Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Schulz2.0 said:

The geopolitics guys I've listened to, Ian Bremmer and Peter Zeihan, both think regime change will be very tough to accomplish because the IRGC effectively run the country. 

I’m coming around to the idea that if the nukes at Fordow can be eliminated and they keep degrading the ballistic missile capability, keeping Khameini in power may be the preferred outcome. He’s proven to be completely outclassed in this conflict. Keep letting the old fool run the country into the ground.

Obviously, if there was an Ataturk type who could replace him with a secular democracy that would be the fantasy scenario, but I’m not holding my breath on that. Reza Pahlavi doesn’t seem to have any substantial base of support and I haven’t seen anyone else (either an individual or party/movement) that might step up into that role. 
 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
4 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

The Iranian leadership gives no shits about their people, otherwise they wouldn't have morality police beating the hell out of women (and/or killing them) for not dressing modestly enough. They can get their families to Moscow (and rumors are some have done that, although I have my doubts).

So that leaves the lives of the actual leadership. 

Not every dictatorship ends with a quick flight to Moscow like it did with Syria. If Trump actually keeps up with the "unconditional surrender" angle, the Iranian leadership all saw what happened to Gaddafi and Hussein when they were driven out of power by Western military might, and if it's not outright capture by citizens and the shoving up the ass of red hot pokers like Gaddafi, it'll be turned over to the civilian population like Hussain. Some of them are nuts enough to decide they are going to take down a lot of innocent people on their way out, and they have a shit-ton of missiles and at least some nuclear material.  I wouldn't put it past them if things go down that road.

I don’t disagree the risk is there for missile strikes but I understood their missile capacity was quite limited. In fact something like 2000 total and much of that is likely expended already trying to push back Israel? 

I don’t think it’s bad to expose Iran’s shitty military capability just like Russia was exposed. Leaves China alone. They have no military allies. So when this shit shifts to Taiwan they will be 100% isolated on that. The emerging axis of Russia, China and Iran is a house of cards (except to the extent the lesser are just pawns to provide oil).

I think the bigger risk above missile strikes is ancillary terrorism from Iran - stunts in the Red Sea, proxy responses from the Houthis and others.

but it is interesting, some of the Arab states even most of them seem to have an appetite for moving on from the foundational grievances. There seems to be a fair amount of if you can’t beat them join them from the more developed parts of the region. 

Iran already fucks with shit in the Middle East so who is to say confirming their nuke program is busted and setting them back is a bad thing? I’m still open minded about it all - though I’d like the US to stay out of it.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
4 minutes ago, Duane Moore said:

I’m coming around to the idea that if the nukes at Fordow can be eliminated and they keep degrading the ballistic missile capability, keeping Khameini in power may be the preferred outcome. He’s proven to be completely outclassed in this conflict. Keep letting the old fool run the country into the ground.

Obviously, if there was an Ataturk type who could replace him with a secular democracy that would be the fantasy scenario, but I’m not holding my breath on that. Reza Pahlavi doesn’t seem to have any substantial base of support and I haven’t seen anyone else (either an individual or party/movement) that might step up into that role. 
 

 

I agree though a free and secular Iran would a boon to the world economy. I really wish they could fully join this century. Too much to ask. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, troph said:

I agree though a free and secular Iran would a boon to the world economy. I really wish they could fully join this century. Too much to ask. 

Lol. If you think we would ever allow a free and secular Iran I have a bridge to sell you. The best we can hope for is we use our attack dog to decapitate the current regime and they fly Pahlavi's ass back over there and reinstall the monarchy, and then this all happens again in a couple decades.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, troph said:

I agree though a free and secular Iran would a boon to the world economy. I really wish they could fully join this century. Too much to ask. 

Absolutely. It’s such a shame because they really should not have any natural enmity with Israel. The two countries don’t even share a border. If they spent their efforts trying to ensure the prosperity and security of their people rather than defining their nation around the elimination of an entire state solely due to their religion, everyone one in the region would be better off. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Duane Moore said:

Absolutely. It’s such a shame because they really should not have any natural enmity with Israel. The two countries don’t even share a border. If they spent their efforts trying to ensure the prosperity and security of their people rather than defining their nation around the elimination of an entire state solely due to their religion, everyone one in the region would be better off. 

Yeah there is no real reason beyond the shitty, religious extremist ideology of the mullahs. They were strategic allies prior to the Iranian Revolution. No reason it can't be the case in the future.

Aside from the ones I gave, of course.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Yeah there is no real reason beyond the shitty, religious extremist ideology of the mullahs. They were strategic allies prior to the Iranian Revolution. No reason it can't be the case in the future.

Aside from the ones I gave, of course.

So then the Clerics must go. Otherwise it won't change. Did you know there were Taliban within the Karzai government? Quite openly. But they were willing to listen and see. They were from the Deep south. 

When we decided to impose what we call Democracy vs. their traditional system they said nah, fuck this. And went to be come regional leaders. 

Keep big Army out of this. Want them removed? It is a Special Operations mission. Delta, Rangers, the Airborne. 1st Cav can watch. 10th mountain, keep guarding our northern border. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, InkaUtexas said:

So then the Clerics must go. Otherwise it won't change. Did you know there were Taliban within the Karzai government? Quite openly. But they were willing to listen and see. They were from the Deep south. 

When we decided to impose what we call Democracy vs. their traditional system they said nah, fuck this. And went to be come regional leaders. 

Keep big Army out of this. Want them removed? It is a Special Operations mission. Delta, Rangers, the Airborne. 1st Cav can watch. 10th mountain, keep guarding our northern border. 

 

Yeah I would think it would have to be a targeted, precision op. Dropping MOABs everywhere ain't gonna do it.

Posted
1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

Yeah I would think it would have to be a targeted, precision op. Dropping MOABs everywhere ain't gonna do it.

Bomb it, cuz we already sent the shit over and show China what we can do. There are probably very few people there. Sucks. Then let the IDF go in and really neutralize the site. Invite some international "monitors," That is all the IDF can do on the ground. Fuck it, do the two nuke sites.

Meanwhile the US takes the 5 major airports, Bandar Abbas (port only), only special ops personnel. Get them up and running to normal ASAP. Take Kharg Island and get the oil moving. Cut a deal with the non-ICRG managers of the refineries. Get them going. 

Open up the airports and port. MASSIVE influx of aid. Food, medicine, fuel. Alleviate any possible bitching. 6 months US leaves. Replaced by an international monitoring and security force. 

Allow regional leaders to continue day to day operations. 18 months to national elections. No member of the Shah's family or member of the current regime allowed to run. Keep the threat up that if ANYONE gets out of line, in a big way., there will be tit for tat BS, US air is coming. 

Oh, and to the poster above who said Savak controlled everything? Do not you think the IRG does? 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
40 minutes ago, troph said:

I agree though a free and secular Iran would a boon to the world economy. I really wish they could fully join this century. Too much to ask. 

 

35 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Lol. If you think we would ever allow a free and secular Iran I have a bridge to sell you. The best we can hope for is we use our attack dog to decapitate the current regime and they fly Pahlavi's ass back over there and reinstall the monarchy, and then this all happens again in a couple decades.

where did I say I think we would allow it?
 

26 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Yeah there is no real reason beyond the shitty, religious extremist ideology of the mullahs. They were strategic allies prior to the Iranian Revolution. No reason it can't be the case in the future.

Aside from the ones I gave, of course.

aspirations and reality are not the same, agreed.

  • Like 1
Posted

There is a lot to unpack in this rather long Reuters Paylink Article

I'll put some highlights in spoilers below but broad take aways with as little bias as possible 

1) Iran saber rattling and declaring no surrender

2) Russia getting in the saber rattling game. 

3) Iran making veiled threats to OG facilities and shipping which won't help their cause with US or ME OG powers.

4) Internal concerns in Iran about tactical errors due to leadership deaths.

