| |
| ▲ | galactus 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I think that if you start an unjustified war of agression against a country and you kill 150 children, you should be held responsible | | |
| ▲ | Pay08 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | How would you like a country to respond to getting bombed? | | |
| ▲ | lukan 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | Destroy the bombers, not children? Also I am confused which contry you mean, mutual bombing has going on there since a while. | | |
| ▲ | Pay08 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | The school was next to a missile launcher. Iran bombed Israel in January as a distraction tactic during the protests. | | |
| ▲ | lukan 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | The school was hit 3 times by precision rockets. The compound of the school physically separated from the military buildings since 10 years. Clearly visible on sat pictures. Trump's reaction? It could have been anyones Tomahawks missiles. Is that where your information comes from, that there was a missile launcher next to it? Oh and are you aware that Trump once said he will intentionally kill the families of terrorists, if voted into power? https://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/02/politics/donald-trump-ter... | | |
| ▲ | Pay08 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I was not saying that there was a problem with the rockets themselves. Any attack is a long process with a lot of stages, and something (in this case, probably the targeting) needs to go wrong. And because I dislike a regime that wants to kill me, I must automatically worship Trump? | |
| ▲ | wholinator2 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I agree with you, but i want to also ask, have you heard what the ayatollah and the mullahs have said about killing Americans, dismembering protestors, raping children, nuking the United States. Have you heard the protestors mowed down by machine guns, have you heard they make you buy the body of your loved ones for the cost of the bullet, assigning that value to their life, have you heard that they literally living inside hospitals and schools, that they told the iranians they would rather every iranian die then let go of power, have you heard at all how insane the islamic regime is? How seriously they talk about destroying America and all of the west so they can spread their Islamic regime (forced conversions or death, forces prayer or death, women cannot go outside with men, men have all rights in marriage, age of consent is 9 years old _for girls_, older for boys, speaking against the governed is death, protesting is death. They literally walked the streets with speakers and plays on the national tv (propaganda, the only channel allowed now) that the people should go into the street and leave their houses, while america and israel are saying to shelter while we take out military installations. The mullahs are trying to get people killed to use that as a story to get us to stop the war. They've literally embedded military installations in every single block of most of the cities. They do that to use the citizens as human shields. The only reason they haven't already been toppled is that owning guns is illegal, and the regime and their insanity are willing to murder anyone and everyone it takes to hold on to power. They don't care about iran, they care about islam and nothing else, they're willing to destroy the world if it means no other religions are allowed. They killed tens of thousands of protestors, they raped the bodies of women then ripped out their wombs to prevent investigation. It's categorically insane. These are facts. If you don't believe them is cause you don't know anyone who came from Iran, i know many and all of them support toppling the ayatollah, sending in pahlavi as transitionary leader to get democracy running again. Trump is and has always been a crazy person too, but having learned some farsi and listened with my own ears, he's nothing like the mullahs. | | |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | gruez 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >I think that if you start an unjustified war of agression against a country [...] That's just moving the goalposts because the original comment said >What part of "doing the right thing" is bombing an all girls school? which is calling out that particular event specifically, other than the war itself. Otherwise you can just head over to the wikipedia page and point out the casualty figures. | |
| ▲ | 3842056935870 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [dead] | |
| ▲ | trimethylpurine 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | What if it happens as a result of trying to hold someone worse responsible? | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > someone worse You do not get to decide that. If we allow everyone to invade other countries and murder leaders because they deem those people worse than themselves, the world will be engaged in endless war. Or do you think perhaps deciding who to invade and kill is a special privilege reserved only for your country, which should be emperor of the world? | | |
| ▲ | trimethylpurine 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If a guy pays soldiers to sneak into another country, kidnap rape and murder children, and continues similar behavior for 4 decades I can decide he's worse than Trump. I do get to decide that. Some things are worse than others. The preceding comment was about holding someone responsible. It appears you might have misunderstood that mine points out that this is exactly how the school was hit. | |
