| ▲ | sosomoxie 4 hours ago |
| A completely unnecessary war that benefits no one other than Israel and harms the rest of the world. The only positive to come from this is the annihilation of US military assets in the Middle East and an even deeper unity of the world against Zionism. It’s tough times but we will ultimately defeat this heinous ideology. |
|
| ▲ | ptaffs 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| >benefits no one isn't correct. There are plenty of people on HN working in military contract industries, high tech arms manufacturing and such. They lobby Gov and benefit financially as do their employees. |
| |
| ▲ | shaky-carrousel 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Ok, benefits no one other than Israel AND American warlords. | |
| ▲ | spauldo 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Only certain types of contractors, and likely only in the short term. Military contractors do well when the military has widespread support from the voters. Congresscritters will happily approve tax dollars going to the military industrial complex when their constituents view the US as the global protector of democracy. Wars like this one that aren't popular and make us look like thugs open the floor up to anti-military candidates. So yeah, the companies building missiles do well while the war is on, but the people like me who automate military fuel farms see budget cuts and projects cancelled. | |
| ▲ | bee_rider 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I wonder if it does benefit arms R&D folks. At least, as someone not too well informed on the military stuff, it looks like the moral of the story has been that our high-end stuff hasn’t functioned as well as the price tag lead us to expect, and a bunch of cheap drones might be the way to go. If I worked in military R&D I’d be worried that focus might shift away from the more speculative/less delivery-oriented/fun to work on products… | | |
| ▲ | cyberlurker 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I could see this happening if the point of the arms industry was defense and not a jobs program. | | |
| ▲ | wk_end 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Domestically maybe, but international buyers aren't giving billions to American arms manufacturers to prop up American jobs. |
|
| |
| ▲ | mullingitover 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The mayor's rock-throwing spree is doing wonders for growth in the town's window repair sector! |
|
|
| ▲ | watwut 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Russia is also benefiting. China less so, but it gives them advantage in their competition with west. |
| |
| ▲ | 0cf8612b2e1e 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | China is going to be selling solar panels and EVs at triple the previously projected rate after this crisis. |
|
|
| ▲ | dirck-norman 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | eightysixfour 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | People really struggle to keep their heads straight when all of the primary actors are horrible people. | |
| ▲ | ogogmad 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Jews What does this word mean in the year 2026? | |
| ▲ | hart_russell 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I don’t see Iran committing genocide in Gaza. | |
| ▲ | sosomoxie 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Wow, this is just a blatant lie. It’s Israel that is ethically cleansing Lebanon, not Iran. The hasbara is getting more desperate every day. | | |
| ▲ | NickC25 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Correct. Iran also has no nuclear weapons. | |
| ▲ | dirck-norman 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | sosomoxie 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I’m a developer who has to deal with Zionism every day. We’re speed running IBM and the Holocaust. Commenting about it is the very least I can do. I have zero issue with Hezbollah. | | |
| ▲ | dirck-norman 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | ogogmad 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Hezbollah was formed after Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon, which killed 17k+ people, mostly civilians, and which Israeli historian Ilan Pappé said was mainly unprovoked (see below). Israel's explanation for why they decided to risk killing tens of thousands of non-Israelis - which is ultimately what their invasion did - was highly dishonest. The reason for Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982: Israel said it invaded Lebanon in June 1982 to stop PLO attacks from southern Lebanon and push Palestinian fighters far enough north to protect northern Israel.† The immediate trigger was the attempted assassination of Israel’s ambassador in London, Shlomo Argov. But that attack was carried out by the Abu Nidal group (based in Iraq), not the PLO, and Israel used it as the opening for a much broader war: destroying the PLO’s power in Lebanon, besieging Beirut, weakening Syrian influence, and trying to install a friendly Lebanese government. So, bluntly: there was a real security problem, but the 1982 invasion was also a war of choice and political engineering, not just self-defense. † Right before the June 1982 invasion, the "they were shelling Galilee" line is weak: even the IDF says that after the July 1981 Habib ceasefire, "from July 1981 to June 1982, the Israeli-Lebanese border was quiet." | | |
| ▲ | dlubarov 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon [...] which Israeli historian Ilan Pappé said was unprovoked "Unprovoked" is wildly inaccurate, and not even the most anti-Israel historians like Pappé claim that. The provocation was very clear: the PLO paramilitary bombarding Israeli towns from southern Lebanon. If Mexican cartels started bombarding San Diego, would anyone say that a US response was "unprovoked"? | | |