5) Iranian people fleeing cities

6) Iran going full dictatorship and banning public filming. Limiting purchases etc

Iran's Khamenei rejects Trump's call for surrender as thousands flee Tehran -

Spoiler

DUBAI/JERUSALEM - Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei rejected U.S. President Donald Trump's demand for unconditional surrender on Wednesday, as Iranians jammed the highways out of Tehran fleeing from intensified Israeli airstrikes.

In a recorded speech played on television, his first appearance since Friday, Khamenei, 86, said the Americans "should know that any U.S. military intervention will undoubtedly be accompanied by irreparable damage."

"Intelligent people who know Iran, the Iranian nation and its history will never speak to this nation in threatening language because the Iranian nation will not surrender," he said.

Trump has veered from proposing a swift diplomatic end to the war to suggesting the United States might join it. In social media posts on Tuesday he mused about killing Khamenei, then demanded Iran's "UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!

...

Israel's military said 50 Israeli jets had struck around 20 targets in Tehran overnight, including sites producing raw materials, components and manufacturing systems for missiles. The military told Iranians to leave parts of the capital for their safety while it struck targets.

Traffic was backed up on highways leading out of the city of 10 million people. Arezou, 31, told Reuters by phone that she had made it out to the nearby resort town of Lavasan.

Russia's foreign ministry said the world was "millimetres away from catastrophe" due to daily strikes on Iran's nuclear sites. Germany's foreign minister appealed to Iran's leaders to make credible assurances they were not seeking a nuclear weapon and show willingness to find a negotiated solution.

...

Iran had conveyed to Washington that it would retaliate strongly without restraint against the United States for any direct participation, its ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, Ali Bahreini, said. He said he already saw the U.S. as "complicit in what Israel is doing".

Iran has been exploring options for leverage, including veiled threats to hit the global oil market by restricting access to the Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important shipping artery for oil. Tehran has in the past threatened to close the strait but has never followed through.

A former Iranian Economy Minister, Ehsan Khandouzi, said on X that Iran should start requiring permission for tankers transiting the strait, a move he said would be "decisive" but only if implemented quickly. Iran's Oil Ministry and Foreign Ministry did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Authorities are intent on preventing panic and shortages, and fewer images of destruction have been allowed to circulate than in the early days of the bombing, when state media showed pictures of explosions, fires and flattened apartments. A ban on filming by the public has been imposed.

With Khamenei's main military and security advisers killed by Israeli strikes, the leader's inner circle has been narrowed, raising the risk that he could make strategic errors, according to five people familiar with his decision-making process.

 

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

There is a lot to unpack in this rather long Reuters Paylink Article

I'll put some highlights in spoilers below but broad take aways with as little bias as possible 

1) Iran saber rattling and declaring no surrender

2) Russia getting in the saber rattling game. 

3) Iran making veiled threats to OG facilities and shipping which won't help their cause with US or ME OG powers.

4) Internal concerns in Iran about tactical errors due to leadership deaths.

5) Iranian people fleeing cities

6) Iran going full dictatorship and banning public filming. Limiting purchases etc

Iran's Khamenei rejects Trump's call for surrender as thousands flee Tehran -

  Reveal hidden contents

DUBAI/JERUSALEM - Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei rejected U.S. President Donald Trump's demand for unconditional surrender on Wednesday, as Iranians jammed the highways out of Tehran fleeing from intensified Israeli airstrikes.

In a recorded speech played on television, his first appearance since Friday, Khamenei, 86, said the Americans "should know that any U.S. military intervention will undoubtedly be accompanied by irreparable damage."

"Intelligent people who know Iran, the Iranian nation and its history will never speak to this nation in threatening language because the Iranian nation will not surrender," he said.

Trump has veered from proposing a swift diplomatic end to the war to suggesting the United States might join it. In social media posts on Tuesday he mused about killing Khamenei, then demanded Iran's "UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!

...

