588
US Fatally Bombs Wedding in Iran, Killing 4, Including Children (truthout.org)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/world@lemmy.world
175 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 2 months ago (34 children)

Iran shutting off the internet ultimately helped prevent Israeli penetration. Mossad had active elements stirring up unrest and terrorism in Iran.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 34 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (25 children)

    Cowbee, Iran shut off the internet because people were protesting for women's rights. This was years before the Israeli/American bombing campaign. Stop simping for authoritarian regimes. You sound like an American liberal the way you apologize for their actions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Mossad openly admitted to being active in Iran:

    Go out into the streets together. The time has come. We are with you. Not only from a distance and verbally. We are with you in the field.

    If Mossad's official Twitter account admitted this, how can you say that this wasn't a critical factor?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    You're dodging the subject. Israel has been fucking with Iran for decades, that's not the question. The question is why are you okay with Iran shutting down the internet to stop a women's rights movement?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    I'm okay with Iran shutting down the internet to stop a Mossad-backed color revolution intended to pave the way for the modern war against it. Do you think between the protests and the bombing of Minab elementary school that Israel and the US suddenly decided to get involved, or do you realize that this was a part of the actual plan the entire time?

    The people of Iran should be able to chart their own course, free from the interference of the genocidal US and Israeli attacks.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    ran shut off the internet because people were protesting for women’s rights

    Iran shut of internet because of organized attempts at insurrection using women's rights as an excuse. UK/US want another puppet in place shitting on gold toilets selling out the country cheap.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    Two things can be true. Personally I think women's rights are a great reason for insurrection.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    They weren't a reason. They were an excuse.

    What you are actually supporting is invading and subjugating Iran.

    Also, it is amusing how you (plural) keep speaking about women's rights when as supposedly a valid reason to invade other countries (a la the white supremacist fairy tale of "civilising savages") while your empire actually died stuff like the overthrow of the socialist government of Afghanistan that did improve women's rights.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    I never said I supported the invasion, you're putting words in my mouth. I said women's liberation is a good reason for people to rise up against their government, which is what an insurrection is. The US invasion of Iran is an act of imperialism intended to subjugate and exploit it, not an insurrection.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    I never said I supported the invasion

    You do support pro-NATO forces subjugating Iran for the benefit of invaders of Iraq and Afghanistan simply because of the pretense of "women's rights". The people that you support in this case do not care about women's rights.

    I said women’s liberation is a good reason for people to rise up against their government, which is what an insurrection is.

    These people claiming that they just want women's rights doesn't mean that that is what they actually struggle for.

    You are buying another round of Nayirah testimony/Iraq WMD and other such cases of propaganda.

    What is needed first and foremost right now is liberation from NATO, as it is the most major barrier for improving, as whichever group will try to sabotage the Iranian government - even if it will genuinely want things like women's rights - they will be used by NATO to just further (re-)subjugate Iran and wooden their living conditions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    You're ridiculous. The people I support are the Iranian people themselves, who did in fact protest over women's rights. Even if the goal of Mossad's support for the protests was to destabilize Iran in preparation for the US invasion, that does not make the protesters "pro-NATO forces," nor does it mean women's rights are nothing but a pretense. While that's certainly the case for Mossad, the protests were undeniably carried out by the Iranian people themselves to advance the cause of women's liberation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    The people I support are the Iranian people themselves

    You (plural) say this, but every time it is some CIA/NED-backed group. And inevitably it turns out that the only reasons you (plural) do so, is because your empire told you that those are the "good ones".

    Even if the goal of Mossad’s support for the protests was to destabilize Iran in preparation for the US invasion, that does not make the protesters “pro-NATO forces,”

    Yes, it does. They are literally used by NATO to maintain or strengthen colonial subjugation of the Global South.

    nor does it mean women’s rights are nothing but a pretense.

    For these groups, it is. Their actual goals are not to improve living conditions, but bring their countries under the heel of Washington.

    While that’s certainly the case for Mossad, the protests were undeniably carried out by the Iranian people themselves to advance the cause of women’s liberation.

    As in, the low-level members of the group thought that those were the group's goals?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    You (plural)

    You're lumping me in with a group I don't identity with because you're so dogmatic about your beliefs that you think anyone who contradicts them must be the enemy. I've said repeatedly that I don't support the war and that I oppose imperialism and yet you keep arguing as if I am in support of it. You speak about Iranians as if they are hapless pawns unable to think for themselves, insisting that the only reason they would protest against their government is if foreign intelligence agencies directed them to, which is actually a very colonial and condescending mindset for you to have. For an anti-imperialist, you sure like to dismiss the agency of people who are themselves victims of imperialism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    You’re lumping me in with a group I don’t identity with

    You might not voluntarily identify with the other people who are just supporting yet another group that conveniently serves NATO's interests, but so far there isn't a good case for your favourite groups attempting to improve the living conditions in the Global South.

    Hell, you actually admit that Mossad using such groups to (re-)subjugate countries in the Global South (and, thus, worsen the living conditions there) isn't enough for you to drop support for them.

    I’ve said repeatedly that I don’t support the war and that I oppose imperialism and yet you keep arguing as if I am in support of it.

    You can't claim that you do not support the war, and that you oppose imperialism (and, I assume, you also want to claim to oppose colonialism) while also supporting pro-colonial efforts that would only advance the imperialist and colonialist goals of NATO and opposing Global South states defending themselves against your empire.

    You speak about Iranians as if they are hapless pawns unable to think for themselves

    Where did I say that?
    In fact, the people of Iran have been struggling against you with a significant degree of success.
    If you meant that I do not support wannabe-compradors, then that's not an issue of thinking that people can't "think for themselves". The issue is that I do not support those wannabe-compradors.

    insisting that the only reason they would protest against their government is if foreign intelligence agencies directed them to

    Nowhere did I say that. I even pointed out that even in the cases where such groups do genuinely want to achieve better living conditions for the Global South, their efforts will be utilised by NATO to actually worsen those living conditions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago (12 children)

    He is literally a propagandist that never engages in good faith. I'm not sure if he works for republicans or actually believes his bullshit but he's definitely doing work for Putin.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (11 children)

    I have always engaged in good faith. I don't work for republicans or Putin, I spend time and money organizing as a communist.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (10 children)

    🙄

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (9 children)

    Is there a reason you spread disinformation about me?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (8 children)

    The majority of the fediverse knows exactly what you are cow.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (7 children)

    I doubt I'm that famous, but even if you're correct about that, that still doesn't explain the disinformation, ie allegations of LLM use, etc.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [+] 0 points 2 months ago* (7 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

    Might be anecdotal, but many more people tend to like me than hate me, especially to the degree you do. Especially considering the baseless accusations of LLM use, the subsequent dehumanization of me (ie, calling me an "engagement bot"), all of this is far more unserious than taking a consistent, principled line on the DPRK, a line shared by the Black Panther Party, Party for Socialism and Liberation, and the Communist Party of Cuba (PCC). The fact is, Marxist-Leninists have been sympathetic to the Korean socialist project since its inception, and its resistance to Japanese and later US colonialism.

    As for the idea that I am "trying to get the republicans elected," or that I have changed how active I am because of primary season, neither of these have any evidence. I do actual organization work, which means organizing against Trump and the capitalist state. I have agitated against both the democrats and republicans consistently, because I am a socialist, a Marxist-Leninist specifically. This consistent, principled stance does not make me "bad-faith," even if you yourself disagree with Marxism and Marxism-Leninism. I put my skin on the line and roll my sleeves up because I truly believe a better world is possible, if that's "bad-faith" then what would you consider to be "good-faith?" Anything you personally agree with? Would also like an example of how my understanding of theory is shallow, I love to know how to improve.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    I had to go through a stage of deliberately training myself to not great-(wo)man a few comrades, but I still love you all.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Haha, it's an easy trap. Socialism comes from the working class, while leaders are important we have to understand that the working class as a whole is the maker of history.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    You encourage people not to vote because you genuinely believe democrats and republicans are the same. This gets republicans elected, therefore you work to get republicans elected. You refuse to acknowledge the fundamental reality that third parties are wholly nonviable as a means of political change in the US. You refuse to acknowledge the currently successful strategy of primarying democrats with progressives and preventing republicans from winning in the general by any means necessary which in very nearly every instance explicitly means voting for the democrat. And you never actually directly address criticisms you don't have a questionably sourced talking point for, hence the commonly held opinion you use ai for your comments. You're not a serious person.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    I encourage people to not treat voting as the primary source of political engagement anyone has. For me, it does not matter who people vote for, as revolution remains necessary. That isn't to say Republicans and Democrats are the same, they do have some differences, but their overall function as maintainers of imperialism leads to critical conclusions: trying to "push the democrats left" is a failed endeavor and cannot work.

    I don't believe third party voting is a meaningful way of gaining political change, because I don't believe reformism works. The purpose of third party political participation in elections is to prove the ineffectiveness of reformism, to advertise the party platform, and to gain new members. This is the extent that socialists understand elections to be genuinely effective.

    The current wave of the DSA successfully primarying establishment Democrats is a signifier of increasing socialist sympathies. However, and this is critical, it will not lead to socialism. It will also not end imperialism, and therefore it will not be able to stop the gradual decay of the current capitalist system. There are hard limits to what reforms can accomplish without revolutionary change.

    I have no idea what criticisms you are referring to that I haven't challenged, if you have an example I'm more than happy to address it. As for accusations of LLM use being "common," I've only ever seen you and one other user make such an accusation, so again, not sure where you're getting that idea. Also not sure what you mean by "questionably sourced," if you have an example of a source you are skeptical of, then please let me know.

    I am in fact a serious person. I have fun too, of course, but I have been consistent in my socialist views and advocacy, and active in real life. I put my words into practice because I want a better world. Am I Lenin 2? By no means, I don't have such a high opinion of myself. Do I put in effort? Yes, I spend hours every week outside of work continuing my organizing and education/study efforts.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    But the protests for women's liberation were real, and the Iranian regime shut off the internet during those protests in order to suppress them. Even if Mossad was involved in stirring up that unrest it does not justify the state crackdown, nor can it be denied that there is grassroots support for women's liberation in Iran. If you want your country to be less susceptible to manipulation by foreign agents your best bet is to give the people what they want so that they aren't negatively polarized against their government in the first place. Every injustice enforced is an exploitable weakness that your adversaries can seize upon.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    I agree that women's rights not only can, but should be improved in Iran. The important nuance here, though, is that social progress is severely stunted when a society is under active siege and infiltration. All states inevitably become more repressive than they otherwise would be when their legitimate security concerns are relentlessly violated. The quest of the Iranian people for social progress is interconnected with the quest of the Iranian people for sovereignty.

    Mossad infiltrating the protests, that started with legitimate grievances, exacerbated the violence in an attempt to weaken the Iranian state, preceding the war. It was deliberate, and not for the benefit of women in any capacity. Iranians now are more socially cohesive than before the protests ramped up precisely due to the resistance against imperialist aggression.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    I agree with all of that except for the inevitability of repression in a society under siege. Yes, that is a historical trend, but it's also a choice that leadership makes, and it's the wrong one. If the Iranian government made concessions on women's rights, queer rights, etc. while holding firm on national sovereignty it would reduce the level of negative polarization the Iranian people have towards their government giving Mossad less to work with to destabilize Iran.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago*

    I can agree with it being the morally wrong decision by leadership while also understanding that the progression of history is driven primarily by material conditions, rather than the actions of individuals. The social struggle in Iran is one that is driven by the consciousness of the masses in Iran, and their struggle at this moment is principally against Israeli and Statesian aggression. Unfortunately, the fight for women's rights in Iran cannot be genuinely struggled against when Israel and the US take every chance they can to leverage that into being able to commit genocide against the Iranian people.

    Would it be excellent if women's rights were improved from the top-down in Iran? Yes. Is it likely to happen? No. This is why taking a materialist analysis of the Iranian war and events leading up to it is so critical for understanding our historic moment.

    Regardless, the Iranian people presently near-fully support the IRGC and the Iranian government. Even if some do have a desire to socially reform Iran, achieving better rights, right now it's secondary by far to surviving the war and maintaining sovereignty. That's why these struggles are interconnected so closely.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    You should watch Johnny Harris' video about the Western puppet regimes installed in Iran.

    Maybe worry a little more about US laws restricting freedom for women lately.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago

    I've actually already seen this video, and it doesn't change my stance. Iranian leadership has a choice in how they respond to foreign manipulation and they do not have to respond with repression of their own populace for fear of their adversaries taking advantage of social unrest when they could instead reduce social unrest by making concessions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    You're taking to someone that unironically claims North Korea is a legitimate communist state. Also uses gpt for all their comments. If you're engaging in good faith you're wasting your time because cowbee is a pure tankie propagandist.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    I do belive the DPRK is a legitimate socialist state, yes. The economy is worker run and controlled. They are incredibly poor, largely due to sanctions, but like Cuba they stretch what they do have very far. That's also why Cuba and the DPRK have such strong and positive relations, with Cuba only recognizing the ROK in 2024.

    As for the idea that I use LLMs for any of my comments, that's false. I sometimes copy chunks from older comments if I have already addressed a topic in detail, but I have never used any LLM for any of my comments. No idea where this came from, other than the fact that some of my comments are longer, which really is just because I'm a yapper. I don't appreciate the baseless allegations of LLM use as a means to undermine my points, if you oppose what I'm saying, tell me directly.

    I am definitely a communist and a propagandist, I agree with that. I believe socialism to be necessary, and devote time and money to organizing work and outreach. I definitely fit the definition of propagandist as someone deliberately trying to get people to become sympathetic to socialism and communism and join an org, but that doesn't mean what I say is incorrect either. It's all true.

    If you disagree with what I have to say, tell me directly. Don't just lie to others about me in an attempt to undermine socialist talking points, it's enormously bad-faith to do so.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent