|
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. |
On June 16 2025 00:11 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2025 00:04 Nebuchad wrote:On June 15 2025 23:45 Mohdoo wrote:
It’s very clear Israel and the west monitored the situation until it was far enough along or Iran to be widely condemned, providing the cover to strike like this. Public support for Israel in the West is at an all-time low before this, I think most likely the only thing that they were closely monitoring was my ballsack. I doubt the context in which Israel is buried at -50 net favourability in most of western Europe and around 50% in the US is the context in which they can attack another country, in a way that is so obviously not self-defense that even the liberal media is calling it an attack, and have their enemies widely condemned instead of them. Compare the stuff Macron is saying about Israel vs Iran to the stuff Macron says about Israel vs Gaza. It’s not critically important, but it does matter to some extent. Think about all the other folks Israel could have killed when they assassinated the Hamas leader in Tehran. Whatever their reason, they are showing us very clearly right now they were using a lot of restraint previously. Whatever their reason, it’s apparently totally gone now
All of this is quite standard and doesn't support your initial claim that this was a closely monitored time to be doing this or that they had the right amount of cover. A much more likely outcome for doing this, in my opinion, is that even more people see Israel as very clearly causing issues in the Middle East and that support for it tanks even more. I guess it's hard for me to gauge how it's going to play in the US but the proportion of people in Europe who think this is a good thing is probably similar to the proportion of people who support Trump, absolutely negligible numbers.
|
United States43672 Posts
On the subject of people blocking essential aid from getting to Gazans there should be 100x more criticism of Hamas than Israel. A large part of Hamas’s business model is to intercept all essential aid heading to the Gazan people, seize it, warehouse it, and resell it at markup. Aid groups aren’t permitted to just give people food and medicine for free, it has to go to Hamas who use access to essentials for leverage.
Obviously it’s despicable for Israeli politicians to say “why not simply starve the entire population of Gaza until in desperation they kill Hamas and return our hostages”. Collective punishment is abominable and the population of Gaza is mostly innocent children. People calling out that rhetoric are absolutely right.
But it’d be nice if the people who can correctly identify that denying food as a means of control would be wrong as a hypothetical when Israel is being talked about would also recognize that its the status quo under Hamas. That’s why there are Hamas controlled warehouses full of food. That’s why the American aid pier got attacked by Hamas.
If they get their ceasefire, if Israel withdraws from Gaza and allows Hamas to resume their mafia government, then the weaponization of food as a means of control over Gazans returns. If that’s genocide then maybe let’s not put the genocidal people back in charge.
|
The implemented tactic in the North was destined to fail. Hamas simply shoots fleeing civilians or erects road barriers. Unfortunately, they don't only have Israeli hostages.
|
Northern Ireland26342 Posts
On June 15 2025 23:18 Billyboy wrote:@ Jankisa Show nested quote +The major issue I have with the rhetoric of people in this thread is claiming people who have issues with Israel's conduct are broken brained when the same people leveling these kind of accusations are the ones that decided that what Hamas did on October 7th gives Israel free reign to do whatever kind of violence and escalations. I don't think anyone here holds this position. I think there are are people you can put in two camps though. One that thinks everything is Israel's fault. And others who put blame on both in varying degrees. There used to be a Israeli fella on this thread who could have given eloquent and informed info on the Israeli position and how different groups within Israel felt but he was chased away with hate. Anyone here mad at Iran for launching massive missile and drone volleys with no even attempt at hitting military targets?
Not really my recollection. They got pretty standard pushback on their positions and decided not to engage subsequently, they weren’t ’chased away with hate’.
Which is a shame nonetheless but let’s not frame it otherwise.
I’d personally prefer Iran not to do such things. They’ve been attacked by a state, not paramilitaries however.
They’ve also been attacked at a deliberate time of Israel’s choosing where they relaxed certain protocols based on the US negotiations.
Iran’s overall stance is clearly reprehensible, but what nation on Earth wouldn’t respond?
Either the US and Israel collaborated here, in which case why trust either? Or the US was in the dark which indicates Israel can do what it wants essentially and doesn’t think there’ll be US pushback.
