The Israel-Gaza war and wider Middle-East tensions

She does seem to have a soul, so she’d be a better president than her husband (very low bar)
 
Dark Carnival said:
Oh please, have a seat. I literally know those regimes AND their proxies, FIRST HAND.
Click to expand...
Girl, shut up. SO HAVE I. You're not the only one with FIRST HAND experience and you doesn't come close to representing all of our experiences. Go fish for attention elsewhere. My family had to flee in the middle of the night and abandoned everything. It'll be generations before any of us will see our ancestral homeland again because the Irani regime has singlehandedly made the Middle East, ESPECIALLY Iraq, completely inhospitable for many of us. My cousin had to watch his own son's head roll past him during Sunday mass by an Irani proxy. US or no US. West or no West. TRUMP OR NO TRUMP. The elmination of Khomeini and his thugs doesn't even come close to retribution. You don't have a monopoly over pain and suffering or the Middle Eastern experience.

Dark Carnival said:
I don’t need convincing how evil they are
Click to expand...
You absolutely do, because you're acting oddly defensively for an "evil regime".

Dark Carnival said:
and let’s not even try to pretend it’s all to save Iranians from the evil regime
Click to expand...
I literally already said this on the last page. You're stating the obvious. The West, ESPECIALLY Trump, isn't the least bit interested in regime change as much as they are in denuclearization.

Dark Carnival said:
I’ll ecstatic to see the Ayatollahs gone but I’m also happy my country is not involved in the decades of instability that follow and the deaths of millions as a result.
Click to expand...
:D Absolutely laughable. "I'm happy the Ayatollah is dead BUT..." girl go home - you're in no position to be talking about anything. First of all, geopolitically speaking, an armed nation doesn't get to yell "Death to [insert country here]!" while being a fanatic religious government; arbitararily murdering innocent people; building a nuclear program running at 60%+ Uranium enrichment; accumulating nuclear stockpiles; installing secret facilities; conducting research on warheads; and expect nobody to do anything. Sitting by and doing nothing would just about be the dumbest foreign policy decision ever. If anything, it's surprising it took this long for someone to do something about it because it was absolutely only a matter of time before someone did.

THAT'S how decisions are made - based on actual real identifiable security threats from confirmed intelligence. Not because they satisfy whatever echo chamber historical White guilt narrative you've picked up from Moopy.

Second of all, AS IF Middle Eastern nations have EVER needed the West to cause instability and death in the Middle East :D Dictators and wars have come and gone for generations just fine without Western intervention. You're just mad NOW because the US is involved.

Your entire post is an anecdotal rant at best. You have zero grasp of foreign policy and you've provided no real historical evidence.
 
Madison said:
Fuck off.
Click to expand...
middle-finger-kid.gif
 
I don’t think DC was defending Iran’s government was he? You can be against Iran and be against America at the same time.

I think “zero grasp of foreign policy” is a bit much, KC. We’re all entitled to have an opinion on a messy subject, especially when people have close experience, like yourself. We need to listen to each other. You and DC are not the enemy here!
 
K.C. said:
Girl, shut up. SO HAVE I. You're not the only one with FIRST HAND experience and you doesn't come close to representing all of our experiences. Go fish for attention elsewhere. My family had to flee in the middle of the night and abandoned everything. It'll be generations before any of us will see our ancestral homeland again because the Irani regime has singlehandedly made the Middle East, ESPECIALLY Iraq, completely inhospitable for many of us. My cousin had to watch his own son's head roll past him during Sunday mass by an Irani proxy. US or no US. West or no West. TRUMP OR NO TRUMP. The elmination of Khomeini and his thugs doesn't even come close to retribution. You don't have a monopoly over pain and suffering or the Middle Eastern experience.


You absolutely do, because you're acting oddly defensively for an "evil regime".


I literally already said this on the last page. You're stating the obvious. The West, ESPECIALLY Trump, isn't the least bit interested in regime change as much as they are in denuclearization.


:D Absolutely laughable. "I'm happy the Ayatollah is dead BUT..." girl go home - you're in no position to be talking about anything. First of all, geopolitically speaking, an armed nation doesn't get to yell "Death to [insert country here]!" while being a fanatic religious government; arbitararily murdering innocent people; building a nuclear program running at 60%+ Uranium enrichment; accumulating nuclear stockpiles; installing secret facilities; conducting research on warheads; and expect nobody to do anything. Sitting by and doing nothing would just about be the dumbest foreign policy decision ever. If anything, it's surprising it took this long for someone to do something about it because it was absolutely only a matter of time before someone did.

