We (the US) just bombed Iran last summer. We are moving the largest buildup in decades of armament and materiel to Iran's doorstep RIGHT NOW, and it seems extremely likely we are about to bomb them again.
What exactly do you want to happen here? In your view, am I taking the side of the Ayatollahs because bombing isn't enough and we should be nuking Tehran instead?
It's telling that perceived tacit support of an Iranian regime — which America is more hostile to perhaps more than any other nation on the planet — is more disturbing to you than the deaths of 20k+ children in Gaza.
It's not, really, if you are now ignoring all of the dictatorial theocracies that we support enthusiastically, and focusing on the ones that America is looking for an excuse to intervene in.
And this is not a "why focus on this thing when there are other things" fake argument. These protests were engineered by people with the intention of intervening, and a lot of that engineering the involved manipulation of western media narratives and the creation of fake organizations to become sources of information. It's not coincidence or luck that you're focused on Iran; people were sitting around planning an invasion of Iran and part of their planning was "How can we get the public to focus on Iran enough to give Congress cover to ignore another Executive war?"
The actual narrative, undisputed by even the people involved, is that
1) a currency crash was intentionally instigated in Iran by the West, which caused protests. We have bragged about this.
2) Many of the educated Iranian middle class joined these protests to argue against the regime in general, which they always do.
3) US and Israeli-supported terrorist organizations took advantage of those protests (like a black bloc) to start burning down buildings and burning cops alive, armed by the west and networked through smuggled Skylink terminals,
4) the US and Israel bragged that the protests were materially supported by covert western intelligence in order to push the crackdown to atrocity levels, and to eliminate even the general public's support for the protests (which would be some restraint to the government.) They literally said that many of the protesters were Mossad agents. You might as well be saying "please kill them." It's as if Al Qaeda announced that they were materially supporting and completely infiltrating BLM protests, and when many BLM activists were arrested, they were carrying Al Qaeda satellite terminals and arms smuggled from Pakistan.
(The Iranian middle class was even out, because they aren't traitors, they just don't want to live in a theocracy. The West are who turned Iran into a dictatorship by replacing Mossadegh with the Shah. The West helped Iraq use chemical weapons against Iran. We care nothing about Iranians, we just want to steal from them. We're thieves, and we're consciously moving to a economic strategy of piracy in order to take advantage of our navy.)
5) The US moved as much navy to bear on Iran as it did when it invaded Iraq, and said that unless some magic words were said that nobody knows, it would invade.
You might be comfortable being manipulated like this, but I am not.
The case for intervention in Iran is much stronger, from the perspective of the United States, if you zoom out and realize that a larger fight in the Pacific is brewing and it would be wise to remove a player from the board who would happily provide access to fuel and refining capacity to PRC. Not saying I agree with this, necessarily, but it helps to steel man the more sophisticated cases when you are trying to understand complex geopolitical events.
To the extent that the protests are being "engineered", certainly there are elements of that, but why wouldn't there be and why would that be bad a priori? The regime is uniquely terrible in the world, and if you listen to Iranian ex-pats who fled it seems clear a lot of the kids that supported the revolution in 1979 quickly realized that it was a mistake, and that they underestimated the extent to which the new regime would prioritize regressive islamism over actually addressing what were at the time legitimate economic inequality issues.
>it would be wise to remove a player from the board who would happily provide access to fuel and refining capacity to PRC.
Washington has an easier way to do that: namely, to use its navy and the Sentinel Islands (controlled by Washington ally India) to prevent the transit of tankers from Iran to China.
Yes, possibly, but running an indefinite blockade or interdiction operation is still costly. It is lower in complexity in terms of operational capabilities required than a decapitation strike against the potential co-belligerent, although this is rapidly changing, but in order to effectively run one you are dedicating a very sizable percentage of your overall combat power away from the front. Additionally, I am skeptical that the Indian Navy could handle such an operation independently. Their fleet size has grown over the last decade, but, as alluded to, interdiction operations are increasingly complex so they would likely need assistance at least at the beginning. It's also, I think, a stretch to call India an "ally" per se of Washington today (maybe "partner" would be more accurate), and I find it hard to believe that India would effectively enter into a world war on behalf of the United States.
There is an argument to be made that a maritime interdiction operation is a better approach, and the information I would need to decide definitively which approach I think is better is likely very classified.
> all my friends who posted non-stop about supporting Palestine
> I'm saying if you were a very vocal pro-Hamas activist
Palestine ≠ Hamas
Pro-Palestinian ≠ Pro-Hamas
If you genuinely don't believe a significant number of people support the former but not the latter, I... don't even know what to tell you. It certainly says a lot that you can neither distinguish these two nor believe anyone else sees a distinction.
> They don't consistently care about any particular type of human suffering. Just opposing Zionists
People are not numbers for your narrative.
Whether on a population chart or on a death chart.
Again: you're ignoring more than half a century of history and extremely relevant differences regarding how each got into their current situations, whom the involved parties were, what the current situations even are, and what their futures might look like... and more.
Just because the number of deaths appears to have reached a similar order of magnitude that does not mean anyone who fails to display the same reaction to the situations the two groups of people have been in is a hypocrite.
Maybe you should ask a few Palestinians before making such statements.
Polls made by respected Palestinian surveyors show immense support for Hamas by Palestinians [1]. If you dig inti the polls, you’ll find great support in continuing the armed conflict. I’ll add: to the last man standing.
While I agree with you that Hamas and the Palestinians are not one thing, Hamas would not be able to operate the way it did (and still does to an extent), without broad support from the population.
Even still, that data does not refute the parent's point that you are making a false equivalency.
Polling Israeli or US citizens on the extremist groups they support would be similarly dishonest; organizations like ICE, Blackwater and Irgun cannot be fairly conflated with their respective populations regardless of how the majority feels.
"Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas. This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank."
Right, the current Israeli administration is horrible, especially the far right that keeps it alive. I invite you to oppose that government and help the opposition take power. Instead, you’re making the opposition weaker by putting all the Israelis in one basket.
You should read about the Oslo accords and the failed talks at Camp David. This is to say that Israel has been trying for a long time to make peace with the Palestinians. Them not wanting has led most to give up and stop fighting the extremists.
Dont need your victim theatrics, we both know who made that comment. We both also know Ben gurions private correspondence and what the plan always was for Israel.
We both know the majority of Israel supports the settlements and the status quo in Gaza, but maybe not the last few years. We both know they went out to protest against the punishment of your rapists.
Oslo and David talks included poison pills so that Palestinians would never agree to it. While I believe that Hamas should not exist I do believe the powers in Israel wants them to.
Essentially everyone but Israel supports the 1967 borders today, but Hamas does not recognize Israel, just like Israel didn't recognize Palestine in the Oslo accords, that would also allow settlements in the west bank to continue.
The Oslo accords were supposed to lead to a Palestinian state. The exploding busses in Tel Aviv didn’t help.
I don’t know what Ben Gurion’s private correspondence was, but it sure binds me, a millennial!
Your aggressive rhetoric doesn’t impress anyone, instead it signals your emotional gut response, probably an ill informed one.
You already hate me, a stranger, and nothing I will say will make you reconsider your position. That is because you hold it because you want to, and not because of real investigation.
What Ben gurion wanted has not changed. I'm I'll informed yet you have no idea what your country really was from the start.
Not sure if it's feigned victimhood or if you feel guilty for what your country is doing. Either way you seem to take what your country does personally.
Yes, and if you poll Israelis about their views of Palestinians, you'll find that the majority want to exterminate them all. What does that say about Israel? Fucking nothing except that we shouldn't be funding either of them. And we aren't arming Hamas.
What matters is that pro-Palestinians aren't calling for the extermination of Israel, while Zionists are clearly calling for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. Wanting the war to end does not automatically make you a Hamas terrorist, obviously.
I don’t know, these chants of “river to the sea” accompanied by signs with maps of israel fully covered with a Palestinian flag tell me the opposite.
> if you poll Israelis about their views of Palestinians, you'll find that the majority want to exterminate them all
Can you point me to that poll, or is that just your opinion?
> Zionists are clearly calling for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza
First of all, you clearly don’t know what Zionism is. Hell, it means different things for different people. Let me help you out: for most Israelis, Zionism is about independence and sovereignty for the jewish people.
While there are Israelies who want the Palestinians out, only the crazies are actually considering it as a plausible reality. These crazies gain more political power the more the general population loses its faith the Palestinians are wanting peace, as opposed to fighting to the last man standing. You should read about the Oslo accords and the later failed talks at Camp David.
Lastly, wanting to vote for Hamas is absolutely not about wanting the war to end, as Hamas is a perpetrator of it. How did you make this astonishing logical leap?
It sounds crazy to me, and indeed very disturbing if it was true. However if it was true, I would have known at least one person to fit the image they’re portraying. I know none.
I tried to find the original publication, but all I found was press coverage. Specifically I’m interested in the demographics - who was asked these questions, aside from the religious attributes that they name.
The correct course of actions is to reexamine your beliefs in light of the new evidence that was presented to it, not shut off your mind completely. If you still doubt its truth, you can easily get more with a quick google search. Also, it's not like Israel's government ever tried to hide their genocidal rhetoric (well, outside of the PR they serve the West, of course).
I did spend quite some time trying to find the original publication to no avail, thank you very much. If it’s so easy, maybe you’ll be kind enough to help me. Just let me know if you find an actual rigorous paper or just an outrage piece meant to horrify everyone.
I am aware of this rhetoric you mention, I hate it myself, but I believe that it’s populist bullshit, just like most things this government is saying, including stuff that doesn’t get worldwide coverage, and are intended to cause outrage and get media coverage. This pattern (sadly) repeats in most western nations nowadays.
If there was ever an actual intent to get rid of the Palestinians, you would get an order of magnitude more dead. The means exist, not the intent.
Israel was prepared for peace a long time ago. Nowadays Many Israelis are convinced that the Palestinians don’t want peace, but rather a fight to the death. This thwarts any hope of trying for peace again on the Israeli side.
> Maybe you should ask a few Palestinians before making such statements. Polls made by respected Palestinian surveyors show immense support for Hamas by Palestinians
I never made the statements you're suggesting I did to begin with.
> Hamas would not be able to operate the way it did (and still does to an extent), without broad support from the population.
Leaving aside whatever "still broad, to an extent" means: I never claimed otherwise, regardless. Certainly they have their share of supporters.
What I'm pointing out is that the parent's "friends who posted non-stop about supporting Palestine" are not (probably not? or hopefully not, at least in their view?) pro-Hamas or pro-genocide.
Heck, I imagine they're probably not local Palestinians or in the surveyed population here to begin with. And the rest of the people around the world supporting Palestinians clearly aren't, either.
> I agree with you that Hamas and the Palestinians are not one thing
One, is it actually? (EDIT: I don't think it is [1]. This seems to be another case where American pro-Palestinian activist culture may be getting confused with actual Palestinian culture.)
Two, I'm going to be almost everyone in America wearing one doesn't know that. (We're not the most internationally-literate population. I can't even begin to imagine what fraction of #StopKony posters in the early 2010s could have placed Uganda on a map.)
> all my friends who posted non-stop about supporting Palestine
> very vocal pro-Hamas activist
> Wearing the kaffiyeh is explicitly pro-Hamas and Genocidal towards Israel. It's pretty simple.
OK, simple enough. And you said you are friends with such pro-Hamas, pro-genocidal people?
> I know know why you insist on acting
You clearly neither know what I'm doing (certainly it's not acting), nor why, but feel free to believe as you wish.
> like that's not happening.
Nobody said that's that's not also happening. What I said is there are many, many pro-Palestinians who emphatically do not support Hamas, and you're lumping them together with people who support both (yes, they also exist).
If anyone is insisting on anything, it's you insisting on not making the distinction between these positions or groups, for some reason. And apparently on keeping said pro-Hamas/pro-genocide people as your friends (?!) but I'll avoid speculating why; I imagine you must have extremely compelling reasons.
>That crowd only seems to care if they can actively oppose Israel or the current administration
Can you think of any motivating reasons for the crowd to focus on Israel specifically? Last I checked, the American government isn't sending billions of dollars of weaponry and political cover to the Iranian government, so that is one massive reason why protesting Israel makes more sense.
>have not made a peep about the thousands of Iranians recently murdered by their regime
I don't protest to signal my moral outrage, I do it to effect change in my elected leaders. It's not my responsibility to devote an equal amount of attention to every injustice — ignoring the cause and effects in that injustice with direct connection to politicians beholden to me — because people like you will find it "disturbing".
That's projection. Because it is nearly impossible in practice split support as you claim you are. HAMAS is the government in Gaza. They intercept any and all aid that isn't administered directly to Palestinians. Also the questionable version of the history of the region that you have to believe (or be completely ignorant of the history) to support the Palestinians is entirely a HAMAS narrative. If you actually knew the history, you would know that while all Palestinians moved to the Levant voluntarily in the last 150 years, most of the Jews in Israel were moved by force by Muslims. If Palestinians were upset by lots of Jews in the Levant, they should be mad at other Muslims countries as they were the ones who moved most Jews there.
You just make these claims to avoid any accountability of your actions. That tracks because the HAMAS narratives completely do the same, so its easier for you to accept.
PS Most of the videos that swayed you were AI generated.
> PS Most of the videos that swayed you were AI generated.
This is an absolutely insane and downright insulting claim to make about anyone. You should feel ashamed of saying something as utterly indefensible as this.
So what you're saying is that Palestinians all deserve to die because they gave their support to HAMAS when their neighbor was slowly colonizing their land and expropriating them. Meanwhile, the US should provide Israel with as much weapons and funding as necessary to help them achieve their overt genocidal agenda. And the people that call for the killings to end are actually just terrorists that you don't have to listen to. Got it.
So you want you elected leaders to save Palestinians (perfectly reasonable), but don't want your elected leaders to consider doing something out when thousands are being massacred in the street?
You really think if the US wasn't supporting Israel, no one would have cared about Gaza?
> So you want you elected leaders to save Palestinians
I don't want that. I want them to stop paying Israelis with our money to kill Palestinians. If they want to do atrocities, they can do it on their own dime.
When talking about Israel, it's always couched in terms of universal human rights. When confronted with their lack of advocacy for the human rights of practically anyone else, their cognitive fallback is that they only care for what they feel the U.S. government is responsible for, and that it's not really about universal human rights, and never was. Then, when no one is paying attention anymore, they swing back to being avowed universal human rights activists who just happen to be condemning Israel.
People were angry at the world allowing a genocide to occur and at their own countries actively supporting that genocide.
It was also a genocide going on for several years allowing momentum to build and anger to grow. The most recent Iranian uprising lasted a few weeks.
I would be more upset that Trump told the poor Iranians to protest and that he would support them if violence was used against them - and he let them die by the thousand. He told them "help is on the way". It wasn't.
You've been breaking the site guidelines quite a lot in this thread by posting flamebait and crossing into personal attack. That's not ok, regardless of how wrong other people are or you feel they are.
>I'm saying if you were a very vocal pro-Hamas activist
"Pro hamas activist" has become the calling card of deeply committed western and israeli islamophobes.
Much like their close cousins, the holocaust denying anti semite, they almost universally refuse to recognize the UN recognized genocide in gaza.
>That crowd only seems to care if they can actively oppose Israel or the current administration
Im sure if the current administration backed a genocide in another country they would passionately oppose that too. Unlike dedicated islamophobes, anti racists are consistent.
How would releasing the prisoners stop the settlers and other issues?
What Israel has been doing for decades at this point is completely unacceptable. Hamas is a bunch of terrorists, but in context they are the inevitable outcome of Israel's continuous mistreatment and ongoing antagonism against all of their neighbors stretching on for fifty years.
You really have to wonder what the hell is wrong with the Israelis that they can't stop being aggressive towards literally everyone around them.
Agreed that Israel could have taken another path the last couple decades, but it's also unreasonable to omit that they are surrounded by neighbors that want to kill them. Iran and their proxies.
What exactly do you want to happen here? In your view, am I taking the side of the Ayatollahs because bombing isn't enough and we should be nuking Tehran instead?
It's telling that perceived tacit support of an Iranian regime — which America is more hostile to perhaps more than any other nation on the planet — is more disturbing to you than the deaths of 20k+ children in Gaza.