Neither scenario is going to be remotely palatable to Iran.
|
United States43672 Posts
On June 16 2025 01:04 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2025 23:18 Billyboy wrote:@ Jankisa The major issue I have with the rhetoric of people in this thread is claiming people who have issues with Israel's conduct are broken brained when the same people leveling these kind of accusations are the ones that decided that what Hamas did on October 7th gives Israel free reign to do whatever kind of violence and escalations. I don't think anyone here holds this position. I think there are are people you can put in two camps though. One that thinks everything is Israel's fault. And others who put blame on both in varying degrees. There used to be a Israeli fella on this thread who could have given eloquent and informed info on the Israeli position and how different groups within Israel felt but he was chased away with hate. Anyone here mad at Iran for launching massive missile and drone volleys with no even attempt at hitting military targets? Not really my recollection. They got pretty standard pushback on their positions and decided not to engage subsequently, they weren’t ’chased away with hate’. Which is a shame nonetheless but let’s not frame it otherwise. I’d personally prefer Iran not to do such things. They’ve been attacked by a state, not paramilitaries however. They’ve also been attacked at a deliberate time of Israel’s choosing where they relaxed certain protocols based on the US negotiations. Iran’s overall stance is clearly reprehensible, but what nation on Earth wouldn’t respond? Either the US and Israel collaborated here, in which case why trust either? Or the US was in the dark which indicates Israel can do what it wants essentially and doesn’t think there’ll be US pushback. Neither scenario is going to be remotely palatable to Iran.
I think most nations in Iran’s specific military position wouldn’t respond honestly. They don’t have much of a diplomatic leg to stand on given that 8 months ago they launched a huge volley of missiles at Israeli cities (though I did very much enjoy when Jankisa explained that Iran hadn’t attacked Israel directly since the last time they attacked Israel directly). Their military has been shown to be completely outmatched. Their planned deterrent system of counterstrikes through proxies has been eliminated. There’s no viable path to military victory.
So if they’ve lost militarily then the question becomes “what must they give up in defeat”. What are Israel’s demands of Iran? What great price must the Iranian people pay to secure an end to the war?
Israel is demanding that instead of spending all of the wealth of Iran on missiles and proxy forces and nuclear programs with the intent of destroying Israel they instead spend it on schools and hospitals and so forth.
If Britain were in a shooting war with the US and the price of peace was increased NHS funding without tax increases then I’d absolutely want the British government to stop returning fire. I’d absolutely want them mashing that surrender button. Lots of Arab nations have surrendered to Israel and done very well out of it.
|
Yes all Israel wants is for Arabs to have good schools and healthcare <3
What's that?
They might actually have an ulterior motive for wanting Iran to disarm? No way.
If I was Iran, and Israel wanted me to disarm, I might point out that I'm surrounded by US military bases, and that the US and Israel are already in the middle of one genocide, so I think I'll just keep my weapons, thanks.
|
United States43672 Posts
On June 16 2025 01:15 Jockmcplop wrote:
Yes all Israel wants is for Arabs to have good schools and healthcare <3
What's that?
They might actually have an ulterior motive for wanting Iran to disarm? No way.
If I was Iran, and Israel wanted me to disarm, I might point out that I'm surrounded by US military bases, and that the US and Israel are already in the middle of one genocide, so I think I'll just keep my weapons, thanks.
Iranians aren’t Arabs and if you don’t know that then you’re probably not informed enough to have an opinion. But setting that to one side let’s consider if Israel’s demands for peace are more than they appear. When Egypt made peace with Israel they were rewarded with land, money, and a lasting peace. If this is all part of the secret plan then it’s a long plan, they’ve been at peace for almost 50 years now.
But in any case, nobody is asking Iran to disarm. We’re at the point where Iran is being disarmed whether they want to or not. They’re not giving up military power by surrendering, they’re gaining it. An Iran that is both heavily armed and committed to the destruction of Israel is intolerable to Israel. Iran has so far refused to budge on the destruction of Israel part and so they’re having the heavily armed part taken away from them. If they truly believe that it’s essential to be heavily armed then it’s an absolute necessity that they compromise on the destruction of Israel. Refusing to do so is how they get disarmed. Egypt is heavily armed. Saudi Arabia is heavily armed. Turkey is heavily armed. Iran could be too if it wished to be.
|
On June 16 2025 01:04 WombaT wrote:
Either the US and Israel collaborated here, in which case why trust either? Or the US was in the dark which indicates Israel can do what it wants essentially and doesn’t think there’ll be US pushback.