| ▲ | ogogmad 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's a provocation of sorts, maybe. However, I'm curious how Israel's invasion was supposed to stop that. Either they would occupy part of Lebanon, but open up their soldiers to attacks from irregulars, which doesn't seem any better for Israel. Or, they would expel tens of thousands of people AND occupy parts of Lebanon, which would still expose the Israeli occupiers to attacks from just outside the new border. If Israel was going to kill tens of thousands of people, it had an obligation to have a plan which wasn't completely stupid. I don't see what WASN'T stupid about it. |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | simianparrot 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | stephen_g 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Nobody is saying Iran is good, this war if anything has solidified the rule of the hardline ideologues in its Government, by killing off a bunch of the more moderate ones. And all this bombing is definitely going to convince the local population that you are the good guys, right? Is it any wonder why the people haven’t risen up against the Iranian regime? And all that is not to mention that the war has handed the regime control of the Strait. And it’s fair for people to point out that the the US and Israel starting the war was illegal under international law and exactly the same crime most of the world is sanctioning Russia for… Just because you don’t like the target, you can’t ignore the facts. | | | |
| ▲ | Traster 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think it depends on what you classify as siding with Iran. I don't support any part of Iran's regime, but they didn't start this war. I don't support any part of Iran's regime, but this war seems to have empowered rather than destroyed the most objectionable parts of Iran's regime. I don't support any part of Iran's regime. But the actions of the US and Israel in this war have breached a lot of international rules that we would decry if it were Russia or China - and in doing so have created much more risk for countries in Eastern Europe and Taiwan. | |
| ▲ | phatfish 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Israel and America sure managed to set the bar low didn't they? | |
| ▲ | ryandrake 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I don't know anyone saying "Iran good." That's just a straw man. Both Israel and Iran can be bad simultaneously. | | |
| ▲ | dirck-norman 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | ryandrake 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Well, he must have deleted it, then, because there is literally no mention of Hezbollah in this thread. Nobody with at least half a brain is saying that Iran is in any way a good guy. | | |
| ▲ | bit-anarchist 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | They did post this: > I’m a developer who has to deal with Zionism every day. We’re speed running IBM and the Holocaust. Commenting about it is the very least I can do. > I have zero issue with Hezbollah. The parent comment, from OP, which was flagged, was questioning GP about Iran's support for Hezbollah IIRC. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | sosomoxie 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I do not share any values with Zionism which include: genocide, ethnic cleansing, apartheid, imperialism, systematic rape, torture, censorship, bribery and blackmail. | | | |
| ▲ | myth_drannon 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | sosomoxie 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I’m a leftist and certainly Muslims will be against their own slaughter. There are plenty of right wingers who hate Zionism too though. Zionist’s only allies are the heavily propagandized baby boomers, and even they are shifting away from Israel. | | |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | jvanderbot 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| There was a time when USA guaranteed the safe passage of shipping, which helped secure a peaceful world order, apparently. I view this as a continuation of that legacy, but admit I only have 1-2 books supporting this view. |
| |
| ▲ | AntiUSAbah 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Soooo just to be clear here with your argument: The USA was doing something to guarantee that stuff can flow through it, then they start a war, now they can no longer guarantee this? Did they suddenly loose the power to protect this flow? Just because USA is war mongering, doesn't mean no one else would have stepped up or that it wouldn't be better without all of this involvment. | | |
| ▲ | jvanderbot 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Everything I said was true : Bretton woods exists, and my opinion flows from that. Feel free to disregard it or correct the facts, I think that'd be a good discussion. And yeah, USA might do dumb things that put them into a bind, but ultimately the peaceful flow of traffic through Hormuz is a goal worth pursuing for the world economic health. |
| |
| ▲ | armada651 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | How is closing the strait a continuation of a legacy of guaranteed safe passage? | | | |
| ▲ | ajross 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is some extraordinary up-is-down construction. Hormuz was open in February, and for decades preceding that. It's closed now. How is this situation the result of the "guarantee of safe passage of shipping", exactly? |
|