THAT'S how decisions are made - based on actual real identifiable security threats from confirmed intelligence. Not because they satisfy whatever echo chamber historical White guilt narrative you've picked up from Moopy.

Second of all, AS IF Middle Eastern nations have EVER needed the West to cause instability and death in the Middle East :D Dictators and wars have come and gone for generations just fine without Western intervention. You're just mad NOW because the US is involved.

Your entire post is an anecdotal rant at best. You have zero grasp of foreign policy and you've provided no real historical evidence.
Click to expand...
Show me there fuck I said I represented anyone you dense fuck! You literally tried playing the ‘some of us are exiled’ card first, well guess what two can play that game!

In typical MAGA fashion, anyone criticising Trump’s stupid move is automatically defending the Ayatollahs.
Go spew your bullshit elsewhere, the Truth Social is probably the right place for you. I’m not responding to such dumbfuckery.
 
Dark Carnival said:
In typical MAGA fashion, anyone criticising Trump’s stupid move is automatically defending the Ayatollahs.
Go spew your bullshit elsewhere, the Truth Social is probably the right place for you. I’m not responding to such dumbfuckery.
Click to expand...
In typical Islamic Republic of Iran apologist fashion, anyone who provides actual real-world foreign policy considerations for why America feels a legitimate reason to intervene in Iran is automatically "just eating up some Trump bullshit", as if the last 4 US Presidents just didn't happen. Yes, Trump's approach is aggressive and escalatory, but again just HOW LONG did the Irani regime they could keep provoking the contemporary global power before an equally psycho cunt answered them back?? Go spew your uninformed bullshit elsewhere, TikTok might suit your educational needs.

Dark Carnival said:
Show me there fuck I said I represented anyone you dense fuck! You literally tried playing the ‘some of us are exiled’ card first, well guess what two can play that game!
Click to expand...
WRONG. You played that card way before me weeks ago, and you did it again today. I just had to use my own 'card' because you're wielding your experience as if I'm some kind of newbie who's never seen and lived the ME. And the real hard truth is NEITHER of our experiences matter in the end. The anecdotal experience of the everyday person affected by war is NOT what drives foreign policy.
 
K.C. said:
In typical Islamic Republic of Iran apologist fashion, anyone who provides actual real-world foreign policy considerations for why America feels a legitimate reason to intervene in Iran is automatically "just eating up some Trump bullshit", as if the last 4 US Presidents just didn't happen. Yes, Trump's approach is aggressive and escalatory, but again just HOW LONG did the Irani regime they could keep provoking the contemporary global power before an equally psycho cunt answered them back?? Go spew your uninformed bullshit elsewhere, TikTok might suit your educational needs.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing with you here, I'm genuinely curious, but how has Iran been provoking the global power? By all accounts, the nuclear deal that was on the table before the strike was even more favourable to the one offered to Obama. Trump attacked without warning. He did it without congressional approval. And he brought in Israel - which he didn't need to do in this instance - just to make it worse. Iran are lots of things but they don't seem to be the provocateur right now.

We could argue all day about America's justifiable reasons and the timing for it, but they just bombed Iran without warning, breaking countless international laws in the process, while a deal was currently on the table, simply because "he didn't like the terms offered". Meanwhile, North Korea keeps testing actual bombs in the Sea of Japan without so much as a raised eyebrow. Is it nothing to do with the fact that North Korea don't border with a canal that carries billions of barrels of oil? Does it have anything to do with the fact that Trump just bought himself some time by illegally invading a South American country with plenty of oil reserves?

Iran definitely needs a regime change, but right now there isn't a solitary thing that will convince me that Trump is doing this for the good of the Iranian people.
 
And I don't say any of this to be argumentative - I'm just struggling to comprehend how Trump manages to take the bottom floor of geopolitical order and smash through it nearly every single day. Talk about war fatigue - the world is on a precipice and jokes about Dubai expats are trending higher on social media than dead schoolchildren in Tehran. Moopy is my only outlet to say, what the actual fuck?
 
funky said:
I'm not arguing with you here, I'm genuinely curious, but how has Iran been provoking the global power? By all accounts, the nuclear deal that was on the table before the strike was even more favourable to the one offered to Obama. Trump attacked without warning. He did it without congressional approval. And he brought in Israel - which he didn't need to do in this instance - just to make it worse. Iran are lots of things but they don't seem to be the provocateur right now.
Click to expand...
The nuclear deal WAS a good idea. But we're talking about Trump. Diplomacy in the current administration is like pearls amongst swine.
But it IS important to note that the JCPOA was not perfect. Iran DID comply, but there were still many issues regarding access and transparency.

