Let's hope Iran doesn't follow the "no quarter, no mercy" policy laid out by US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. For the unfamiliar, it means executing survivors and surrendering combatants. Aka war crimes.

▲

jLaForest 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

[flagged]

▲

hdgvhicv 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

In America you get jailed for quoting the US president

	▲	cindyllm 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[dead]

▲

TOMDM 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Secretary of War thank you, no dead naming glorious leaders very fine people

	▲	amysox 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Can we just call him "Secretary of Death Piss-Drunk Pete Kegstand"?

▲

partiallypro 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

derwiki 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think the Great Leap Forward famine killed a lot more, but I guess it wasn’t a massacre: just super weird and bad leadership from Mao.

▲

culi 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

this is ridiculous misinformation propagated by an outlet that has no actual journalists on the payroll btw

▲

operatingthetan 2 hours ago | parent [-]

What is the source of your claim?

▲

culi 2 hours ago | parent [-]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/31/concern-over-u...

▲

operatingthetan 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Your link does not reference the "40,000" number regarding the purported massacre at all. Your claim is that the number is "misinformation."

▲

culi 2 hours ago | parent [-]

This is The Guardian's investigation into Iran International. Which is the outlet that made up that number

▲

operatingthetan 2 hours ago | parent [-]

You're making a character attack on the source but not proving the claim wrong.

▲

culi 2 hours ago | parent [-]

It's not just a character attack to point out that a glorified blog post pulled that number out of thin air.

It would be silly to ask someone to prove that a made up number is made up. How can I provide evidence for lack of evidence. A more reasonable starting point would be to bring up what evidence does exist for the 40k number and then evaluate that.

If you want to continue believing it, that's your prerogative. I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm just doing my part to counter misinformation from biased sources.

FWIW, the Human Rights Activists in Iran (Virginia-based NGO) puts the figure at 6,488

▲

operatingthetan 2 hours ago | parent [-]

It is a character attack to call into question the validity of the source in general.

You did not provide evidence for your claim. You offered something else entirely. In the future it would be better to provide what is being requested instead of a distraction.

I don't have strong beliefs on this, I just wanted a conclusive source. You did not provide one.

	▲	bigyabai 25 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> You did not provide evidence for your claim. I don't think that Iran International did either, so calling their methodology into question is fair play.

▲

asadotzler 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

partiallypro 4 hours ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

	▲	paulryanrogers 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		War was not the only option to respond to the crime. FWIW I'd agree your question wasn't what-about-ism.
	▲	bigyabai 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		You don't have to forget anything, just contextualize it. The United States already tried installing a puppet government in Iran and it went terribly. They were so unpopular that the CIA set up state-sponsored torture rings to quell dissent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAVAK Going back to the old way foments instability that jeopardizes the Gulf States, with precisely zero upsides to anyone that isn't a net oil exporter (namely, the US and Russia). If this was about protecting against genocide then the US would be invading Sudan and Gaza, not Iran. The death toll has nothing to do with how American leadership sees this conflict, and it has been like that for over half of a century.