against. You don’t go on crusade because you hate the Turks, you go on crusade because you hate the Franks and you’ll be damned if you let them present themselves as the natural leaders of Christendom. If anyone is going to have the prestige of being first amongst equals then clearly it should be us. It’s not really about Israel, it’s about Iran’s own sense of identity. It’s about what it means to position yourself as the leader of the Islamic world. It’s about the supposed foreign corruption of their chief rival Saudi Arabia. It’s about Sunni vs Shiite. In 1979 Israel was 3 decades old and had won each of the previous Arab Israeli wars. Egypt had signed a peace treaty with them and regained lost lands, state level war with Israel appeared to be over, the Islamic states had fought and failed. The newly formed Islamic Republic stepped into the vacuum. Their demand of Israel has always been very simple and very unreasonable, that there not be an Israel. This is a negotiating position that is very difficult for Israel to meet because one of Israel’s core requirements is that it continue to exist. The irreconcilable conflict in demands led to war and here we are. I find the Gazan demands of Israel to be, at their core, extremely reasonable. The Gazan demand is essentially “we really don’t like living in the prison camp with the bombs falling on it, can we go home”. But the Iranian demand of Israel is essentially “destroying you would really make the saudis look dumb and show everyone how we’re the best candidate for a new caliphate so if you wouldn’t mind letting us” and I just don’t see it as reasonable. Israel doesn’t want Iran to do anything other than leave it alone. Within the context of their conflict with Israel I find the Iranian position incredibly unsympathetic, on any given day they could get a peace deal in an hour without giving up any land or treasure by just saying the magic words “we acknowledge the existence of Israel”. That’s all that is asked of them. There’s plenty of precedent, we saw Egypt gain land through peace with Israel, a peace that has now held for half a century. We’ve seen it work. Israel is not so lucky, there are no magic words they could say to get Iran to leave them alone. But if they insist on being at war with Israel, and it really does seem to be a core part of the ideological framework of the Islamic Republic, then I don’t see how it’s not on them. That doesn’t mean Israel doesn’t have any discretion in the various different ways they could conduct their side of the war, they can chose between A, B and C and they own the relative consequences resulting from that. I’ve stated repeatedly that I think escalation by Israel is unsound and unlikely to get them the result they want. But what Israel can’t choose, what isn’t available to it as an option, is not to be at war. | ||
|
Broetchenholer
Germany1947 Posts
When did Hezbollah and the houthis start firing at Israel? It started largely after Israel began to bulldoze Gaza. Iran this time largely reacted to the Hamas / Israel conflict and to me it looked like they were completely embarrassed by what their associate had done. They knew being involved with Hamas after that was really bad and they tried to not escalate the conflict further. Israel did not care. Did Israel send rockets to Qatar? No, only evil Iran. Hamas is not Iran. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9716 Posts
On June 14 2025 18:51 KwarK wrote: Wanted to specifically highlight this part because it’s important for people, including you, to see exactly how broken your brain is. You’re describing Iran as putting a nuclear warhead on a missile, fueling it, targeting it at an Israeli city, and then launching it. The words you’re using to describe that process are Israel pulling the trigger to strike their own cities. You never seem to point this out when people blame Hamas for Israel starving and bombing Palestinians. In fact I'm pretty sure you have blamed Hamas for Israel bombing and starving Palestinians, many times. Can we agree that this assigning of blame depending on whatever point someone feels like making is a poor rhetorical trick when blame is shared all around. It makes the most sense to assign responsibility for actions that were directly initiated by that party. For example, Israel is entirely responsible for denying aid and starving the population of Gaza, just as Iran or whoever would be responsible if they nuked Israel. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6248 Posts
