"Can’t Elon Musk do anything? What about Trump?”
Why would you not realize that those two fucks are just as insane as Khomeini?
"Can’t Elon Musk do anything? What about Trump?”
Why would you not realize that those two fucks are just as insane as Khomeini?
It's important when you read just about anything from articles to social media comments to even books to ask yourself two questions.
With all the instructions of "using the word capture regarding any Venezuela president news" to "Hamas under hospital" news and the justification of killing of children, to the biggest lie of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, we can statically say that any news regarding foreign policy related topics are aim to control the narrative and should not be believed.
These news media are private companies and control by billionaire class. Trusting them is not a good idea.
I never thought I'd see Lemmy so desperately supporting a theocratic dictatorship that allows women to be stoned to death for minor "offenses" to their archaic code, but here we are.
Yeah, got a comment removed as „islamophobic“, calling the regime islamofascists, while at the same time rooting for the people of Iran. Some people cannot comprehend, that the enemy of my enemy is sometimes just another dictatorial regime full of assholes.
For a lot of people on here, tankies especially, anyone that opposes the West is incapable of doing harm and must be defended at all costs. Human rights abuses are ignored so long as they can go "west bad". Like, yes, the West is indeed bad. That doesn't excuse the awful actions of the regimes that oppose them nor make it okay.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. A tale as old as humanity itself.
You're forgetting that nuance is forbidden. Anyone with a nuanced point of view is obviously a fascist sympathizer /s
Just kidding, fascists and tankies alike have no concept of nuance. They're cut from the same cloth...
very convenient to label anyone as tankie who is against liberal zionists. No is excusing wrong doings of the iranian govt, however we need to be real here, western regime changes have never been good and particularly how this is openly israel backed is even more problematic. Not to forget govt still has support in iran and in case of regime change it would lead to catastrophic civil war - surely that wont liberate women. I dont support religious theocracy but we need to deal with reality, what happened to the "lesser of two evils" you liberals yap about all the time?
Wait didn't we get women's rights in Afghanistan after bombing them for 20 years? Ah nevermind, I already moved on to the next big issue.
It sounds like you are against the protesters, which in reality is supporting the government...
I'm not against the protests, but I am 100% against the installation of a puppet shah through US/Israeli interference and intervention.
There's no good outcome here?
Yes. Supporting the government is in reality opposing Zionism. I know it's hard logic, but bear with me.
There is no alternative to the current government of Iran that is capable of organizing the military to defend against the US and Israel.
If the current government were to fall, the military would have a two-way fight that they would need to navigate, splitting their focus and creating mass paranoia.
It would be almost impossible to tell the difference between a legit revolution and a CIA color revolution, of which we have documented evidence.
So, if you oppose Zionism you must support the Iranian government, and if you support the Iranian people overthrowing their government TODAY then you support Zionism.
But you can be smarter than that and be like the rest of us who want the Iranian people to overthrow their government and since we want that the only way we can support them is by ending the threats from Israel and the US and Britain. If we can end the threats, then the Iranian people will have the safety to manage their own affairs.
Today, they are under siege and must not lose at all costs.
I say if Iranian people want to overthrow the current system then I'm all for it, rooting for the status quo against their will "for the greater good" sounds fucked up to me. Iranian people should be the one deciding the outcome here.
Each one if us want that, but at this moment it is not likely
It's not possible for the people of Iran to decide the outcome. That's what you're ignoring. If Iran was completely disconnected from this plane of existence, sure, do it.
But Mossad is literally operating inside Iran and has been for years. During the attempted decapitation attack last year, when Israel shot missiles from fighter jets into apartments of top scientists and politicians, it was also discovered that Mossad was operating entire buildings as forward bases, with large amounts of drones, munitions, and recon capabilities.
Yes, it would be great for the people of Iran to decide, but it would require them to weaken the control and capabilities of the state, which woul guarantee Israeli and US involvement immediately.
The reason the Iranian people are not able to change their government is because they are under siege.