| ▲ | mhb 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | With this reasoning, how do you make any decisions in your everyday life? Does everything look like a morally relativistic gray to you? | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | ??? Do most of your everyday life decisions involve starting wars or killing people? That's concerning. Are you a high-ranking officer in the US military? As it happens, I'm not, and my decisions do not typically have life-or-death consequences. I also don't even know what you're getting at. There was nothing "relativistic" or "morally grey" about my argument. My point is that in order for any kind of peace to exist, each country must be able to accept that there will be other people in the world who are morally repugnant to them. Because there will always be leaders who consider each other repugnant, so if you endorse starting wars over that, you're committing to a world where everyone is starting wars all the time as the international norm. | | |
| ▲ | trimethylpurine 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | But if you're getting attacked for 4 decades by another country, do you do something about it or are you saying that's also wrong? My understanding is that the regime in Iran has been terrorizing around the world for decades. It's not just disagreeable. People are seeking justice. It's one thing to dislike another politician. No one needs justice for repugnancy. But if they are committing acts of terror, that's a totally different thing. | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The regime in the US has been terrorizing around the world for decades. Among many other things, it overthrew the democratic Iranian government to establish a puppet autocracy in Iran, leading directly to the current one after a revolution. The entire reason Iran funds terrorists that target the US is because the US is an existential threat to it. So your argument basically boils down to "if I shoot someone, and they shoot me back, am I not entitled to self-defense?". The actual answer is to stop shooting them. Stop fucking up the entire Middle East and the people from there won't hate a country across the world so much that they feel a worthwhile use of their life is to strap a bomb to themselves in order to kill people from there. | | |
| ▲ | trimethylpurine 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Your other comment is locked apparently. Can't reply. But there you suggested that the US should stop because they make Iran want to bomb and that's why there's war. And we can say the same about Iran. So, your solution is hopeless as we already know from centuries of conflict history. Iran wants to kill us for historical events. We want to kill them for those too. Very insightful. But we're bigger and the war is just on the TV in America. You have a much better shot of convincing them that we'll stop bombing them if they just take it for a while and then don't seek revenge. I didn't know why you think America will be easier to convince of that. | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Iran wants to kill us for historical events. No, Iran wants to kill you for current events. You're talking like American imperialism in the Middle East is past-tense. It is on-going, constantly. It is happening right now. This, itself, is an imperialist war. Trump is not going to war for whatever fucking reason you think he is, like stopping terrorism or changing the Iranian regime to help the Iranian people. > You have a much better shot of convincing them that we'll stop bombing them if they just take it for a while and then don't seek revenge. They LITERALLY DID THAT. The first invasion striking their nuclear facilities was itself an act of war that would have justified closing the Strait and all other measures they could take to fight back. Yet they accepted such a blatant crime against them and tried to de-escalate, were in the middle of negotiating a humiliatingly one-sided deal (after Trump tore up the one they had made with Obama, for no reason), and then the US attacked them in the middle of negotiations for the second time in a row. This time killing their leader, 150 children, and countless other crimes. Nobody could ever lay down and accept that. You have just created a country full of people that will justifiably hate you for another 80 years, minimum. They have been taught that the only thing trying to appease the US does is embolden the US to take even more from them. I don't know how to communicate this to you, but your country IS THE AGGRESSOR. The US is worse than Iran. Fullstop. The Iranian regime is evil, and despite that, the American regime manages to be multiple times worse. Peace in the Middle East was possible. It is the US who is constantly, constantly, constantly stirring up conflicts there, and you have the gall to blame Iran for it. | | |
| ▲ | trimethylpurine 12 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | >'No, Iran wants to kill you for current events" Which events were they wanting to kill Israelis and Americans for on October 7th? Or is it totally acceptable for Iran to start wars by kidnapping and torturing civilians and filming it, but not for America to do it without celebrating the death, kidnap, torture and rape of children? | |
| ▲ | Hikikomori 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Just to add, Israel killed Irans negotiators last year when they were approaching a deal. This situation is manufactured. | | |
| ▲ | trimethylpurine 14 minutes ago | parent [-] | | "Negotiators!?" They were torturing children and using the videos for ransom. Did you just not know that or you would still call that negotiating? |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | trimethylpurine 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >The regime in the US has been terrorizing around the world Yeah, that already happened. Now what? How do we stop more kids from getting kidnapped, raped, murdered, or bombed? Your proposed solution is essentially a leader in every country that has suffered from Iran's terror who can convince his/her people that their kidnapped children are worth it. Obviously that isn't feasible. But worse, how is that different than saying it's okay for Iran to kidnap children? | | |