Iran is absolutely the provocateur. They have: enriched their Uranium way above the levels needed for civilian use and slowly upped them; accumulated large stockpiles; installed advanced centrifuges for enrichment levels only necessary for weapons, defying international regulations; installed secret facilities outside the reach of international regulators; researched nuclear warheads; invested heavily in ballistic missiles; oh, and all the while screaming "Death to America" and attacking its ally unprovoked. No country would stupidly wait around and do nothing - especially not the US: a country that can do something about it and being run by someone who's just ITCHING to do something about it.

Your part about "without warning" and "international law"...unfortunately those are all arbitrary rules. If they can't be enforced, they mean nothing. Khomeini didn't follow the "law" when he oppressed his own people or when he attacked Israel or when he broke literally every nuclear rule in the book. And he got away with all of it. "International law" did nothing about it. Once one player throws out the rulebook so do the rest. That's just the nature of foreign affairs. I'm sure Trump was all the more obliging anyway.
 
Last edited:
funky said:
I think “zero grasp of foreign policy” is a bit much, KC.
Click to expand...
His whole 'argument' is effectively that the US shouldn't have taken aggressive action in Iran because of the "decades of instability that follow and the deaths of millions". An irrelevant point at best, because (A) The region was unstable and deadly ALREADY, and (B) This is the climax of years of brewing antagonism between the two nations - it's absolutely no surprise that it eventually erupted into this. He's provided no evidence or policy considerations to counter this, so YES I would say a poor grasp.

funky said:
You can be against Iran and be against America at the same time.
Click to expand...
Girl, you're preaching to the choir. I hate all of these motherfuckers. One has made it a nightmare to live in my original home and one has made it a nightmare to live in my current home. Oh and the European cunts that drew the current borders and fucked the rest of us up, throw them all away too. But if I'm gonna talk politics and do the subject justice, I have to put those personal feelings aside and look at it non-dogmatically. That doesn't seem to exist on Moopy. It's a free for all where everybody just interprets events according to their own personal whims and beliefs and calls it "political discourse".
 
K.C. said:
Your part about "without warning" and "international law"...unfortunately those are all arbitrary rules. If they can't be enforced, they mean nothing. Khomeini didn't follow the "law" when he oppressed his own people or when he attacked Israel or when he broke literally every nuclear rule in the book. And he got away with all of it. "International law" did nothing about it. Once one player throws out the rulebook so do the rest. That's just the nature of foreign affairs. I'm sure Trump was all the more obliging anyway.
Click to expand...

True, but I don't think that America's response to Iran being a dissident of international law should be to also be a dissident of international law. There's a certain irony for responding to a country for breaking rules, by breaking rules to attack them.

I don't think there's a right answer - how long into Iran's enrichment process do you step in, etc. But who do they listen to, when the world's only superpower is also breaking laws, is regularly aggressive and threatening to other nations, deposes governments whenever they feel like it, ignores the UN charter, creates fake global organisations illegally using money from the federal reserve, holds the biggest nuclear arsenal in history and remains the only country to ever actually use one? America wants to be the world's police and the world's army and the world's bank, and we wonder why other countries find it difficult to negotiate with them...
 
funky said:
True, but I don't think that America's response to Iran being a dissident of international law should be to also be a dissident of international law. There's a certain irony for responding to a country for breaking rules, by breaking rules to attack them.

I don't think there's a right answer - how long into Iran's enrichment process do you step in, etc. But who do they listen to, when the world's only superpower is also breaking laws, is regularly aggressive and threatening to other nations, deposes governments whenever they feel like it, ignores the UN charter, creates fake global organisations illegally using money from the federal reserve, holds the biggest nuclear arsenal in history and remains the only country to ever actually use one? America wants to be the world's police and the world's army and the world's bank, and we wonder why other countries find it difficult to negotiate with them...
Click to expand...
The current administration is sloppy to say the least. It's just a bunch of JOCKS running the federal government.

And no, there is no right answer. My best attempt is usually just to try and figure out why leaders make the decisions they do, by following the evidence. What threats they may have perceived or what choice of rhetoric they decided to opt for. This whole time, I haven't even made an argument. But people's echo chamber is so fucking fragile that even that's too much.
 
I think this conversation shows why it's so difficult to have a one-line response. Everyone in a position of power here is demonstrably evil, leading regimes built on blood and all of them are intent on bringing harm to civilians, including their own. There's no 'good guy' here and that's the Western narrative in a nut shell - who's the hero and who's the villian. When they are all villians, the West (an imperialist term to start with...) tries to work out who is somehow the least evil and this always ends up being who is the least harmful to our own financial interests.
 