There is no US pushback against a military bombing campaign that tries to pressure Iran to end the nuclear program via negotiations.
Escalating it into a regime change operation or an outright attempt at state destruction might be even beyond Trump's limits.
|
What's your opinion of Chamberlain, Kwark?
|
The US is basically acting like a bodyguard for Israel while it commits genocide, steals land, and bombs other countries.
WASHINGTON (AP) — American air defense systems and a Navy destroyer helped Israel shoot down incoming ballistic missiles Friday that Tehran launched in response to Israeli strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities and top military leaders, U.S. officials said.
The U.S. has both ground-based Patriot missile defense systems and Terminal High Altitude Air Defense systems in the Middle East capable of intercepting ballistic missiles, which Iran fired in multiple barrages in retaliation for Israel’s initial attack.
A Navy destroyer in the eastern Mediterranean Sea also shot down Iranian missiles heading toward Israel, one official said.
The United States also is shifting military resources, including ships, in the Middle East in response to the strikes.
The Navy directed the destroyer USS Thomas Hudner, which is capable of defending against ballistic missiles, to begin sailing from the western Mediterranean Sea toward the eastern Mediterranean and has directed a second destroyer to begin moving forward so it can be available if requested by the White House, U.S. officials said.
American fighter jets also are patrolling the sky in the Middle East to protect personnel and installations, and air bases in the region are taking additional security precautions, the officials said.
apnews.com
|
United States43672 Posts
On June 16 2025 01:33 Nebuchad wrote:
What's your opinion of Chamberlain, Kwark?
A damn fool whose refusal to accept the blindingly obvious truth let the world be dragged into a war that killed tens of millions. Hitler wrote a book about his plans and had it published but somehow Chamberlain didn’t know what Hitler was planning. There’s a whole lot of revisionism about how Munich actually bought Britain time to rearm and it’s all bullshit. The German army broke down on the way into the Sudetenland. They had no capacity to wage war in 1938. The treasury that funded the war in 39 was the Czech one. The tanks that broke France were Czech tanks that were surrendered to Hitler without a shot. The Black Orchestra had a military coup against Hitler ready to go in 1938 in the event that war broke out because they knew Germany could never win. If Hitler continued his brinksmanship then they were going to remove him the moment war was declared. Chamberlain saved Hitler, enabled Hitler, armed Hitler. He did the right thing in the end over Poland but by then he had destroyed his own credibility to the point that Hitler refused to believe Chamberlain would ever show any backbone.
|
On June 16 2025 01:43 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2025 01:33 Nebuchad wrote:
What's your opinion of Chamberlain, Kwark? A damn fool whose refusal to accept the blindingly obvious truth let the world be dragged into a war that killed tens of millions. Hitler wrote a book about his plans and had it published but somehow Chamberlain didn’t know what Hitler was planning. There’s a whole lot of revisionism about how Munich actually bought Britain time to rearm and it’s all bullshit. The German army broke down on the way into the Sudetenland. They had no capacity to wage war in 1938. The treasury that funded the war in 39 was the Czech one. The tanks that broke France were Czech tanks that were surrendered to Hitler without a shot. The Black Orchestra had a military coup against Hitler ready to go in 1938 in the event that war broke out because they knew Germany could never win. If Hitler continued his brinksmanship then they were going to remove him the moment war was declared. Chamberlain saved Hitler, enabled Hitler, armed Hitler. He did the right thing in the end over Poland but by then he had destroyed his own credibility to the point that Hitler refused to believe Chamberlain would ever show any backbone.
Good opinion imo, it takes an idiot to think that fascists can be contained through negociations. Although I will say inbetween that post and the last I read about the importance of pacifism in the british context inbetween the two world wars, and I thought that was quite interesting.
|
|
|
On June 16 2025 01:28 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2025 01:15 Jockmcplop wrote:
Yes all Israel wants is for Arabs to have good schools and healthcare <3
What's that?
They might actually have an ulterior motive for wanting Iran to disarm? No way.
If I was Iran, and Israel wanted me to disarm, I might point out that I'm surrounded by US military bases, and that the US and Israel are already in the middle of one genocide, so I think I'll just keep my weapons, thanks. Iranians aren’t Arabs
How embarrassing.