Israel's military said 50 Israeli jets had struck around 20 targets in Tehran overnight, including sites producing raw materials, components and manufacturing systems for missiles. The military told Iranians to leave parts of the capital for their safety while it struck targets.

Traffic was backed up on highways leading out of the city of 10 million people. Arezou, 31, told Reuters by phone that she had made it out to the nearby resort town of Lavasan.

Russia's foreign ministry said the world was "millimetres away from catastrophe" due to daily strikes on Iran's nuclear sites. Germany's foreign minister appealed to Iran's leaders to make credible assurances they were not seeking a nuclear weapon and show willingness to find a negotiated solution.

...

Iran had conveyed to Washington that it would retaliate strongly without restraint against the United States for any direct participation, its ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, Ali Bahreini, said. He said he already saw the U.S. as "complicit in what Israel is doing".

Iran has been exploring options for leverage, including veiled threats to hit the global oil market by restricting access to the Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important shipping artery for oil. Tehran has in the past threatened to close the strait but has never followed through.

A former Iranian Economy Minister, Ehsan Khandouzi, said on X that Iran should start requiring permission for tankers transiting the strait, a move he said would be "decisive" but only if implemented quickly. Iran's Oil Ministry and Foreign Ministry did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Authorities are intent on preventing panic and shortages, and fewer images of destruction have been allowed to circulate than in the early days of the bombing, when state media showed pictures of explosions, fires and flattened apartments. A ban on filming by the public has been imposed.

With Khamenei's main military and security advisers killed by Israeli strikes, the leader's inner circle has been narrowed, raising the risk that he could make strategic errors, according to five people familiar with his decision-making process.

 

Live shot of senior IRGC officials on the streets:

756b5e21-0149-467e-a677-a579883dec93_tex

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, troph said:

I agree though a free and secular Iran would a boon to the world economy. I really wish they could fully join this century. Too much to ask. 

I think they can and possibly would.

Sometimes countries can find their own autonomy post regime change. Most posters here, due to historicals, have completely dismissed the Iranian peoples ability of self determination and self rule. It's myopic and a discredit to the humans living in the country of Iran. 

They are a proud and historical amazingly strong people.

I DO get the historical realities of the ME, but to automatically assume with certainty that the Iranian people are completely incapable of self determination is frankly racist.

Edited by BurntEyes
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
52 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Bomb it, cuz we already sent the shit over and show China what we can do. There are probably very few people there. Sucks. Then let the IDF go in and really neutralize the site. Invite some international "monitors," That is all the IDF can do on the ground. Fuck it, do the two nuke sites.

Meanwhile the US takes the 5 major airports, Bandar Abbas (port only), only special ops personnel. Get them up and running to normal ASAP. Take Kharg Island and get the oil moving. Cut a deal with the non-ICRG managers of the refineries. Get them going. 

Open up the airports and port. MASSIVE influx of aid. Food, medicine, fuel. Alleviate any possible bitching. 6 months US leaves. Replaced by an international monitoring and security force. 

Allow regional leaders to continue day to day operations. 18 months to national elections. No member of the Shah's family or member of the current regime allowed to run. Keep the threat up that if ANYONE gets out of line, in a big way., there will be tit for tat BS, US air is coming. 

Oh, and to the poster above who said Savak controlled everything? Do not you think the IRG does? 

It seems wildly optimistic that we'd sustain follow through aid for even 6 weeks. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Ghost of NMAS said:

I’m sure the Persian people loved SAVAK.  The Shah was just another brutal dictator propped up by the US

https://gamaan.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/GAMAAN-Political-Systems-Survey-2022-English-Final.pdf

A 2022 survey by Gamaan found that 64% of respondents viewed Mohammad Reza Pahlavi positively, while 28% judged him negatively.  I bet that number is significantly higher today.

Edited by Frank Drebin
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
8 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

Yeah everyone understands your fucking point. The CR is right over there. I’d like to read about the conflict without having anyone bring up their Trump hatred reflexively nonstop. We get it. He’s a tweeting buffoon. 