In this difficult and uncertain time, we really need to spare some thoughts for those truly affected: American vacationers :(


IMG_3957.jpeg




IMG_3958.jpeg
 
starmer's cowardly silence on whether conflict in middle east will impact melodifestivalen final
 
  • BOOM BOOM
Reactions: GNL
octophone said:
How about posting a real response rather than a heavy handed unfunny parody?
Click to expand...
Better yet, how about we stop trying to homogenize the experiences of entire groups of people because it makes people feel more secure in their precious beliefs and opinions? The experiences of immigrants and non-immigrants vary wildly, and selectively appropriating them and collapsing them to bolster whatever flavor-of-the-month partisan narrative you happen to subscribe to means this forum is just another propaganda-quality Twitter feed with a Moopy algorithm. No fucking wonder we've lost so many users to this.

The level of POMP from some of the users here who are so quick to moral grandstanding and who profess to be "informed" but have never cited a shred of actual expertise, data or evidence is fucking embarrassing. All they know how to do is repost Tweets from their favorite totally unbiased pundit or link their favorite totally unbiased rag, and think it constitutes 'research'.

Some of us follow politics because we just want to understand it, not because we're auditioning for anybody's stupid party or because we're trying to discredit anybody's experience.
 
K.C. said:
Better yet, how about we stop trying to homogenize the experiences of entire groups of people because it makes people feel more secure in their precious beliefs and opinions? The experiences of immigrants and non-immigrants vary wildly, and selectively appropriating them and collapsing them to bolster whatever flavor-of-the-month partisan narrative you happen to subscribe to means this forum is just another propaganda-quality Twitter feed with a Moopy algorithm. No fucking wonder we've lost so many users to this.
Click to expand...

But angry posts like this can only contribute to the loss of users. This is actually way more aggressive than the post you're commenting on.

The level of POMP from some of the users here who are so quick to moral grandstanding and who profess to be "informed" but have never cited a shred of actual expertise, data or evidence is fucking embarrassing. All they know how to do is repost Tweets from their favorite totally unbiased pundit or link their favorite totally unbiased rag, and think it constitutes 'research'.
Click to expand...

To be fair, this is exactly the type post that octophone and others were responding to. A tweet from a pundit. Voodoo does this a lot. They're allowed to do it. We're allowed to disagree and voice our opinion - it's just that most of moopy have a particular type of opinion on this matter.

Lived-in experience is valuable yes. But that doesn't mean others aren't allowed to have an opinion on war and genocide and the murderous motherfuckers who start it. Surely that's better than living in ignorant bliss like the majority of the world?
 
Voodoo said:
Glad to hear from "liberals".

Click to expand...

you know the right are really a joyless bunch when you see what they consider humour these days. this dated ass liberal snowflake satire (blue hair nose ring lol!!!) that's about as cutting as a wooden spoon. get a fucking grip.
 
funky said:
To be fair, this is exactly the type post that octophone and others were responding to. A tweet from a pundit. Voodoo does this a lot. They're allowed to do it. We're allowed to disagree and voice our opinion - it's just that most of moopy have a particular type of opinion on this matter.
Click to expand...
Oh Voodoo is easily the biggest culprit of it, and he does it in a very conniving way. But there are others, it's not just Voodoo. I've RARELY, if ever, seen anything cited from a think tank, or a policy center, or from a study. Off the top of my head, I remember one or two public sentiment surveys that Jark posted. The rest is almost all algorithm-fed social media content, ragebait, and newspapers. An opinion based on just those is NOT a good opinion. It's really much closer to gossip.

funky said:
Lived-in experience is valuable yes. But that doesn't mean others aren't allowed to have an opinion on war and genocide and the murderous motherfuckers who start it. Surely that's better than living in ignorant bliss like the majority of the world?
Click to expand...
I've literally never ever used my lived experience as authority in any serious political opinion. The very thought actually makes me cringe because resorting to anecdotal evidence for a topic LIKE THIS is unprofessional to say the least. You absolutely don't need a lived experience to have an opinion on this, and in fact that perspective is just as valuable.
 
Trump says he's going to use the Navy to redirect all Hormuz traffic. That would cost an absolute fortune in defence spending so clearly he thinks this is going to be a short war.

I'm no expert on Iran, but surely bombing a few government buildings and key personnel and then hoping a bloody civilian coup will very quickly enable regime change is a bit.... naive, no?
 
An Iranian navy ship sunk near Sri Lanka. Let's presume that is absolutely a deliberate sinking. The conflict in the space of five days has now stretched from Cyprus to Sri Lanka.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom