> Hitler's rationale

Ah yes, give any discussion enough time and Hitler inevitably gets to be whoever your opponent is.

Unlike Hitler, unlike Israel and unlike the US, Iran has not proactively attacked.

Hitler had no reason to fear attack from Russia, Czechoslovakia or France. Iran has every reason to fear an attack from the US and Israel, look at what is happening right now ffs.

Western governments provide funding and shelter for extremist Iranian groups like People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran and various separatists movements inside the country, so please spare me this Hitler nonsense.

▲

JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> give any discussion enough time and Hitler inevitably gets to be whoever your opponent is

Because it fits. Nazi Germany was an aspiring land power. You can see the same effect in Imperial Rome and the Persian empires. (And, while America was conquering its own continent, on the peripheries of Manifest-Destiny America.)

> Unlike Hitler, unlike Israel and unlike the US, Iran has not proactively attacked

Of course they have. Its proxies are constantly proactively attacking everyone in their neighbourhood.

> Hitler had no reason to fear attack from Russia, Czechoslovakia or France. Iran has every reason to fear an attack from the US and Israel, look at what is happening right now ffs

Everyone has reason to fear attack from everyone. Defence in depth is a regionally-destabilising response to that security imperative. And by the way, Russia and Germany did wind up going to war with each other. Same as Iran and Israel, that same one whose anihiliation the former has been chanting for since its revolution.

Arguing Iran has been some peaceful country minding its own business is totally inaccurate.

▲

nixon_why69 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> Arguing Iran has been some peaceful country minding its own business is totally inaccurate.

Compared to Israel and the US, it would be a massive understatement to call Iran peaceful.

▲

JumpCrisscross an hour ago | parent [-]

> Compared to Israel and the US, it would be a massive understatement to call Iran peaceful

Sure. Which makes Iran a decidedly not-peaceful country.

▲

nixon_why69 an hour ago | parent [-]

At every step, for years, they've tried to de-escalate while Israel and the US launched direct attacks against them. Embassies bombed, that general in Iraq in 2020, last summer and now this. All of these attacks completely unprovoked except for the fact that they are friendly with Hamas and Hezbollah.

They are practically Gandhi in this story.

Looking forward, the problem with being irrationally hateful is that its irrational. What's the plan here? Persia will still exist, and its unlikely any future rulers will like Israel, given what's going on. So what's the win condition?

	▲	JumpCrisscross 5 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> At every step, for years, they've tried to de-escalate They've also, simultaneously, tried to escalate. > All of these attacks completely unprovoked except for the fact that they are friendly with Hamas and Hezbollah "Friendly with" in the way America was friendly with South Vietnam and South Korea. (Also, the IRGC has directly sponsored attacks, e.g. Bondi Beach.) > They are practically Gandhi in this story This is either stupid or dishonest. > What's the plan here? Don't confuse specific criticism with endorsement of the war.

▲

Matl 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> by the way, Russia and Germany did wind up going to war with each other. Same as Iran and Israel,

Are you seriously arguing that Hitler was rational for preemptively attacking Russia because AFTER Hitler attacked Russia, Russia did not simply sit back and let itself be attacked but in fact started defending itself? And are you arguing that Israel doing the same is rational because AFTER Israel attacked Iran, Iran launched some missiles towards Israel IN RESPONSE TO THE ISRAELI ATTACK, therefore proving Israel right that Iran is going to attack them?

> that same one whose anihiliation the former has been chanting for since its revolution.

Oh and Israel has been nothing but wishing them happy Ramadan?

The reason Israel does not want the current Iranian system to survive is because it sees it as the only possible threat to its eternal domination of the Palestinians and its ability to dictate its borders in the Middle East.

▲

JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> Are you seriously arguing that Hitler was rational for preemptively attacking Russia because AFTER Hitler attacked Russia, Russia did not simply sit back and let itself be attacked but in fact started defending itself?

No. I'm saying Hitler's theory of attacking Russia was the same as Iran's simultaneous proxy wars with its entire neighbourhood. It's not theoretically wrong. Just antiquated, destructive and–in the trade-based modern world–increasingly counterproductive. (You're trashing and alienating your natural trading partners.)

And I'm drawing analogy between (a) "Iran has every reason to fear an attack from the US and Israel, look at what is happening right now" and (b) the nonsense argument "that Hitler was rational for preemptively attacking Russia because AFTER Hitler attacked Russia, Russia did not simply sit back and let itself be attacked." In both cases, retaliation is being used to justify the preceding (note: not initial) aggression.

> Oh and Israel has been nothing but wishing them happy Ramadan?

If your neighbour is developing ballistic missiles and explicitly calling for your anihilation, you're not going to "simply sit back and let [your]self be attacked."

> reason Israel does not want the current Iranian system to survive is because it sees it as the only possible threat to its eternal domination of the Palestinians and its ability to dictate its borders in the Middle East

Iran isn't a material threat to Israel's power projection into Gaza and the West Bank. Its ballistic missiles and nuclear programme, on the other hand, are an existential threat to Tel Aviv/Jerusalem. And yes, it's a regional competitor to Israeli (and Saudi and Emirati) hegemony.

	▲	Matl an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> Iran's simultaneous proxy wars with its entire neighborhood Except that's not happening and is complete BS. It also assumes these proxies have no agency and would not have acted on their own. > It's not theoretically wrong. Just antiquated, destructive and–in the trade-based modern world–increasingly counterproductive. (You're trashing and alienating your natural trading partners.) Guess what would allow Iran to peacefully trade with Israel. The end of Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. The reason Iran cannot simply ignore that occupation is because it would loose the moral high ground in the Shia/Muslim world. And having that moral high ground (i.e. its support for the Palestinian cause) is also part of its power projection strategy. > If your neighbour is developing ballistic missiles and explicitly calling for your anihilation, you're not going to "simply sit back and let [your]self be attacked. Given that Israel does indeed have ballistic missiles and is explicitly calling for for the annihilation of Palestinians, or even 'Arabs' in general, does that in your mind justify October 7th? > Iran isn't a material threat to Israel's power projection into Gaza and the West Bank. Not Iran itself, but Israel insists that Iran support for 'proxies' is. Maybe not to Israeli power projection, but to its security at least.

▲

thunky an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> Because it fits. Nazi Germany was an aspiring land power.

Look at the mass murder by Israel in Gaza. Or how the US just overthrew Venezuela and seized their resources, threatened to take Greenland, taunts Canada and suggests more countries are in their sights.

And now the two of them teamed up to bomb Iran, unprovoked, saying it's going to "annihilate their Navy" as their citizens run for cover.

And your conclusion is Iran is the one that resembles Nazi Germany?

▲

JumpCrisscross an hour ago | parent [-]

> your conclusion is Iran is the one that resembles Nazi Germany?

In this strategic aspect, yes. So does Israel. So do Russia and China. They're all acting like land empires. And they're all pursuing a strategy that seeks weak, unstable neighbours.

It's a shitty strategy that does't earn one friends. The fact that it's theoretically coherent doesn't make it less shitty.

	▲	thunky 43 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> In this strategic aspect, yes. So does Israel. So do Russia and China. They're all acting like land empires. The issue is that you seem to be ignoring the context and using this (weak imo) comparison to defend the US and Israel's decision to attack them.