| |
| ▲ | mikkupikku 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > My understanding is that the regime in Iran has been terrorizing around the world for decades The list of Iranian terror attacks in America amounts to a whole lot of fuck all. Whatever Iran might be doing elsewhere shouldn't be America's problem. |
| |
| ▲ | mhb 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I didn't think the point was that subtle. There is good and evil, right and wrong, survival and destruction. You seem to think that drawing a line around some land and calling yourself a country immunizes you from the moral scrutiny of your neighbors. While this certainly accords with the promulgations of the morally bankrupt UN, it is not a recipe for existing in our world. This is why it is important to have a powerful military. | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | It is a matter of pragmatism. Even if I myself consider my perspective on good and evil to be objective, it is a given that each of my neighbors will have their own seemingly-objective sense of good and bad that differs from my own. We are then at an impasse. Do I attempt to kill all of my neighbors in order to rid the world of what I perceive to be evil? Or do I perhaps make peace with an imperfect world in which bad things happen in other countries that are not my jurisdiction to worry about? Apparently you subscribe to the "kill all your neighbors" camp, that your objective brand of morality must be enforced on the entire world by means of military might. World conquest, however, is an utterly irrational thing to attempt, and will only lead to death and destruction, not an idealistic world that conforms to your sense of morality. | | |
| ▲ | mhb 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | I don't know what to tell you. You're restating the paradox of tolerance. You should probably come to some philosophical resolution regarding that before you keep digging. | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | What I have said has nothing to do with the paradox of tolerance. I am firmly on the side of not tolerating the intolerant, but stating that, "not tolerating" does not extend to "starting wars in an attempt at world conquest to rid the world of the intolerant". | | |
| ▲ | mhb 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If "not tolerating the intolerant" is not actionable, it is just mindless rhetoric. | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | It is actionable. That action is simply not "world conquest", jesus fucking christ. Is America itself a society in which the intolerant have no power? No, it is not. Maybe first it could think about clearing things up in its own borders before trying to use that excuse to invade the whole goddamn world. Indeed it is the intolerant who currently have power in the US. You seem to be projecting your own desire for invading Iran, which is completely incompatible with the people in power's actual reason for invading Iran. They are not invading Iran to make life better for Iranians. But you believe invading Iran to make life better for Iranians is justified, so you lend your support to the current administration, even though that is explicitly not what is going to happen as a result of your support. You are, in short, a useful idiot[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot | | |
| ▲ | trimethylpurine 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Regardless of why we're there, did you want to keep Khameini in power while he coordinates terror? What is your solution for that? |
|
| |
| ▲ | wholinator2 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You'd be hard pressed to find someone more intolerant that the islamic regime of iran. So what are we going to do about it. What actions are we taking to not tolerate them? We tried the nuke deal and they lied and kept building. We tried sanctions and that crippled their economy and led people to attempt regime change, only to be murdered by the tens of thousands in the streets, brutally suppressed. All this while the regime is funding the majority of terrorism in the world today, fucking with literally every country in the middle east to attempt to assert their regime and rules farther and wider. At what point do we do something? How many have to die for us to decide to act. I'm aware that number is not 1, is it 35,000? 100,000? If not a number then what, what does it take to act? | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | > We tried the nuke deal and they lied and kept building This is a lie. A complete fabrication. Trump says this, completely baselessly, without a shred of evidence, as known liars are wont to do. They allowed inspectors in and not one of them ever suggested they were violating the terms of the deal. > How many have to die for us to decide to act. This is a murky question, but if anybody was going to intervene in a country's domestic affairs, it would need to be by broad international consensus to have any legitimacy. It absolutely cannot be a unilateral invasion where one country decides who is worthy of invading and who is not. Moreover, that is not why they were invaded. Whatever qualms you have with the Iranian regime, this war is not a war to instate democracy in Iran. We already saw with Venezuela literally just two months ago that Trump invaded and deposed the leader, only to keep the current regime in place with an agreement to serve as his country's economic vassal. Stop projecting your own justifications for why you would invade Iran if you were President of the United States, to justify the actions of the current one who is not invading for those reasons. The only thing you are doing by justifying his invasion for unrelated reasons is giving your support to the death of more innocent Iranians that you ostensibly want to help. | | |
| ▲ | trimethylpurine 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Do you support Khameini's call and platform to fund the export of Islamic Revolution? Do you believe that other countries should be allowed to defend themselves from the import of Khameini's Islamic Revolution? Or did you not know that this was his openly stated purpose? How many people have to die before you start blaming the international community for inaction or worse, you start to feel that the international community is complicit because they prevent one country from acting while another funds terror attacks with impunity? | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | I don't know why you decided to hop to multiple unrelated threads of conversation with other people while ignoring my reply to you on this subject specifically earlier, but to restate: wholesale violence does not solve terrorism. You already fucking tried this in Afghanistan, and failed, badly. The solution to terrorism is to stop giving people reasons to be terrorists, which means you must stop killing their people and trying to conquer their land/resources, as the US has been engaged in constantly for the entire post-world-war period. A commitment to peace won't make all of the terrorists disappear overnight, so you will have to deal with a long tail of violence against you for years to come, which is known as "consequences for your actions". You have a right to take measures to defend yourself against individual terrorists, but if you ever want actual peace, those measures can't include actions that will create new generations of terrorists, like invading a fucking country, assassinating its leader, bombing schools, sinking ships on diplomatic missions, and destroying infrastructure. Every single one of these actions will create new terrorists who hate your country so much they will lay down their lives to hurt it. Actually, not only did you ignore my reply, you're ignoring the post you're replying to as well. THIS WAR IS NOT EVEN A REGIME CHANGE WAR. STOP PROJECTING YOUR OWN MOTIVATIONS ONTO THE US GOVERNMENT. | | |
| ▲ | mhb 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | > stop giving people reasons to be terrorists FFS they don't need reasons. Their stated goal and actions in support of it is the destruction of the apostatic free world. Your oppressed/oppressor narrative is vapid. Though terrorism is a tool they use, their goal is a caliphate with Sharia law. | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | You are literally brainwashed by American propaganda, JFC. Iranians do not hate you because you are free, they hate you because you are trying to control their country. Do you understand they are not movie villains? They are real people? Real people who would, in normal circumstances, prefer to live their lives peacefully? Imagine what it would take for you to decide the best way to spend your life is to strap a bomb to yourself and kill people from a country on the other side of the planet? Some reasons that may motivate you so heavily would perhaps include that country overthrowing your democracy and massacring your children. Reasons that are not likely are "jealousy of their FREEDOM". I already know your next tired argument will be BUT THE RELIGION OF PEACE, so I will go ahead and pre-empt it. It is not genuinely religion that motivates people to die in acts of terrorism. If it were, that would still not be a reason to attack America, which is on the other side of the planet, as opposed to any of their closer neighbors who are just as full of heathens. Take, for example, Japan. It is a notable country on the world stage, once the #2 economy in the world. It has never, not even a single time, been attacked by an Islamic terrorist. Why do you think that is? Is it because Japan is not free? Is it because Japan lives in accordance with Islamic principles? Or is it because, maybe, just maybe, Japan hasn't given a single person from the Middle East any reason to want to sacrifice themselves to kill Japanese people? Similarly, note that Indonesia is the fourth most populous country in the world, with 270 million people, 87% of which are Muslims. Not one of them has ever staged a terrorist attack against the US. Doesn't that seem strange to you? If Muslims are inherently evil people born for the religious purpose of attacking the US, surely Indonesians should be doing it too? Or maybe, just maybe, it's not actually religion that motivates such extreme acts of self-sacrifice, and the real reasons Indonesians don't attack the US is because the US has not given Indonesians reasons to hate it? | | |
| ▲ | mhb 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Why are you making this about Muslims generally? | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | You were already going there. > their goal is a caliphate with Sharia law. | | |
| ▲ | mhb 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Nope. But now that you see how your distorted world view can lead you to the wrong conclusion, you should consider reassessing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | testaccount28 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > do you think perhaps deciding who to invade and kill is a special privilege reserved only for your country, which should be emperor of the world? yes. we got the bomb before they did, because our policies are better than theirs. |
| |
| ▲ | deeg 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | False dichotomy. There are other ways to deal with Iran that don't involve starting an ill conceived (and illegal) war that kills school children and possibly (probably?) plunges the world economy into recession. It is highly unlikely that the current military action will result in a pacified Iran. Why do people think that since Iran is evil all actions against Iran are justified? | | |
| ▲ | hkt 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | They're not old enough to remember the start of the war in Iraq, I imagine. For those who aren't: it was a barrage of justifications which were found to be untrue, especially the 45 minute claim which said Iraq could strike European targets within 45 minutes with chemical or biological weapons. The UN weapons inspector said this was nonsense, and so it proved to be - after the invasion. Iran will go the same way, one way or another. |
| |
| ▲ | nixon_why69 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | We can quantify "Who has killed the most children in the middle east recently" and Iran is in a distant third place. | |
| ▲ | z3phyr 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Sovereignty. You only get to hold responsibility of your own citizens, like Jeffery Epstein AND his supporters. You do that right, and then maybe then people will like you as the world police. |
| |
| ▲ | gos9 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Held responsible by whom? Certainly not you. | |
| ▲ | brightball 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Well, a couple of days ago Iran fired 2 missiles at a US base in the Indian Ocean with twice the range of anything they were supposed to be allowed to have. That was pretty validating for the war effort. | | |
| ▲ | mikkupikku 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Iran shooting back after being attacked validates the decision to attack them in the first place? "supposed to be allowed to have." Ridiculous premise. They armed themselves thusly because American politicians have been singing "Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran!" for generations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomb_Iran | | |
| ▲ | brightball 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | Right. Under sanctions to prevent them from being a danger to everyone around them while they sponsor terror globally and go on TV talking about getting nuclear weapons to destroy Israel. Most of Europe is within striking distance of their current capabilities that they were not supposed to have. Treaties gave terms to limit the range of their missiles. Treaties were agreed to to prevent them from enriching uranium. They violated both. Had they been allowed to continue on their path, we can all expect that we would be looking at a nuclear terror attack in the near future. People are going to react for their left/right politics but the Iranian regime is a danger to the entire planet. There’s a reason that Iranian expats world wide have been celebrating in the streets. Their biggest fear is that we are going to leave before the regime is fully removed. | | |
| ▲ | mikkupikku 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The real dangers to peace in the Middle East are America, Israel and historically the British, because these three are the bastards that toppled Iran's democracy and lead them to such a defensive posture in the first place. With the utmost respect, kindly blow your judeo-american sanctions out your ass. America should have NOTHING to do with Iran whatsoever, we don't have any moral right to intervention here. | | |
| ▲ | brightball 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | It’s impossible to take anyone seriously who dismisses the threat of developing a nuclear weapon with intent to use it. Sponsoring and funding global terror networks is not a “defensive posture”. Giving speeches about nuking your enemy while secretly developing those capabilities isn’t either. | | |
| ▲ | mikkupikku 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | "Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran" Gee, I wonder why they want nukes. Pity they didn't get them in time, this whole war might have been averted. | |
| ▲ | beedeebeedee 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Please apply your thoughts to Israel then. Israel is the greatest destabilizing force in the middle east. From Gaza, to false flags in Iran, Saudi Arabia and who knows where else. | |
| ▲ | NickC25 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >secretly developing those capabilities isn’t either. At least Iran's been pretty transparent about their intentions for a while now. Israel maintains the "strategic ambiguity" about its nuclear "energy" development which is the stupidest fucking thing ever. Of course they've got nuclear weapons. |
|
| |
| ▲ | Hikikomori 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The treatie that trump left in 2017 at a time when all US intelligence agencies after that they were not working on a nuclear bomb and were then put under sanctions? Yeah ok buddy. |
|
| |
| ▲ | austin-cheney 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That is not a validation of anything and it is not a US base. | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | pepperoni_pizza 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Do you think some evil military planners sat in the Pentagon, saw that school, said "let's shoot at it for shits and giggles" and pressed the button? Absolutely. Russia does it all the time, IDF does it all the time, why would the Pentagon be any different? | |
| ▲ | tmountain 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Grow up conversations aren’t possible when the clowns are running the circus. | |
| ▲ | wsc981 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Seems in Libanon the IDF is currently targeting hospitals and first responders [0]. Sometimes people are just evil. Regarding the USA-Iran war, the president of the USA has threatened to destroy essential infrastructure (e.g. electricity) if Iran doesn't surrender in 48 hours. Which, from my understanding, is a war crime. I think Trump is perfectly ok with bombing schools and hospitals. --- [0]: https://x.com/haaretzcom/status/2035545687006298392?s=20 | |
| ▲ | lonelyasacloud 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > In reality someone made a mistake. It can happen. It should be investigated. It should not deter from achieving the military objectives. There has been little planning and there are no sane military objectives beyond blow stuff up. How can there be when the objectives of the overall war change depend on what side of the bed Bone Spurs got out. | |
| ▲ | lukan 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yes, mistakes can happen. But when you use autonomous targeting systems (with "human oversight" in theory) and tell your soldiers: "no stupid rules of engagement,” “no politically correct wars,” and “no nation-building quagmire.” (Hegseth) And the top commander says that he would intentionally kill the families of terrorists if voted into power: https://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/02/politics/donald-trump-ter... Then at some point I do not believe the term "mistake" is appropriate here. | | | |
| ▲ | bertylicious 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | What are the military objectives? | | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Destroying a school is not an "oopsie". It should literally not be possible for it to happen in any organization that values human life at all. This was a precision strike with three missiles hitting the same target, they should have been goddamn sure they knew where the millions of dollars in ordnance they were launching for the purpose of ending human life were headed. Of course, the US military places zero value on not murdering civilians, which it has shown time and time again throughout its history, so this is the obvious result: massacre by intentional negligence. It's absolutely fucking insane to downplay it like these things just happen and are unavoidable. What is wrong with you? Maybe you don't understand these are not just numbers on a screen? How many children do you know in your life? Is it even close to 150? Can you imagine every single child you know being killed and shrugging that off, insulting people who bring it up as being "sensationalist" and "polluting the conversation"? | | |
| ▲ | brightball 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Let’s have a serious conversation about downplaying things because this is where all of these conversations go sideways. Many people, myself included, watch very loud righteous indignation about this awful event…while hearing absolutely nothing from the same people about… - The Iranian women’s soccer team who are returning home from asylum to likely torture and execution due to regime threats against their families. - The thousands of Iranian protesters who were shot by the regime. - The 19 year old wrestling champion who was executed for participating in a protest. Nobody is saying the school wasn’t terrible, but it’s not some situation where if we just leave the regime in power it’s going to be all sunshine and roses over there. Show equal parts outrage and people will take you more seriously. Show equal parts outrage and you will find far more outrage from leaving the regime in power. | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The entire reason the current Iranian regime exists is because the US overthrew their democracy to replace it with a monarchy that was friendly to their oil interests, which was then overthrown by a popular revolution. Maybe the US should stay the fuck out of Iran because it's not the US's fucking business, and it is most certainly not acting benevolently out of desire to help the people of Iran. > while hearing absolutely nothing from the same people about… Also, really? You think anybody who opposes the US bombing a school is cheering on protestors being shot and all other crimes of the Iranian regime? Well, I guess I'll be the first: Iranian regime bad. Killing protestors bad. Executing dissenters bad. There you go. Your argument is defeated. You can no longer make that claim. But I reckon most people aren't couching their statements by bringing up the whudabbouts because first it's not the direct topic of the conversation, and second it's a fucking given. But it being a given that X is bad does not justify doing more bad things. | | |
| ▲ | brightball 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | Totally agree with you. The US also created the Bin Laden problem. That genie isn’t going back in the bottle though so now we have to deal with the very real threat to the world that we certainly had a hand in creating. Glad to hear your opposition to all of the evil as well. The desire for vocal, social righteous indignation with most of this dialog does not follow your fervor though. People remain silent until it supports their local politics, for the most part. | | |
| |
| ▲ | zzrrt 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I would reply point-by-point to show US hypocrisy, but that might be too much whataboutism. I think I'll just say this one: this is the only time Trump has pretended to care about the lives of brown-skinned protestors. He literally has asked whether he could intentionally shoot American protestors legally. He doesn't care about the Iranian people either, so there's some other reason. I'm not going to carry water for a secretly-motivated war where the "good" effects are secondary, post-hoc rationalizations. At least just say they're a grave threat we should destroy or whatever, don't play along with the game that the American government and people care so much for Muslims on the other side of the world. | |
| ▲ | testaccount28 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | i think the poster you're replying to does not regard iranians as capable of independent decisions. thus, the school deaths are a crime, but the dead protesters are more like a weather event: a tragedy. | |
| ▲ | UncleMeat 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Okay. We can consider this war to be about regime change when Israel and the US give up strategic planning to revolutionaries in Iran. |
| |
| ▲ | joe_mamba 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >Destroying a school is not an "oopsie". You should see how many innocent people US's wars in Afghanistan and Iraq killed. And that's only the ones we know of before the era of smartphones and social media where people could more easily document war crimes. Did anyone go to jail for it? No. Will anyone go to jail for killing innocent people in Iran? Also no. Trump is gonna fuck some more shit up in the area, declare "victory" when he's bored or the political pressure gets too high while leaving the middle east in a bigger mess than it was before. | | | |
| ▲ | trimethylpurine 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I notice you're not critical of Iran's military intentionally firing on civilians. Why? | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Because that was not the subject of the conversation. Iran's military killing civilians is bad, but that does not somehow justify also killing their civilians. WTF even is your logic? | | |
| ▲ | trimethylpurine 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It certainly doesn't justify killing civilians. | |
| ▲ | mhb 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The US made a mistake while attempting to ensure that insane theocrats who are close to building nuclear weapons are not able to. The fondest wish of the religious lunatics in charge of Iran (and we know this because they have told us) is to annihilate the US and Israel. They have demonstrated missiles that can reach Europe. These dots don't seem hard to connect. | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | > who are close to building nuclear weapons This is a lie. Not only is it not the stated purpose of the war, even Netanyahu himself went out of the way to say that Iran had no remaining capability to accomplish this and that was not why they were invaded. > They currently have demonstrated missiles that can reach Europe. The US demonstrated its missiles can reach schools in Iran. Why are we more concerned with scaremongering about what hypothetical evil acts Iran could commit while downplaying the evil acts that are actually being propagated by the US? | | |
| ▲ | mhb 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | The war has multiple goals. > Why are we more concerned with scaremongering about what hypothetical evil acts Iran could commit while downplaying the evil acts that are actually being propagated by the US? Because normal people can understand the difference between a mistake and intentional acts. And between the scales of different actions. | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | > The war has multiple goals. One of which is explicitly not Iran's nuclear capacity, as confirmed by one of the heads of state invading. > Because normal people can understand the difference between a mistake and intentional acts. Normal people can also understand that some things are too serious to pass off as "oopsie". We have terms like "manslaughter" or "aggravated murder" for when your reckless negligence leads to loss of human life. You are still responsible for the murders you cause when you take actions with intent that you know will lead to people dying without intending any specific one of those deaths. | | |
| ▲ | testaccount28 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | either way, you may wish to know: your poor argumentation shores up support for the war. | | |
| ▲ | oa335 an hour ago | parent [-] | | You may disagree with the idea that militaries are responsible for civilians they kill regardless of intent, but it is not poor argumentation. And the fact that it triggers you to support the war reveals more about you than you may intend. |
| |
| ▲ | trimethylpurine 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Military action always has civilian casualties. All you can do is hope and make effort to reduce them. And I'm glad we're on the side that does that. | | |
| ▲ | applfanboysbgon 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | You are absolutely not on the side that does that. The US has killed millions of civilians over the past century in all of the wars it's partaken in and pardons its own war criminals, on the very rare occasion it bothers to try them in the first place. Fuck me American propaganda is in another world. | | |
| ▲ | beedeebeedee 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Israeli propaganda. America is fighting this war but not leading it | |
| ▲ | trimethylpurine 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Iran advertises and brags about how many civilians they've killed and literally states its purpose is to export revolution. But America is the bad guy? No... Not even close. Do you see Americans cheering for the dead school children? I'm watching Iran cheering for the dead children in countries around the world every day for 40 years. You should be ashamed of yourself for even comparing. | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | user3939382 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yes. Evil military planners used AI to generate a list of thousands of kill sites and then engaged them without verification. They attacked a public park by accident because it has the name “police” in it. Recklessly slaughtering children is “grown up” now? | | | |
| ▲ | mikkupikku 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Possibly so, yes, that may have happened. The strike may have been calculated to inflame the Iranian public and lock them into a prolonged conflict, great for military contractors and their shareholders. | |
| ▲ | skeeter2020 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >> In reality someone made a mistake. It can happen. It should be investigated. It should not deter from achieving the military objectives. You should really unpack these statements, especially if you're trying to have a "grown up conversation". You're saying that no price is too high for achieving military objectives, even those that are very unclear and unilaterally defined without justification by a easily distracted narcissist with obvious goals of distracting from his domestic problems. | | |
| ▲ | Pay08 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | He isn't saying that at all, though. He is saying that by the nature of war, innocent people will die. Everyone knows this, which is why international law is based on proportionality, not on whether or not a single civilian was harmed. | | |
| ▲ | tremon 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | So you're saying that killing 150 school girls is a proportionate response to what, exactly? The children would have been safe if their parents would have preemptively sent them away to Epstein's Kid Rock? |
|
| |
| ▲ | abenga 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Is the fact that is a mistake a comfort to the kids' parents, siblings, or friends? Are they somehow less dead? | |
| ▲ | stephenr 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > In reality someone made a mistake. It's never just one mistake. It's usually a chain of mistakes and bad decisions that make the final mistake possible. I'd estimate that there were likely 77,168,458 mistakes/bad decisions made by individuals before this mistake could happen. | |
| ▲ | mlsu 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I simply had a few beers before getting behind the wheel. Honestly, judge, can we admit: nobody wants to run over anyone with their car. Cmon, do you really think I was twirling my moustache, thinking about how I would love to run those people over? Of course not! No, I am a benevolent fun loving guy. And I was simply having a few beers! How else is a good guy like me supposed to get home? | |
| ▲ | kakacik 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Then somebody should be punished so severely that incidence would go down dramatically. I dont mean 2 weeks administrative leave (or medal and promotion), I mean lives ruined, names tarnished, and/or people executed/jailed for 20 lives for mass (in)voluntary manslaughter. In reality, in same vein quite a few US laws are set. If you are not US passport holder you are subhuman. Less rights, less care, more disposable, just a garbage to step on. We saw it enough in past 80 years to see a clear pattern everywhere US went and (mostly) failed. For those slow in back rows - this is how you get almost endless stream of new fanatical recruits to merry groups like isis or al-queda. Dumb, supremely dumb. Yeah, 'a mistake, it can happen'. Fuck that american self-entitled rotten racist mentality. Then you wonder why whole world hates you now and what you stand for and represent. What a success story for america in past year. | |
| ▲ | nutjob2 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Sometimes a mistake is negligence. If you're going to use lethal force it's a good idea to check your facts first. It's been a school for years, how was that missed? None of that happened because the US was unprepared for this war. It was Bibi's idea and Trump is weak and incompetent so he just went along with it, ironically because he thought it would avoid making him look weak and incompetent. | | | |
| ▲ | watwut 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Have you heard Hegseth speeches lately? Or Trumps? Like, yes, evil military planners did sat down and said "rules of engagement are woke, the working groups handling civilian safety are waste of money, be maximum lethal". Also, they had no stable military objectives except "make my insecure masculinity feel manly". | |
| ▲ | ekjhgkejhgk 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think the military planners sat in the Pentagon and thought "Hey if we hit this school and kill all these children, that will achieve us X. Shall we do it?" And then they decided to do it. Yes, that's what I think. | | |
| ▲ | Pay08 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Surely nothing to do with the missile launcher next to it, right? |
| |
| ▲ | enlightenedfool 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Good try. When you are complicit in genocide in Gaza, destroy multiple countries on pretext of democracy and human rights, start wars with blatant lies, the "let's shoot at it for shits and giggles" is actually being kind. | |
| ▲ | Forgeties79 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Would you be so calm if someone made a mistake with your kid’s school? I have heard more than one Trump-defender say “well they would have grown up to attack us.” | |
| ▲ | vasac 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Do you think some evil military planners sat in the Pentagon... Why shouldn’t he believe it? You people believe the same kind of crap when you're told that X (insert the current boogeyman de jour) hates Murica and wants to kill you all. |
|
.jpg){kind=link}
(3).jpg){kind=link}