On June 14 2025 19:01 Broetchenholer wrote: Hezbollah and the houthis are Shia militias and as such clear proxies of Iran, the only Shia power. They have clear geopolitical agendas and also are used to shoot at Israel. Hamas is not. Hamas is a Sunni terrorist group that is financed by Sunni regimes, and they also get money and expertise from Iran, because they hurt Israel. When did Hezbollah and the houthis start firing at Israel? It started largely after Israel began to bulldoze Gaza. Iran this time largely reacted to the Hamas / Israel conflict and to me it looked like they were completely embarrassed by what their associate had done. They knew being involved with Hamas after that was really bad and they tried to not escalate the conflict further. Israel did not care. Did Israel send rockets to Qatar? No, only evil Iran. Hamas is not Iran. That's rewriting history. Hezbollah started firing rockets on October 8. Current leader Qassem said the following o October 13: Hezbollah deputy chief Naim Qassem said on Friday that the group would not be swayed by calls for it to stay on the sidelines of the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, saying the party was "fully ready" to contribute to the fighting. "The behind-the-scenes calls with us by great powers, Arab countries, envoys of the United Nations, directly and indirectly telling us not to interfere will have no effect," he told supporters gathered in the southern Beirut suburb for a rally. source That's weeks before Israel invaded the Gaza strip. At that moment nobody even knew what the Israeli response would look like. Iran was also not embarrassed. They were actively praising the attacks and pledging support. Iranian government officials congratulated Hamas on its surprise attack on Israel early Saturday morning, expressing support for “anti-Zionist resistance” across the region. As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that Israel is “at war,” Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Nasser Kanani praised Hamas. “What took place today is in line with the continuation of victories for the anti-Zionist resistance in different fields, including Syria, Lebanon and occupied lands,” Kanani told the semi-official news agency ISNA. Government-backed Tasnim News Agency reported that a top military adviser to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi, pledged Iranian support to the Hamas operation against Israel. 'We are at war': Netanyahu responds to surprise Hamas attack Meanwhile, Iranian state television showed clips of parliament members standing and chanting “Death to Israel” and “Palestine is victorious.” source | ||
|
PremoBeats
534 Posts
On June 14 2025 17:55 Legan wrote: And the same applies to Israel regarding the Palestinian genocide, right? They are not children, right? They know what they are doing and what happens to people when they do not have food and their homes are bombed to ruins, right? They also know that if they trigger nuclear strikes on their cities, it is because they decided not to give any other options to their opposition? Nothing else seems to stop them, so surely it is understandable that the opposition takes their only chance to stop them, just like this is taking the risk to prevent Iran from getting nukes. I think there are critical differences in intention, context, and responsibility. For Israel, October 7th was not just a mass casualty event - it was the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust. The scale, brutality, and intent behind the attacks go far beyond politics or land disputes. This was not a mere escalation... it was an attempt to terrorize, to massacre civilians in their homes, to take hostages, to erase communities. Imagine living through what, proportionally, was the equivalent of 10 to 12 9/11s. In proportion, over 35k would have needed to die at the twin tower attack and over 7k would have needed to be kidnapped. A nation reeling from that trauma does not need to justify its need to defend itself, it is rather a necessity for survival. That is categorically different from a regime like Iran's, which for decades has made it an explicit goal to eliminate Israel, funding and arming proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah to attack civilians. This isn’t a dispute over borders or sovereignty - this is ideological warfare against the very existence of a country and its people. The very religious fundamentalism that drives the genocidal charter and actions of Hamas. Is Israel above criticism? Of course not. I don't know any user in this forum that did not call for investigating the war crimes committed by Israel. And war causes immense suffering, and the toll on civilians in Gaza is insufferable and tragic. But to call this a "genocide" is to weaponize the term and erase the context: Israel did not seek this war; it was attacked. It is not trying to eliminate a people; it is trying to dismantle a terror infrastructure embedded within a civilian population (and is doing so at lower or equal numbers than similar conflicts). So no, I don’t see these situations as morally or strategically comparable. There’s a difference between defending your people from annihilation and using others as human shields in a proxy war you’ve chosen to escalate for decades. Nations are sovereign, yes... and with that comes full responsibility for the wars they choose to start and the consequences that follow. Iran chose this, not Israel. On June 14 2025 20:07 Jockmcplop wrote: You never seem to point this out when people blame Hamas for Israel starving and bombing Palestinians. In fact I'm pretty sure you have blamed Hamas for Israel bombing and starving Palestinians, many times. Can we agree that this assigning of blame depending on whatever point someone feels like making is a poor rhetorical trick when blame is shared all around. It makes the most sense to responsibility for actions that were directly initiated by that party. For example, Israel is entirely responsible for denying aid and starving the population of Gaza, just as Iran or whoever would be responsible if they nuked Israel. Entirely responsible? After the numbers on how much calories have entered Gaza and how much the population needs have been published? The bursting warehouses by Hamas have been found? The reports that described how Hamas tortured Gazans that tried to "steal" aid? Was Israel wrong in blocking aid to the north even though they publicely announced their plans to starve out Hamas? Yes. Did the bombing of convoys worsen the situation? Of course. But don't you think that Hamas, doing what it always does - misusing or stealing funds, aid and food as well as complicating human corridors - plays a major role as well? | ||
|
Billyboy
1242 Posts
On June 14 2025 19:01 Broetchenholer wrote: Hezbollah and the houthis are Shia militias and as such clear proxies of Iran, the only Shia power. They have clear geopolitical agendas and also are used to shoot at Israel. Hamas is not. Hamas is a Sunni terrorist group that is financed by Sunni regimes, and they also get money and expertise from Iran, because they hurt Israel. When did Hezbollah and the houthis start firing at Israel? It started largely after Israel began to bulldoze Gaza. Iran this time largely reacted to the Hamas / Israel conflict and to me it looked like they were completely embarrassed by what their associate had done. They knew being involved with Hamas after that was really bad and they tried to not escalate the conflict further. Israel did not care. Did Israel send rockets to Qatar? No, only evil Iran. Hamas is not Iran. Hamas is Iran, if Wagner attacked Finland out of Belarus no one would be wondering why Finland was so mad at Russia. If Hamas was actually what you think they are their whole strategy wouldn't be based on having as many Palestinians die as possible and they wouldn't make their bases, armories and so on under hospitals, schools and daycares. You can keep hating Israel as much as you want but there is no need to describe Hamas as anything other than what they are. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12320 Posts
On June 14 2025 20:07 Jockmcplop wrote: You never seem to point this out when people blame Hamas for Israel starving and bombing Palestinians. In fact I'm pretty sure you have blamed Hamas for Israel bombing and starving Palestinians, many times. Can we agree that this assigning of blame depending on whatever point someone feels like making is a poor rhetorical trick when blame is shared all around. It makes the most sense to assign responsibility for actions that were directly initiated by that party. For example, Israel is entirely responsible for denying aid and starving the population of Gaza, just as Iran or whoever would be responsible if they nuked Israel. The worst thing with KwarK is that he used to know better, he has posts explaining literally all of this to others before october 2023. It's also, like, not rocket science, you know. Hamas is responsible for the people it kills, Iran is responsible for the people it kills, Israel is responsible for the people it kills. That's how killing works. But suddenly we have to have this tedious dance where a government who has like hundreds of genocidal quotes attributed to it is killing a large amount of people and going for more wars, but maybe the responsibility is on the people being killed because they didn't react correctly to 75 years of oppression of Palestinians. Extremely silly, and depraved. | ||
|
Billyboy
1242 Posts
On June 14 2025 22:43 Nebuchad wrote: The worst thing with KwarK is that he used to know better, he has posts explaining literally all of this to others before october 2023. It's also, like, not rocket science, you know. Hamas is responsible for the people it kills, Iran is responsible for the people it kills, Israel is responsible for the people it kills. That's how killing works. But suddenly we have to have this tedious dance where a government who has like hundreds of genocidal quotes attributed to it is killing a large amount of people and going for more wars, but maybe the responsibility is on the people being killed because they didn't react correctly to 75 years of oppression of Palestinians. Extremely silly, and depraved. Are you suggesting that when a major world event happened Kwark's perspective changed based on the new information. What a monster. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
OSC
Kung Fu Cup
Classic vs Solar
herO vs Cure
Reynor vs GuMiho
ByuN vs ShoWTimE
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
RSL Revival
Solar vs Zoun
MaxPax vs Bunny
Kung Fu Cup
WardiTV Korean Royale
PiGosaur Monday
RSL Revival
Classic vs Creator
Cure vs TriGGeR
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