It's real simple to ignore the cloak room clowns who cannot help themselves in making every post political.

Posted
1 hour ago, Ghost of NMAS said:

I’m sure the Persian people loved SAVAK.  The Shah was just another brutal dictator propped up by the US

 

Name one decently sized ME autocracy that doesn't/didn't have a brutal secret police.

 

1 hour ago, Brian Fantana said:

Lol. If you think we would ever allow a free and secular Iran I have a bridge to sell you. The best we can hope for is we use our attack dog to decapitate the current regime and they fly Pahlavi's ass back over there and reinstall the monarchy, and then this all happens again in a couple decades.

 

Persians are not Arab and are not historically fundamentalist. Under the Shah they had a history of personal freedom and religious tolerance relative to the rest of the ME.

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
20 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

I think they can and possibly would.

Sometimes countries can find their own autonomy post regime change. Most posters here, due to historicals, have completely dismissed the Iranian peoples ability of self determination and self rule. It's myopic and a discredit to the humans living in the country of Iran. 

They are a proud and historical amazingly strong people.

I DO get the historical realities of the ME, but to automatically assume with certainty that the Iranian people are completely incapable of self determination is frankly racist.

could happen for sure. I think if any ME country ruled under an iron fist could it would be them. just doubt it.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, burnt beanz said:

 

 

Bibi has been saying this, more or less, for the past decade and a half and yet, Iran has never completed the puzzle. Yes, we need Iran back at the table to talk about denuclearization but using the argument that "they're almost there, we think, but it's ambiguous" to bomb Tehran is disingenuous at best.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
6 minutes ago, dieucla98 said:

It's war. It's always going to be political. Wake the fuck up.

Generally, the Ukraine/Russia discussion has been pretty politically free and commentary has been more subject oriented. Every once in awhile the cloak room people and associated commentary crop up but overall it has been good since the thread was started in 2022.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Posted
Just now, Bevo said:

Generally, the Ukraine/Russia discussion has been pretty politically free and commentary has been more subject oriented. Every once in awhile the cloak room people and associated commentary crop up but overall it has been good since the thread was started in 2022.

there's a lot more information to share in that war, Ukraine strategically has been an open book. Iran is not that. there is VERY little tactical information out there to share.  No westerners (media, etc.) on the ground in Iran really.

Posted
1 minute ago, Bevo said:

Generally, the Ukraine/Russia discussion has been pretty politically free and commentary has been more subject oriented. Every once in awhile the cloak room people and associated commentary crop up but overall it has been good since the thread was started in 2022.

The politics are there, we are all just on the same side of the politics so no one minds it.

Posted

Couldn’t the Israelis use one of their own C-130 Hercules to haul a 30,000lb. bunker buster and drop on the Fordow facility?  It has the carrying capacity.

Posted
11 hours ago, troph said:

Where the line is crossed isn’t in talking about what he says, it’s in blind assumption he’s always wrong

Hardly a "blind assumption..."

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Quote

Nobitex, Iran’s largest crypto exchange, appeared to have suffered a major security breach on Wednesday, resulting in over $48 million in losses, according to blockchain sleuth ZachXBT.

After the incident surfaced, Gonjeshke Darande, also known as Predatory Sparrow, a pro-Israel hacktivist group, claimed they were behind the attack.

The hackers accused Nobitex of helping the Iranian regime bypass sanctions and claimed the Iranian government used the platform as part of its financial and military infrastructure.

The group said it would release Nobitex’s internal source code and data within 24 hours, warning users that any assets left on the platform after that time would be at risk.

 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 3
Posted

We can force a dead woman to become a child incubator, which is fine, but if anywhere a woman has to wear a hijab we need to invade that place

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 3
Posted
6 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

We can force a dead woman to become a child incubator, which is fine, but if anywhere a woman has to wear a hijab we need to invade that place

dO YoU waNt sHAriA LAw?!!!!1!1!

Posted
5 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

235524-C-HZB33-109.jpg
 

Always a promising sign of good things to come!

The quoted video reminded me of the video of Afghan men shaving their beards and cursing the Taliban around the time of the U.S. invasion.

This image also came to mind. 

cf295e1a-888e-4c95-8771-fb612b38cbbc_tex

 

  • Haha 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
12 hours ago, bolverk said:

I pretty much agree with all that -- it's likely too late for any other scenario other than the course we're currently on unless, for whatever reason, Trump surprises us all and decides to not go through with it.

If that's indeed the case, then we can just start discussing the duration of the war and degree of suffering this will cause over the short- and long-term, including the severity of blowback and bloody consequences.

I get where your head is at. My thinking is that the best way to analyze an issue, in audio visual where I work or world events is KISS. Try approaching one issue at a time. If a speaker isn't working in a room, check the connection in a room, then the output device, wire, power, and network switch prior to the back end programing of the control system.

So right now in the ME, THE item is war between Iran and Israel. That one thing cascades to all the others. None of us know how it will end and discussion of that specific aspect is more relevant than what happens after. Particularly because we don't know how the first part ends, figuring out the post stems out into so many possibilities that it's not productive, imo. Doesn't mean I don't think others shouldn't, I just think it falls outside the lines of discussions I'm interested in and current news worthy discussion.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, F250 said:

The quoted video reminded me of the video of Afghan men shaving their beards and cursing the Taliban around the time of the U.S. invasion.

This image also came to mind. 

cf295e1a-888e-4c95-8771-fb612b38cbbc_tex

 

Yep. MagicSoccerSpray is an idiot, of the repeatedly-stepping-on-the-same-rake variety. 

  • Haha 3
Posted
20 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

My thinking is that the best way to analyze an issue, in audio visual where I work or world events is KISS.

 

 

  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
1 hour ago, BurntEyes said:

I think they can and possibly would.

Sometimes countries can find their own autonomy post regime change. Most posters here, due to historicals, have completely dismissed the Iranian peoples ability of self determination and self rule. It's myopic and a discredit to the humans living in the country of Iran. 

They are a proud and historical amazingly strong people.

I DO get the historical realities of the ME, but to automatically assume with certainty that the Iranian people are completely incapable of self determination is frankly racist.

I don't get where you're seeing anyone, much less most posters, saying or even implying "that Iranian people are completely incapable of self determination," but agree that it would be a racist statement, were anyone saying that.

Speaking only for myself on this, the main concern is that a decision in favor of regime change can't be rushed or taken lightly. We (the West), and most importantly, the Iranians themselves, will have to live with those consequences. To mitigate the negative effects, both direct and indirect, a plan should be in place to prevent bad actors from taking advantage of the situation, which could easily lead to political chaos, violence, and civilian suffering. 

How do you prevent such an environment from taking hold? Well, someone needs to provide security and keep the peace so that civil society can thrive. Who's going to do that? Obviously, the IRGC, as an organization, and its leaders have $profitted immensely during the reign of the mullahs, so I don't suspect they'll be willing partners in shedding their current wealth and privilege. The regular army? Perhaps, but I know very little about their capacity to do that: leadership, training, etc. An outside force, as Inka has previously suggested, comprised of Canadians, Nordic countries, various Latin American and/or African nations? Is there a coalition to ensure they're on board?

I'm asking not so stubborn as to let any hypothetical perfect plan stand in the way of a good one. All I'm asking is, "What is the fucking plan?" if we're going to do this.

As for our experiences of the recent past in the region, my doubts aren't with the capacity of the people living in these places. Rather, they're with the capacity of the people, who are not living in these places, making these decisions.

 

1 hour ago, MagicSoccerSpray said:

Persians are not Arab and are not historically fundamentalist. Under the Shah they had a history of personal freedom and religious tolerance relative to the rest of the ME.

Now, THIS is what I'd call implied racism.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
28 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

Yep. MagicSoccerSpray is an idiot, of the repeatedly-stepping-on-the-same-rake variety. 

He was pretty vocal over the weekend about a governor and former VP candidate suggesting that China might be a good mediator but was utterly silent when the current president suggested Putin, as were a couple of other posters.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Drool 1
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, bolverk said:

I don't get where you're seeing anyone, much less most posters, saying or even implying "that Iranian people are completely incapable of self determination," but agree that it would be a racist statement, were anyone saying that.

Speaking only for myself on this, the main concern is that a decision in favor of regime change can't be rushed or taken lightly. We (the West), and most importantly, the Iranians themselves, will have to live with those consequences. To mitigate the negative effects, both direct and indirect, a plan should be in place to prevent bad actors from taking advantage of the situation, which could easily lead to political chaos, violence, and civilian suffering. 

How do you prevent such an environment from taking hold? Well, someone needs to provide security and keep the peace so that civil society can thrive. Who's going to do that? Obviously, the IRGC, as an organization, and its leaders have $profitted immensely during the reign of the mullahs, so I don't suspect they'll be willing partners in shedding their current wealth and privilege. The regular army? Perhaps, but I know very little about their capacity to do that: leadership, training, etc. An outside force, as Inka has previously suggested, comprised of Canadians, Nordic countries, various Latin American and/or African nations? Is there a coalition to ensure they're on board?

I'm asking not so stubborn as to let any hypothetical perfect plan stand in the way of a good one. All I'm asking is, "What is the fucking plan?" if we're going to do this.

As for our experiences of the recent past in the region, my doubts aren't with the capacity of the people living in these places. Rather, they're with the capacity of the people, who are not living in these places, making these decisions.

 

Now, THIS is what I'd call implied racism.

Go back and read your own post, what I underlined and the post of everyone else who has clearly posted that the West will determine what happens and all signs point to shit. In short, the west has to come up with the plan to ensure the success of Iran if the current regime is overthrown. Or, more aptly, the US regime is going to make Iran a puppet, because Iran is incapable of self determination and its exactly what the US always does. So, keeping the current Iranian regime in place is better than the US helping Israel over throw them because both leaders of those countries are evil and the people Iran sure as fuck can't lead themselves if they are left to their own devices.

Edited by BurntEyes
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Just checking back in...so, uh, what was the big surprise!?!?!?!

Restrictions on gas thus limiting the ability of their civilians to flee. SUPRISE!!!

Posted
3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Just checking back in...so, uh, what was the big surprise!?!?!?!

They announced that the Ayatollah of Rock ‘n Rolla will be holding a free concert in Tehran Central Park this Saturday. Be there or be bombed.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 3
Posted
2 minutes ago, royiv said:

They announced that the Ayatollah of Rock ‘n Rolla will be holding a free concert in Tehran Central Park this Saturday. Be there or be bombed.

Glasses Why Dont We Have Both GIF by nounish ⌐◨-◨
 

Also the HEB in Tehran will roll out some new delicious faux bacon. 

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, BurntEyes said:

Go back and read your own post, what I underlined and the post of everyone else who has clearly posted that the West will determine what happens and all signs point to shit. In short, the west has to come up with the plan to ensure the success of Iran if the current regime is overthrown. Or, more aptly, the US regime is going to make Iran a puppet, because Iran is incapable of self determination and its exactly what the US always does. So, keeping the current Iranian regime in place is better than the US helping Israel over throw them because both leaders of those countries are evil and Iran sure as fuck can't do it themselves.

You’re not getting it.

If the West breaks it, we buy it. It becomes our responsibility to restore order once we topple their government. We have to help them have a peaceful environment so that they can then determine their future. A democratic, secular government doesn't just spring forth from a mound of rubble. It requires quite a bit of tending to, as we are now seeing here back home ourselves.

Same as Palestine. The ground conditions in both Gaza and the West Bank have never been in place to allow them their own self-determination. Rather, we, the West, have been complicit in supporting an occupying power that willfully denies them the same, and many on this board have been quite vocal in saying that the Palestinian people are incapable of doing so.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...