And in the most sarcastic thing I posted in ages too.
:/
|
On June 16 2025 01:15 Jockmcplop wrote:
Yes all Israel wants is for Arabs to have good schools and healthcare <3
What's that?
They might actually have an ulterior motive for wanting Iran to disarm? No way.
If I was Iran, and Israel wanted me to disarm, I might point out that I'm surrounded by US military bases, and that the US and Israel are already in the middle of one genocide, so I think I'll just keep my weapons, thanks.
This will probably fall on deaf ears, but is there documented/leaked intent for a genocide or genocidal military orders as with China, Myanmar, Sudan or Bosnia?
Most Iranians are ethnically Persians. Arabs are a total minority in Iran.
|
On June 16 2025 00:26 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2025 00:11 Mohdoo wrote:On June 16 2025 00:04 Nebuchad wrote:On June 15 2025 23:45 Mohdoo wrote:
It’s very clear Israel and the west monitored the situation until it was far enough along or Iran to be widely condemned, providing the cover to strike like this. Public support for Israel in the West is at an all-time low before this, I think most likely the only thing that they were closely monitoring was my ballsack. I doubt the context in which Israel is buried at -50 net favourability in most of western Europe and around 50% in the US is the context in which they can attack another country, in a way that is so obviously not self-defense that even the liberal media is calling it an attack, and have their enemies widely condemned instead of them. Compare the stuff Macron is saying about Israel vs Iran to the stuff Macron says about Israel vs Gaza. It’s not critically important, but it does matter to some extent. Think about all the other folks Israel could have killed when they assassinated the Hamas leader in Tehran. Whatever their reason, they are showing us very clearly right now they were using a lot of restraint previously. Whatever their reason, it’s apparently totally gone now All of this is quite standard and doesn't support your initial claim that this was a closely monitored time to be doing this or that they had the right amount of cover. A much more likely outcome for doing this, in my opinion, is that even more people see Israel as very clearly causing issues in the Middle East and that support for it tanks even more. I guess it's hard for me to gauge how it's going to play in the US but the proportion of people in Europe who think this is a good thing is probably similar to the proportion of people who support Trump, absolutely negligible numbers.
All that matters at the end of the day is the US. I was just using macron as an example of how in terms of global optics messaging BS, this timing appears to have been ideal. We already know Israel could have done this a long time ago. Or maybe it took them this long to get the IAEA to issue their statement for cover. No clue. All I’m saying is if they waited until now, I guess they did so for a reason.
|
United States43672 Posts
On June 16 2025 01:48 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2025 01:43 KwarK wrote:On June 16 2025 01:33 Nebuchad wrote:
What's your opinion of Chamberlain, Kwark? A damn fool whose refusal to accept the blindingly obvious truth let the world be dragged into a war that killed tens of millions. Hitler wrote a book about his plans and had it published but somehow Chamberlain didn’t know what Hitler was planning. There’s a whole lot of revisionism about how Munich actually bought Britain time to rearm and it’s all bullshit. The German army broke down on the way into the Sudetenland. They had no capacity to wage war in 1938. The treasury that funded the war in 39 was the Czech one. The tanks that broke France were Czech tanks that were surrendered to Hitler without a shot. The Black Orchestra had a military coup against Hitler ready to go in 1938 in the event that war broke out because they knew Germany could never win. If Hitler continued his brinksmanship then they were going to remove him the moment war was declared. Chamberlain saved Hitler, enabled Hitler, armed Hitler. He did the right thing in the end over Poland but by then he had destroyed his own credibility to the point that Hitler refused to believe Chamberlain would ever show any backbone. Good opinion imo, it takes an idiot to think that fascists can be contained through negociations. Although I will say inbetween that post and the last I read about the importance of pacifism in the british context inbetween the two world wars, and I thought that was quite interesting.
The pacifism thing is true and important and if I was writing a much longer answer then I’d go into the unimaginable trauma of WW1 on Britain and France. How deeply “the war to end all wars” was scarred into the national psyche. I think nations that didn’t experience WW1 properly (and I’d include the US in that) don’t understand that trauma. They don’t understand that on Nov 11 we don’t celebrate the troops, we remember the great tragedy that was imposed upon a generation of young men. We remember the horror and futility of war.
|
I like how the arguments here boil down to: "but Hamas is worse" and "but Iran wants the Jews dead".