Iranian people are opposing the current government and Israel and US are benefiting from that, it doesn't mean the Iranese will doesn't exist or that they're somehow subjugated or acting in orders by Israel and US. Suggesting that is frankly a bit offensive towards those protesting.
If you're looking for some pure revolution where there aren't any outside forces supporting the revolutionaries or benefiting from their actions, I don't think such revolution has happened in modern times.
Nah u dont get it. We have to patronize Iranians, because their government is anti-West. So they have to stay and suffer under this regime.
That's not the point at all. The Iranian people obviously have grievances. They have obviously protested before.
The point I am making is that it's literally not possible for the Iranian masses to defend themselves against Israel and the US if they undermine their government's security forces. The will of the people will be subjugated and instead of the Iranian people deciding how to run their country, the US will be deciding, just like last time when the US coup'ed Iran and determined how they would run the country.
The argument is not and has never been that each protestor is delusional and doesn't have real grievance and is instead brainwashed and controlled by Israel. The argument is that attempting to overthrow the Iranian government does NOT lead to national self determination but will lead to national subjugation by the US.
I'd say let Iranian people decide if they want to go for it or not, instead of supporting a brutal theocracy because you feel like it's for the "greater good". If Iranians want to go for it, I support it.
Again, we're not talking about supporting the greater good here. We're talking about Iranian people being subjugated by the the US and Israel. You can't just say "well let's see what the people choose" when Mossad is literally on the streets killing people. You're not understanding the situation.
The government is fighting against foreign intervention and an attempt at rerunning the color revolution playbook of the CIA and NED. The government will fight back. You don't get to ask the government to lie down and die in the face of foreign adversaries, it has a responsibility to stop that from happening.
The Iranian people are very clear that they do not want the US or Israel to intervene. They came out and protestrd Israel in huge numbers during the attacks against Iran.
Additionally, the news media is walking back their reports of mass killings. Last week it was 12,000. This week it's 1,200 with 5,000 being in investigated. Coroners reports are coming back with hundreds of victims dying of stabbing wounds, which indicates they weren't murdered by state police forces firing into crowds but rather were murdered by the crowds themselves.
You're dismissing the people's actual will and their own measure of the situation because of your own beliefs. And you're making the protesters out to be some foreign actors or foreign invasion. You're taking agency away from them and presenting them as some sort of puppets.
Mossad is literally on the streets killing people. You’re not understanding the situation.
The government is fighting against foreign intervention and an attempt at rerunning the color revolution playbook of the CIA and NED.
Quite handy for the government to dismiss the protests like that. Every single time there's an attempted popular uprising it's just foreign actors and whatnot, not actual popular will.
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-881733
This has nothing to do with the government dismissing the protests. Mossad is literally stating they are on the ground. Remember that they were also on the ground with a persistent presence during the attempted decapitation attacks last year. It's not like the Iranian government is just making shit up about active Israeli attacks.
And it's not like their making shit up about US CIA interference either. The major "human rights organizations" that have been in the news talking about the situation are almost all funded by the NED, a known CIA carve out that has openly taken credit for color revolutions in other countries.
https://www.mintpressnews.com/revealed-the-cia-backed-think-tanks-fueling-the-iran-protests/290638/
There things are well documented, have been well documented for decades, and we have evidence for them from as little as 6 months ago.
You can't just keep acting like there's no such thing as history and no such thing as context. This is not an offseason sporting match between two teams in a closed stadium. Iran is under active siege, in a "frozen" active conflict with Israel, and has been relentlessly attacked for years on end. And when color revolution is a weapon in the arsenal of empire, you're being willfully blind and signing up millions of Iranians for total subjugation by occupying forces.
Nobody is denying that Israel and US are involved. Like said, there's always going to be foreign involvement. What you are claiming is that the protesters are being controlled by them. And that's the line the government is also using while trying to suppress the protests, making the protesters out to be some puppets.
I never claimed the protesters are being controlled by them. Go ahead and read everything I have written in the topic. That's not my claim, it's never been my claim, and I am not arguing from that position. I do not believe the protesters are being controlled by them.
And that's the line the government is also using while trying to suppress the protests, making the protesters out to be some puppets.
The government is speaking in Farsi, not in English. The government is saying that Israeli forces are on the ground making the protests worse. Turning them violent. Killing police officers and burning buildings. They are not saying that all of the protestors are being controlled by foreign agents.
You are absorbing the propaganda of the regime change ghouls.
If you don't think they are puppets and doing the bidding of someone else, do you support the protesters who want to overthrow the government (assuming that there's enough popular will for that to happen), do you dismiss them because Israel and USA have an interested in seeing the government fall too or do you dismiss them on the grounds that you don't think they should do it?
The government is speaking in Farsi, not in English.
Wa waah.
I acknowledge that the protestors want their government to meet their needs. I do not support overthrowing the government at this time because regardless of the people's will, the government will be replaced with a US puppet and that will not allow the Iranian's will to be expressed.
I do not support overthrowing the government at this time because regardless of the people’s will, the government will be replaced with a US puppet and that will not allow the Iranian’s will to be expressed.
So you are against the people's will because you think you know better than the people protesting. And you feel they should suffer under a government they don't want because of that. That's quite something all right.
You're such an idealist. You have no idea what the people's will is. Each person has their own will and collectively the people of Iran have contradictory wills. There are people in Iran counter protesting the protestors. There is no single unified will.
Equally, these sorts of demonstrations being distorted through propaganda and covert ops is a known weapon. Color revolutions are a known phenomenon and the actors who drive them are known, and their mechanisms are known. The CIA used NED for decades to do exactly this sort of thing in many countries.
So no, your formulation is a strawman and a deliberately misleading bad faith interpretation of the situation and the position I am presenting
You have no idea what the people’s will is.
You just said how you don't support it regardless of the people's will. Even if the people did want it, you'd be against them. Right here:
I do not support overthrowing the government at this time because regardless of the people’s will, the government will be replaced with a US puppet and that will not allow the Iranian’s will to be expressed.
"I'm against people's will because I don't think them expressing their will will allow the people's will to be expressed. That's why I'm speaking against the people's will". It's funny.
Again. You have established as fact something that is not fact. I am saying that regardless of their will, their will is not going to win the day but instead either USA's will or the current Iranian government's will is going to win the day. The people will either defeat their government and create the conditions for the USA to subvert the will of the people or the people will not defeat their government. Those are the two options available based on the facts on the ground.
I cannot speak against the will of the Iranian people because no one knows the will of the Iranian people right now. There are different factions on the ground protesting and counter protesting and there are foreign governments distorting all of the information about who is protesting, how many are protesting, what their demands are, what they want, and what they're doing.
You are stating as fact that the will of the Iranian people is regime change when it is clear that there is not one single will of the Iranian people.
And while you claim to want to support the will of the Iranian people, you have no problem with supporting actions that will absolutely subvert the will of the Iranian people by subjugating them to foreign governments.
It's not funny. It's sick and it's sad.
I'm just quoting you. You said that even in the situation where their will was to overthrow the government you wouldn't support them.
And while you claim to want to support the will of the Iranian people, you have no problem with supporting actions that will absolutely subvert the will of the Iranian people by subjugating them to foreign governments.
You said that you are literally against their will happening...
No. I said IF it was their will I would still be against it because it would be contradictory, but YOU are the one claiming to know definitively what their will is and that therefore I am against it. I do not claim to know the minds of all Iranians like you do. The limited evidence I have access to is that the popular will is divided among several factions and understanding the factions at this distance is almost impossible given the direct and indirect foreign interference at all levels.
My statement is an assessment of the state of the game. IF it were the will of a super majority if Iranians to overthrow their government, THEN I would not support it because my assessment of the state of the game is that IF the government is overthrown THEN the USA will subvert the will of the Iranian people. It is structurally contradictory.
I think the Iranian people understand this. I hope they do. You clearly don't
I said IF it was their will I would still be against it
I don't think there's been any confusion about that. You wouldn't and don't support the people's will.
Why are you dismissing the will of millions of Iranians who don't want regime change? Why are you such a chauvinist that you think you speak for all Iranians?
I mean I was talking about the same hypothetical as you were. You wouldn't support the will of the people in a situation where it was to take down the theocracy and I would. I wouldn't be speaking for anyone, just supporting their own will in that situation.
Great, so in a hypothetical, you can feel morally superior to me. I'm OK with that.
It's a position you yourself took, not sure why you are upset with me
Because you're arguing a counterfactual to signal virtues instead of actually engaging in the analysis of the real world.
What if the Iranian people don't agree with your view of the "real world" and what they should do, according to you?
Stop trying to reduce to this personal ethic. "The Iranian people" are not a monolith. Some of them agree with this view of the world, others don't. They will manage it themselves.
You gotta stop imagining that everything is about moral correctness. The reason it matters what Yanks think about what other people should do isn't because it's a moral question but a practical one - Yanks will take their personal beliefs and then put 250k tons of depleted uranium bombs behind it.
When I say I don't support undermining Iranian national security, I am not saying that I would bomb civilians the way the US does when it says it doesn't support something. I don't think a foreign military should intervene to impose its view on the world.
But I for damn sure would engage in dialog and discourse about the topic and support my position with reasoning, history, and evidence.
Luckily I don't have to because there are millions of Iranians already having that discussion with a much better grip on the situation than I have.
My role in this discourse here is to argue with Western liberals and disabuse them of their bullshit moral superiorty driven by the empire's propaganda machine so they stop supporting the empire's agenda.
It seems you've just chosen a position with very little actual care for what the Iranian people want themself. Even going as far as you'd oppose them in their will if it doesn't align with what you think is best for them.
And it seems like you're incapable of actually having a conversation about this topic.
There is a lot to unpack here honestly. Let me say first that I support the Iranian people in their quest for reforms. For me the second thing is history.
The US has had its hand in regime change in Iran for a long time going back to the 1950s. They helped install a dictator and remove an elected democratic leader. This arguably lead to the revolution.
So people who know history are a little bit bitter with the US and allies bombing the fuck out of Iran while calling their people to rise up.
For me it's not so much supporting the Iranian regime but seriously doubting whether any outside interference will actually help the people. Because when has it ever done so?
It's ok they are a minority, hence the downvotes, I just wish Lemmy would auto hide/fold comments below -3.
Tankies are just nationalists for other countries, it's why they're so boring and predictable in their retoric and have no problem dehumanizing anyone they disagree with, especially women. They claim to be "socialist" or "communist", but really they're just MLs who worship Stalin (& other dictators) not because of any progress they achieved in the countries they dictated (it was often minimal beyond an initial boom due to getting rid of the previous dictator) but because they said cool rhetoric against the West (often while collaborating with Western capitalists or even Nazis).
They're also loud and unpopular, the way we beat them on Lemmy is simply to grow the userbase of normal users to the point where the tankies posting their insane takes is just background noise.
When I first made this comment they were up voted and the majority in the thread. Glad to see it reverse
My browser (Summit) auto-folds comments below some limit. I don't know what that limit is, but it's probably modifiable in the settings somewhere.
Please. Opposing intervention is not the same as “supporting the regime”. By the way, how did that theocratic dictatorship come to be?
And finally:
This is a garbage gotcha because you assume that I support the US policy of intervention.
I can both acknowledge that the current regime in Iran is a theocratic dictatorship and that the US has no buisness intervening.
I am equally capable of disliking the regime in Iran and the US.
If the regime falls this is great. If the US intervenes and forcibly topples the regime this is bad. As we've seen historically that leads to failure.
Maybe don't support a regime that allows for raped women to be murdered?
It is probably chatbots making these dumbass ad hominem arguments.
Yes same with Venezuela, regime bad, therefore war good, opposing war bad. As they are advocating for the worst people in the world to use military force.
That’s all good and well but the fact of the matter is that the U.S. and western allies are intervening, and we have intervened continuously since we overthrew their secular democratic government in 1953. Since the Islamic Revolution overthrew our puppet regime in 1979, we have crippled their economy with sanctions, assassinated leaders and civilian scientists, and bombed their country. Even if you believe these revolts are 100% organic, manifesting spontaneously with no assistance or encouragement from Mossad, CIA, etc (doubtful), the context is that the people have already been victimized and pushed to the brink by western powers as much as their own government. That is context that simply cannot be ignored, particularly since this looks a lot like 1953.
Even if you believe these revolts are 100% organic, manifesting spontaneously with no assistance or encouragement from Mossad, CIA, etc
So do you any proof of that or are you just really really sure that's true?
the context is that the people have already been victimized and pushed to the brink by western powers as much as their own government
And? Does this mean there's no possible way that these people are capable of not wanting to live under a theocratic dictatorship? Are you trying to imply they can't make that decision on their own? If so that's infantalizing and patronizing an entire group of people.
Or are you suggesting that the whole reason that this oppressive regime is in charge is because of the US? Because that is entirely true. You'll get no disagreement from me.
Also why are you wasting your time monologing on all the terrible things the west have done to the middle east and Iran? You'll get no disagreement from me. These were all bad actions. I don't see how that justifys a theocratic dictatorship that brutalizes its own population.
You can be anti-western intervention and anti-dictatorship. Actually based on your own source you so kindly provided these are one in the same. As your source said 73% of dictatorships are propped up by the US.
Nono, the Iranian people must please stay quiet and just accept their theocratic overlords, you see. They really don't like the US, so we must kiss their ass.
Mossad LITERALLY tweeted that they are on the ground with the protestors. Also, did you forget history? No not decades ago, last fucking year, Mossad was in Iran, in Tehran, with entire buildings kitted out with drones and munitions and recon and comms gear, coordinating and killing.
Yes there's oodles of evidence that Israel is literally on the ground in Iran right now attempting to overthrow the government, kill top officials, and disable defenses. What is wrong with your news consumption that you do not know this?
Here's a source, they explains it well, and better than I could https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4T5adNE0bMU
but be real, do you see any other alternative?
Be real, there is no revolutionary movement to occupy the power gap, wishful thinking can only get you so far
You seem like a trustworthy source. What is the Hannibal Directive?
Never heard of it before. From a quick search it looks like it's an IDF policy to not allow its own soldiers to be taken as POW (all articles say kidnapped but this is language just used to illegitimatize the forces fighting Israeli oppression) by any means necessary up to and including killing its own service members.
Seems like the policy was invoked and lead to Israel murdering its own civilians at the beginning of the most recent Gaza conflict/genocide.
So yeah Israel being terrible as usual.
What were you trying to bait me into?
Just trying to see if you're an Israel shill. Like when you suspect that someone online is a Russia bot, you ask for a cupcake recipe. If you suspect someone is an Israel shill, you ask what the Hannibal Directive is. I think it's a fair suspicious than someone speaking against Iran online, it's a good chance they're a CIA/IDF account.
it's a good chance they're a CIA/IDF account.
Yeah not really. That's an insane take actually.
People get so drawn into their camps and start viewing the world in a good or bad binary that doesn't reflect the real world at all. The world is messy and there are a lot of oppressive regimes, and they often oppose each other. Just because one bad regime opposes another bad regime doesn't mean that you have to pick one to be "good" and to support.
Well, I choose to believe you're more than a useful idiot, and are getting paid for your take. But just to be sure, can you write the words "Hannibal Directive"?
"Dance for me so I can determine if you are an idiot or a paid shill!"
While I want to help with your delusions that a horde of paid CIA operatives follow you around all day, you basically said if I do that you'll call me an idiot.
So I guess I'll be CIA today
Huh, so it does work, and I was right.
My man, you need to seek professional help, whatever chamber you got your theories from is hurting you
Are you allowed to say the words? Sorry, I'm new to this, and I'm still trying to gauge what's even allowed to be mentioned. And don't give me some "Hannibal Lectar" type of thing that hints at it either.
Hey man, you think you're smarter than you are. You think you can be the only one who's right. In the comment above you said they're either an idiot or a agent. Do you really think they're going to play your game if you're being an asshole? Best case for you, for the way you're behaving, people ignore you. Worst case, you push them away from you. Maybe you're the agent?
And what was I called in the comment before I said useful idiot? I didn't start it.
In this particular comment thread, I don't see anyone calling you anything before then. They said you might be trying to bait them into something, but that's it.
Also, who gives a fuck who started it? That's a game babies play. You can be the better person if you actually want to do good.
See that "insane" word? Also, hold up, are you allowed to say those words?
Yes dude, I can say Hannibal Directive, say Israel is committing a genocide, and still call you a fucking idiot. Not everyone who is annoyed with your bullshit is some secret agent out to get you, if you actually believe that.
I think instead you're using that as a way to dismiss criticism. It lets you ignore what anyone says about you until they play your silly game. Even after they do, you'll probably come up with some other reason to dismiss it, because it's harder to accept criticism than to just pretend like the critic must be a shill, spy, crazy, or whatever other reason you come up with.
Thank you, all I asked for. Who started it might not matter with words, but it does when it comes to genocide. I don't go around blaming jews for the holocaust for burning the Reichstag building, so why would I blame Arabs for the current genocide for the Hannibal Directive. And I don't care about criticism of me, it's not about me, or you, or any one particular person. If anything, I'm doing the criticism of everyone online who wants to bomb Iran, and wants to kill them for being violent. So being a paid shill is the only explanation I came come up with for having that opinion.
Bro plenty of these anti Iran shills are just liberal idiots who have no object permanence about the region and so are easily moved by corporate media tugging at their heart strings.
In the business they call them useful idiots. Its why neocons have had their way since 2001.
I take your point though that a lot of these online posts are.being astroturfed by Zionists
Heh, you should read my other comments here. I used that exact phrase. I had higher hope though.
I never thought
Jury's out on that.
Lemmy so desperately
[ citation needed ]
I don't see Lemmy 'desperate' for anything.
supporting
[citation needed]
I do not see Lemmy 'supporting' anything.
You can be my first citation
So we agree you may not know how to cite a valid source.
Dude, there's not gonna be a peer-reviewed article on comment sentiments in lemmy comments. Just look at the fucking thread and see for yourself
there’s not gonna be a peer-reviewed article on comment sentiments in lemmy comments
or is there?
Ive seen alot of liberal zionists here, that should be more problematic to you.
Your definition of supporting is not supporting the US and Israel vs Iran War II. So yes, I can believe that.
What I can't believe is trolls would bother to work little old lemmy threads to work up cause for war.
Such a fun war for your patrons, the US and Israel, as Iran can't fight back in any real way. Planes are fun.
If you can't believe paid shills and other bad faith operators are present on lemmy, then you've really not been paying much attention...
Apparently, the interactions I've had on this have left me convinced there are influence agents, and I may even have had an ai chatbot arguing with me. Either than or a very lazy influence operative.
You wouldn't think they would bother in such granular detail as working lemmy but I guess with automation and ai there is no limit, social media will be rendered useless from them at some point. It's already over half of accounts that are thought to be fake, influence agent accounts. Over half of all internet content is written by machines too I believe if I have the statistic right.
Your grandpa 95% beat his wife too, hell even your dad depending on your age. Progress is something that happens in times of peace.
Occupying and colonizing only ever stalls that progress. See Afghanistan as example.
Man, I love comparing individual violence against a state that enforces a strict legal gender apartheid.
The USSR had more progressive laws during their civil war than in peace times under Stalin. It's a leadership question, not a peace question.
Yeah, no. Growth is achieved only through adversity. Take the US, for example. Keep things "peaceful", you get a complacent population that manages to elect an orange rapid monkey into office. That's progress? Sure buddy...
top 100 comments