While piece leads with depravity of school attack, and I’d add hospitals and leadership assassination, understand the geopolitics that the US is ruled by Israel first mandate, and Israel wants only destruction. Not a surrender and peace. Just as a nuclear deal with Iran would have entitled it to an opinion on Israel actions. Cruelty and illegality is the insurance to guarantee a unified angry Iran who’se only choice is to fight back. This is 100% the plan, and all idiocy of not understanding a plan is idiocy looking at the US to promote some humanist/liberal peace outcome instead of serving Israel’s demonism.
All US allies have their political capital and media as atlanticist/zionist supremacist propagandizers. As such, they are more likely to equivocate Iran’s self defense actions instead of strong condemnation of Zionist demonism, and threatening of rupturing of ties with Zionist allies to motivate a quick ceasefire. Waiting for Atlanticist/Zionist supremacist media to help sell demonism to the people of US colonies, is simply gaslighting concerns about demonic evil that will be applied to them all directly in the future.
Wtf is “demonism”?
while a specific demarcation line between human selfishness and demonism is fluid within personal conscience, most experts might agree that wanton mass murder and destruction for purposes of facilitating less opposition to future mass murder and destruction for wanton theft of the land of the murdered, can cross the lines of civilized human-considerate policy discussions, such that a demonic label is unanimously appropriate.
The kinds of atrocities you describe are violent imperialist and colonial policies. The word “demonic” is dehumanizing religious language used by nutjobs, bible-thumpers and MAGAts. It is especially problematic when used to describe a jewish institution (even if that institution is a genocidal apartheid state), due to the long tradition of antisemitism in Canada (we are both users at lemmy.ca I see) and the west in general.
Religious supremacism is used to justify the wanton murder and destruction to steal lands. Just because Zionaziism is a core tenet of some Jews, the orthodox reject the state as being agents of God/Judaism, and there are other jews who either respect the boundaries of civilization, oppose Zionism entirely, or focus on communal support. Nevermind, demonic Ashkenazi pig fuckers including themselves as semitic people to deflect from criticism of Zionaziism.
Property rights are foundation of civilization. Religious supremacism overriding foundational civilization principles must be labelled demonism. If there is a sentimental/religious value to land, then go ahead and buy or pray for it. That is only option consistent with humanism and civilization. Otherwise, why can’t I murder my neighbour and take his house while calling it God’s command to me? God telling me to do it last night, is not any less valid than using latin instead of greek translations of people who told history 4000 years before their time.
Normalizing Zionist supremacism with every lie their controlled media/politicians tell us is a core problem.
There is a whole bunch of antisemitic and racist language in your response, and I’m not going to follow you down that rabbit hole.
The only possible imagination of anti-semitism when criticizing Zionist supremacist demonism is that you view all jews as demonic.
Not interested in antisemitic gaslighting. This conversation ends here.
that chart in the article showing how Raytheon’s stock price jumped up right after we learned about that girl’s school was bombed is just so sickening
I’ve been incredibly frustrated to hear and read articles that boil down to “We bombed another country again, here’s what it’s doing to stock prices”.
And bombing of a girls school is a war CRIME. There is a subtle difference.
That BAAL statue…
Perhaps one of the most pointless wars in recent memory.
Most the the recent pointless wars all have one thing in common.
Religion + authoritarianism
And dat black, sticky-icky!
All wars are pointless.
Fuck no, some wars are entirely needed like the haitian revolution, or really any war fought against colonisation… Imagine if the chinese people hadn’t fought against imperialism, or the russian people against tsarism
It’s the Haitian revolution, not the Haitian war. Rising against your masters isn’t waging war, and fuck the language that conflates those two things. Defending yourself from invaders isn’t waging war. The invaders are the ones waging war, and thus war is pointless.
If raising an army and establishing a nation to fight another army defending it’s nation is not what war is then I don’t know what your definition is
What event are you referring to?
really any war fought against colonisation… Imagine if the chinese people hadn’t fought against imperialism, or the russian people against tsarism
So you’re saying the people banding together to overthrow their oppressors is waging war? That’s like saying killing someone violently raping you makes you a murderer. Its textbook victim blaming, and you should be ashamed of yourself. Revolutions don’t happen in a vacuum, they happen because of systematic abuses, i.e. a war waged by those in power against the people. Oppression is the start of the war, not the revolution. The revolution is self-defense, against the warmongers.
Defending yourself against imperialism isn’t waging war either. The imperialism is the warmongering, not the defense. Again, more victim blaming bullshit.
War is always bad. That not a condemnation of self-defense. Self-defense isn’t war, its a reaction to war.
A pointless war is a war with no goals. All wars has goals. This one is sbout creating a failed state for the usa to conquest easier the ressources and for israel to expand colonization
I think we should just get it out of the way and call it The Iran Genocide. We all know that’s where this is going.
But it’s what
AmericansIsrael wants!Queen Ghislaine wants!
Iran’s government needed toppling, but the ends do not justify the means. How you do something is just as important as what you’re doing, and this is being done in a horrible, unjustifiable way for deeply nefarious reasons, and the fact that some sort of good may come of it (though that remains yet to be seen) does not excuse the fact that most of it is really, really bad.
Iran’s government needed toppling,
Fun fact: The conservative religious state was formed when the US wouldn’t let go of proxy control of the country and it led to a revolution from US-hating hardliners and fundamentalists who overthrew the Shah and started a revolution in 1979. Whether or not the US’s installation of the Shah in the 50’s led to this outcome can be debated, but the fact is the US and Europe got really concerned that Iran was going to start managing their own oil and the oil around the region. (Iran was basically the center of the Middle East for a long time, and they could have easily risen to a first-world, progressive super-power if they had control over their own resources and elections.)
Iran’s government needed toppling
by whom?
… that’s exactly what I meant. Did you… not read the rest of the comment? What did you think I meant by “the ends do not justify the means?” The means include who did it, and how. I am saying they are not justified.
I don’t see who you think should do be the one to do the toppling, it’s a sincere question
The Iranian people, ultimately. Even if they will need outside help achieving it, I believe it still needs to be led by them, it needs to be both be conducted in a way and ultimately result in something the Iranian people consent to, and it needs to be done in good faith, not transactionally, and preferably with substantial international consensus. I don’t think good faith was even in the same timezone with what is happening here, and any possibility of consensus is weak and almost entirely post-hoc. I think genuine criticism is deserved for why it hasn’t happened before now, and even for why this kind of intervention became necessary in the first place, and maybe this is a better state than it has previously been in, but again, those ends still do not justify the means. The means have been wrong before this, and the new means are also wrong. None of it is justified, and none of it will justify the current situation or any of the places the current situation is going. I am not going to give it a “pass” just because it might end up in a better situation.
I think that’s a fair take if you mean that the Iranian people lead the revolution and outside help is only permitted if it works directly under the command of the iranian people. The reason people are so on edge about this is because there is a lot of US state dept propaganda about “liberating” the country, trodding out some opposition group regardless of popularity that is willing to work with the US regime. See for example VZ and machado as the latest example.
What actions by outisde helpers do you purpose?
Probably the same they do every time by working with the most violent groups so when shit goes down they end up with an even worse regime.
I am not an Iranian person, I don’t get to make proposals for them, nor do I want to. Go ask them. I won’t propose a right answer. I don’t know if there is one. But I can tell you with confidence that this answer is not right, and I am quite certain the Iranian people didn’t ask for what they’re equally certainly going to get.
There 90 millions Iranians so no I will not ask Iranians because each one has different opinions. There are even those who like what Israel and the USA are really doing right now . I don’t understand why you don’t want to clarify what outside help is
There will be no good from this… there’s no justification for killing thousands and thousands of innocent civilians.
This will be just like the Palestinian genocide.
There’s no plan other than bomb and kill.
With transparency and plans for transitioning out of violence after success/phases
No, countries should not go around invading other countries to effect regime change, regardless of how evil the leadership of that country may be. Change must necessarily come from the people, not foreign interests acting first and foremost for themselves. Time and time again toppling regimes has been the justification used to engage in wanton death and destruction, all the while being a pretense for something else. Just no. It needs to fucking stop.
Land taken and extended time period is war. Not splitting hairs here, but a few strikes to avoid discussing genocide or the Epstein files, does not a war make.
American internal politics are not the universal standard. The Iranian foreign minister has called it a war: https://www.wionews.com/world/-us-entered-war-on-behalf-of-israel-iran-slams-rubio-s-justification-of-pre-emptive-attack-1772524933052
I would assume he knows what he’s talking about.
Not a war, but they keep using that word. Journalism is dead
Is there no war in Ukraine either? Russia is quite specific to talk their “special military operation” there anything but a war.
Not a war?
Then the US is at war with world, and then the word has no meaning.
