> “bomb them, they’re all regime supporters”

Even those regime supporters are civilians. This is literally advocating for a war crime.

RiverStone 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Sad that my comment got flagged, this is a major problem with hacker news - censorship of comments that prevent people from hearing all perspectives.

The point of my comment was to give a first-hand conversation with an actual Iranian.

You can react to it any way you want, but the point of my comment was to show how some Iranians are actually thinking. And yes, many Iranians want regime change and they see the supporters of the regime as the enemy.

The regime hangs protestors by the way.

▲

yodsanklai an hour ago | parent [-]

Yes, many Iranians want regime change, but that's not going to happen by bombing everything in the country, and Trump isn't willing to send troops. I'm not sure what your point is actually.

▲

RiverStone an hour ago | parent [-]

I was responding to a comment about bombing bridges.

I quoted an actual conversation i had with an Iranian where they said essentially “go ahead and bomb the bridges”. That got flagged for some reason.

I’m simply trying to surface conversations I’ve had with Iranians. So often these Internet conversations occur in a bubble.

My point? I guess there’s this idea that Iranians are disgusted with Trump’s comment today. That hasn’t been my experience at all. My wife is Iranian. I’m connected to a large Iranian expat community. They are very pro Trump because of the war. The initial reaction I saw was disappointment with the ceasefire. They want continued pressure on the regime, and they feel that a cease-fire works against that.

	▲	mrbombastic 7 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		You often find expat communities have the exact opposite viewpoint as those that remain, part of the reason they are expats. See cuban expats, nicaraguan expats, not to say they are wrong but they are not a monolith representing all of a civilization. Presumably those standing around the bridges don’t want them bombed.
	▲	yodsanklai 28 minutes ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		It's not because you've found an Iranian that wants their country destroyed that this is the right thing to do. All military experts agree that bombing a country isn't going to trigger a regime change, and it hasn't so far after weeks of intense bombing. So the answer should be, keep bombing more things and target civilians? Besides, the Iranian expat community is also a bubble, maybe not representative of the ones who are actually bombed.
	▲	jamaliki 25 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Iranian expat communities have these radical views because they won't have to live with the consequences.

▲

kortilla 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

“War crime” is all but meaningless. They happen in every war and the only side that gets prosecuted for them seems to be the losers.

	▲	dbdr 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		"Corruption" is all but meaningless. It happens in every society and the only people that get prosecuted for them seem to be people outside the elite. /s I don't think holding such views is helpful. Besides, a few people have been prosecuted for war crimes while being on the winning side (or by their own side), some examples: William Calley (US), convicted for his role in the 1968 My Lai massacre, in which American troops killed hundreds of unarmed South Vietnamese civilians. Donald Payne (UK), for abuse and death of an Iraqi detainee. Charles Graner (US), sentenced to 10 years in prison for the abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison. However, we can agree those are very few and far between, compared to all crimes committed. But it's more useful to condemn them and advocate for more accountability than to claim it's useless anyways and normalize calls for more crimes.