All the things that happen in the meantime, the clearly fucked up "aid distribution" tactics Israel does, the attack on Iran just before the next round of nuclear negotiations don't matter.
Yeah, Hamas is a theocratic death cult with 0 redeeming qualities, Iran's government is also an insane theocracy, Israel on paper isn't, so why spend most of your time explaining away all of their shitty, aggressive, escalatory moves. They will not be reasoned with, and they will most certainly be bombed into submission, there is 0 historic precedence for that, so all you are doing by providing explanations how Israel has the right to do whatever they want is giving tacit approval.
I will never understand the heartlessness of these arguments, the absolute lack of giving a shit about the 99 % of the population that just wants to live their lives.
|
On June 16 2025 01:59 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2025 00:26 Nebuchad wrote:On June 16 2025 00:11 Mohdoo wrote:On June 16 2025 00:04 Nebuchad wrote:On June 15 2025 23:45 Mohdoo wrote:
It’s very clear Israel and the west monitored the situation until it was far enough along or Iran to be widely condemned, providing the cover to strike like this. Public support for Israel in the West is at an all-time low before this, I think most likely the only thing that they were closely monitoring was my ballsack. I doubt the context in which Israel is buried at -50 net favourability in most of western Europe and around 50% in the US is the context in which they can attack another country, in a way that is so obviously not self-defense that even the liberal media is calling it an attack, and have their enemies widely condemned instead of them. Compare the stuff Macron is saying about Israel vs Iran to the stuff Macron says about Israel vs Gaza. It’s not critically important, but it does matter to some extent. Think about all the other folks Israel could have killed when they assassinated the Hamas leader in Tehran. Whatever their reason, they are showing us very clearly right now they were using a lot of restraint previously. Whatever their reason, it’s apparently totally gone now All of this is quite standard and doesn't support your initial claim that this was a closely monitored time to be doing this or that they had the right amount of cover. A much more likely outcome for doing this, in my opinion, is that even more people see Israel as very clearly causing issues in the Middle East and that support for it tanks even more. I guess it's hard for me to gauge how it's going to play in the US but the proportion of people in Europe who think this is a good thing is probably similar to the proportion of people who support Trump, absolutely negligible numbers. All that matters at the end of the day is the US. I was just using macron as an example of how in terms of global optics messaging BS, this timing appears to have been ideal. We already know Israel could have done this a long time ago. Or maybe it took them this long to get the IAEA to issue their statement for cover. No clue. All I’m saying is if they waited until now, I guess they did so for a reason.
The most likely reason being, of course by a mile, that Netanyahu had some court date (or something? I didn't really look in details sorry) pending and now he can't go
|
On June 16 2025 02:02 Jankisa wrote:
I like how the arguments here boil down to: "but Hamas is worse" and "but Iran wants the Jews dead".
All the things that happen in the meantime, the clearly fucked up "aid distribution" tactics Israel does, the attack on Iran just before the next round of nuclear negotiations don't matter.
Yeah, Hamas is a theocratic death cult with 0 redeeming qualities, Iran's government is also an insane theocracy, Israel on paper isn't, so why spend most of your time explaining away all of their shitty, aggressive, escalatory moves. They will not be reasoned with, and they will most certainly be bombed into submission, there is 0 historic precedence for that, so all you are doing by providing explanations how Israel has the right to do whatever they want is giving tacit approval.
I will never understand the heartlessness of these arguments, the absolute lack of giving a shit about the 99 % of the population that just wants to live their lives.
I can't name a single user that hasn't addresses the plight of the Palestinian population or didn't call for the Israeli officials and soldiers who committed war crimes to be held responsible. Collective guild on the Gazans was heavily criticized.
Still, the main reason that things aren't heating down for Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran is religious fundamentalism. Hadn't Hamas attacked with genocidal intent and execution on October 7th like its charter says and hadn't Iran enriched to 60% (being non complient with NPT safeguards for the first time in 20 years) - far from the 3,67% limit and closing in to 90% weapon grade, all of this escalation in the past 1,5 years would not have happened.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
