Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
4 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

image.png.9caa4377eeef49cee7554867725c0f24.png

The very fundamental precept of market economics is that resources are limited and human desires are unlimited. I think we are both saying the same thing. And I would guess we both agree that late stage capitalism needs to be tore down for anything to change.

We live in a framework and methodology problem because I think it's been proven since time immemorial that human beings don't do behavior modification and long term behavior change. We need to be fenced.

Posted
13 hours ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

Absolutely ridiculous statement.  Hamas caused 10/7 and Iran is the leading supporter of Hamas in terms of funds and weapons. 

Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) worked with Hamas to plan its 7 October 2023 surprise attack on southern Israel and gave the green light for Hamas to launch the assault on a meeting in Beirut on 2 October. In the Hamas-led attack, Palestinian militants killed 1,200 Israelis, primarily civilians, and took around 200 Israeli civilians and soldiers hostage.[24] In the weeks leading up to the attack, some 500 fighters from Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad received training in Iran, under the guidance of the IRGC Quds Force.[25]

According to The Washington Post, the attack occurred "with key support from [Iran] who provided military training and logistical help as well as tens of millions of dollars for weapons."[5] According to The New York Times, Internal documents indicate that Hamas sought to persuade Iran and Hezbollah to participate in its attacks.[26][27] The group deferred the assault from an initial 2022 plan, aiming to secure regional backing. Although Iran and Hezbollah offered support, they were unprepared for direct involvement, prompting Hamas to proceed independently.[26][27]

So second down the list.  If you are lowballing Iranian involvement.

 

13 hours ago, Vegas64 said:

These terrorists groups don't exist without resources; money, munitions, and political cover. Iran gave them these in spades. 

Alone without Iran these groups are but sparks and flames. Iran was the immense oxygen that fanned the flames.

I did not say that Iran doesn't lend them support, I said these groups do not exist because of Iran. It is absolute insanity to claim that these groups exist because of Iran. That is a straight up lie.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

The very fundamental precept of market economics is that resources are limited and human desires are unlimited. I think we are both saying the same thing. And I would guess we both agree that late stage capitalism needs to be tore down for anything to change.

We live in a framework and methodology problem because I think it's been proven since time immemorial that human beings don't do behavior modification and long term behavior change. We need to be fenced.

Nah, we can put a time certain on that. Wine is older than haves and have nots.

Quote

And Nebelivka appears to have lacked a class of elites ruling over hordes of common folk who did the dirty work. Instead, excavations suggest that the site was organized to promote shared rule among groups of equal social standing. Thus, Nebelivka demonstrates that urban development doesn’t automatically split people into haves and have-nots, Chapman and colleagues argue, a common assumption among those concerned about social and economic inequality in modern societies.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/ancient-urban-megasites-may-reshape-history-first-cities

Posted
14 hours ago, Vegas64 said:

Not only that, but Iran was a coward (as all bullies truly are deep down). Always avoiding directly doing anything but having their minions do their dirty work. And like all bullies, when punched in the nose, the truth is they are weak and cowards and projecting their insecurities. Iran has comported itself very poorly since 10/7 and should be shamed.

Minions? The Shah was our minion after we overthrew an elected government in Iran. Saddam Hussein was our minion in the war against Iraq. We directly trained our minions to be death squads in Latin America at the infamous School of the Americas. We propped up dictators all over our hemisphere and beyond.

We won't deter Israel from the hideous slaughter campaign in Gaza. It's maybe worse than Russia's in Ukraine.

We bomb the fuck out of countries with bad comportment. We're not that discriminating on who we kill or the effectiveness of those campaigns. That's bullying with superior technology.

What's our comportment score? By your definition, we should be among the axis of evil created for the naive imaginations of Americans who are sure we're just the greatest.

Calling somebody bad is not the foundation of sane war policy. It's interests that matter. Our interests. Not some idiotic vision of a showdown in the dusty street where divine combat dictates that the righteous win. It's bloody and expensive to cling to fairy tales.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

 

I did not say that Iran doesn't lend them support, I said these groups do not exist because of Iran. It is absolute insanity to claim that these groups exist because of Iran. That is a straight up lie.

You are correct...but also disingenuous.

Those groups would EXIST without Iran, most likely.   However, they would not have existed as a material fighting/disruptive force without Iran.  Iranian support -- dollars, training, weapons -- is absolutely what enabled Hezbollah to wage war for decades (as just one example).  Sure, Israel and its bullshit were an impetus for the existence of many of these groups, I don't think anyone has argued otherwise.  But the difference between Hezbollah a group of people pissed at Israel and able to cause a bit of chaos here and there vs. Hezbollah a group of people capable of controlling the Lebanese government and waging actual war against Israel is a big one.  And Iran was the difference-maker.

The world is/would be much better off if Iran's ability to export chaos was sharply curtailed/eliminated.  Trump's move in going after Iran was ill-conceived, done to please his master, and in support of his master's own efforts to cling on to power, NOT based on any new urgent/exigent circumstance.  But a world in which Iran and its proxies have had their capabilities massively degraded is a good thing.  All of those things can be true at the same time.

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
16 hours ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

In 2013, Supreme Leader of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, called Israel "an illegitimate regime" led by "untouchable rabid dogs" and "doomed to failure and annihilation."[8] In 2015, he said there would be "no Zionist regime in 25 years" and that "during this period, the spirit of fighting, heroism and jihad will keep [Israel] worried every moment."[9] Khamenei referred to Israel as "cancerous" on numerous occasions, has said Israel will be destroyed, and has pledged Iran's support for any group or nation confronting it.[1

On October 3, 2023, four days before the Hamas-led October 7 attacks on Israel, Khamenei delivered a speech in Tehran in which he said Israel would "die of [its] rage", and concluded by saying: "This cancer will definitely be eradicated, God willing, at the hands of the Palestinian people and the resistance forces throughout the region."[2] In 2024, Ali Khamenei told Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh: "The divine promise to eliminate the Zionist entity will be fulfilled and we will see the day when Palestine will rise from the river to the sea."[11]

In 2014, Hossein Sheikholeslam, then secretary-general of Iran's Committee for Support for the Palestinian Intifada, stated that "the issue of Israel's destruction is important, no matter the method" and warned that "the region will not be quiet so long as Israel exists in it."[21]

According to Dana H. Allin, Iran has covertly supported Palestinian suicide attacks targeting Israeli civilians.[33] The October 7 attacks on Israel—which killed approximately 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and saw the kidnapping of 250 hostages—was, at least in part, a product of Iran's strategy.[34] The Wall Street Journal cited senior Hamas and Hezbollah members who said the IRGC helped plan the assault and gave the go-ahead during an October 2 meeting in Beirut.[35] In the lead-up to the attack, about 500 Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad fighters reportedly received training in Iran under the supervision of the IRGC Quds Force.[36]

Destruction of Israel in Iranian policy - Wikipedia

In September [2019]] the commander of Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said that destroying Israel was now an “achievable goal.”

Four decades on from Iran’s Islamic revolution, “we have managed to obtain the capacity to destroy the impostor Zionist regime,” Major General Hossein Salami was quoted saying by the IRGC’s Sepah news site.  “This sinister regime must be wiped off the map and this is no longer … a dream [but] it is an achievable goal,” Salami said.

So, that's in response to me saying that Iran (or specifically Ahmadinejad) never said anything to indicate they would nuke Israel, given the chance.  I'm still not seeing it in there.  The "we have managed to obtain the capacity to destroy the impostor Zionist regime" isn't on the Wiki page you quoted, but I did find it on the Times of Israel article.  It would be nice if the original source "IRGC's Sepah news site" was available to see the original context.  But, can we agree that Iran didn't "manage to obtain the capacity to destroy the impostor Zionist regime" in 2019? 

As far as the typical rhetoric, the TofI article did start out: 

Quote

When Iran speaks of wiping Israel off the map, it doesn’t mean the mass slaughter of the country’s Jews but rather eliminating the Jewish state’s “imposed regime,” Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Friday.

“The disappearance of Israel does not mean the disappearance of the Jewish people, because we have nothing against [Jews],” Khamenei said, speaking alongside senior Iranian officials at the so-called 33rd International Islamic Unity Conference.

“Wiping out Israel means that the Palestinian people, including Muslims, Christians and Jews, should be able to determine their fate and get rid of thugs such as [Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu,” Khamenei continued, according to Iranian media.

Khamenei further argued that “had the Islamic world been committed to unity, there would have been no tragedy in Palestine.” He lamented that Muslims couldn’t even adhere to what he called the lowest level of unity — non-aggression between Muslims.

“We are not anti-Semitic. Jews are living in utmost safety in our country. We only support the people of Palestine and their independence,” he said.

And, listen, Iran is full of shit, right.  As stated originally, they are shitty.  But of the types of statements - the "wipe Israel of the map" vs. "we love Jews" - which gets play in the US Press?  What percentage of Americans do you think would be surprised about Khamenei's statements above.  When I say propaganda, that's what I mean: the version of Iran that Americans sees is filtered, and therefore a half-truth at best.  

Posted
5 minutes ago, Tuco said:

But of the types of statements - the "wipe Israel of the map" vs. "we love Jews" - which gets play in the US Press? 

Yeah....the AMIA bombing in Buenos Aires by Iran-backed Hezbollah puts the lie to the "we don't hate jews" statement.  Sorry, that was bullshit.  Iran was perfectly happy to kill jews.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
13 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

Nah, we can put a time certain on that. Wine is older than haves and have nots.

promote shared rule among groups of equal social standing.

This implies caste systems and haves and have nots, does it not? 

Posted
14 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You are correct...but also disingenuous.

Those groups would EXIST without Iran, most likely.   However, they would not have existed as a material fighting/disruptive force without Iran.  Iranian support -- dollars, training, weapons -- is absolutely what enabled Hezbollah to wage war for decades (as just one example).  Sure, Israel and its bullshit were an impetus for the existence of many of these groups, I don't think anyone has argued otherwise.  But the difference between Hezbollah a group of people pissed at Israel and able to cause a bit of chaos here and there vs. Hezbollah a group of people capable of controlling the Lebanese government and waging actual war against Israel is a big one.  And Iran was the difference-maker.

The world is/would be much better off if Iran's ability to export chaos was sharply curtailed/eliminated.  Trump's move in going after Iran was ill-conceived, done to please his master, and in support of his master's own efforts to cling on to power, NOT based on any new urgent/exigent circumstance.  But a world in which Iran and its proxies have had their capabilities massively degraded is a good thing.  All of those things can be true at the same time.

This was my point. And there is a difference between mere existence and executing and being effective.

Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Tuco said:

So, that's in response to me saying that Iran (or specifically Ahmadinejad) never said anything to indicate they would nuke Israel, given the chance.  I'm still not seeing it in there.

I never argued Ahmadinejad is the sole author of threats to destroy Israel and I provided you with some additional quotes from folks other than Ahmadinejad.  If your argument is that Iran hasn't pursued a strategy of destroying Israel in the last few decades, I think the evidence belies that.

And I do realize that some of the folks quoted later said "not really/JK".  Given Iran's part in 10/7, I'm not putting much stock in that.

Edited by The Original Greaser Bob
Posted
4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You are correct...but also disingenuous.

Those groups would EXIST without Iran, most likely.   However, they would not have existed as a material fighting/disruptive force without Iran.  Iranian support -- dollars, training, weapons -- is absolutely what enabled Hezbollah to wage war for decades (as just one example).  Sure, Israel and its bullshit were an impetus for the existence of many of these groups, I don't think anyone has argued otherwise.  But the difference between Hezbollah a group of people pissed at Israel and able to cause a bit of chaos here and there vs. Hezbollah a group of people capable of controlling the Lebanese government and waging actual war against Israel is a big one.  And Iran was the difference-maker.

The world is/would be much better off if Iran's ability to export chaos was sharply curtailed/eliminated.  Trump's move in going after Iran was ill-conceived, done to please his master, and in support of his master's own efforts to cling on to power, NOT based on any new urgent/exigent circumstance.  But a world in which Iran and its proxies have had their capabilities massively degraded is a good thing.  All of those things can be true at the same time.

Yes of course, the contention begins with whether you believe these groups would exist as they do if we didn't continue to do what we do and allow Israel to behave the way they do (and also, if you believe that any of the scary mooslems have a right to fight back against Israeli aggression). Placing the blame for these group's activities entirely on Iran is straight up pussy shit, and just another symptom of the American allergy to accountability for its own actions. We see it all around the globe, not just in the Middle East.

Sure, you're not wrong that the world would be better off if Iran's ability to export chaos was neutered, but approaching it from that direction is just kicking the can down the road. Groups like these will continue to pop up and gain power in perpetuity as long as we/Israel continue to be a destabilizing force in the region, and Iran is hardly the only willing sponsor out there. If not them, it will be someone else.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

This implies caste systems and haves and have nots, does it not? 

The architecture uncovered infers it does not. 
 

It is very interesting. Here’s another such site.

https://popular-archaeology.com/article/the-mega-village-of-valencina-de-la-concepcion-a-large-sustainable-and-egalitarian-community-at-the-height-of-the-copper-age/

Edited by Willfully Horn
Posted
2 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

I never argued Ahmadinejad is the sole author of threats to destroy Israel and I provided you with some additional quotes from folks other than Ahmadinejad.  If your argument is that Iran hasn't pursued a strategy of destroying Israel in the last few decades, I think the evidence belies that.

And I do realize that some of the folks quoted later said "not really/JK".  Given Iran's part in 10/7, I'm not putting much stock in that.

What are your thoughts about Netanyahu spending many years propping up Hamas as a forever enemy, including allowing and even encouraging outside actors (such as Qatar) to lend them material support? What are your thoughts on the strong evidence that his office allowed 10/7 to happen in order to have an excuse to flatten Gaza?

I bet I can guess.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yeah....the AMIA bombing in Buenos Aires by Iran-backed Hezbollah puts the lie to the "we don't hate jews" statement.  Sorry, that was bullshit.  Iran was perfectly happy to kill jews.

The genocide by American-backed Israel should prove that we hate Muslims.

  • Rage+1 2
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

I never argued Ahmadinejad is the sole author of threats to destroy Israel and I provided you with some additional quotes from folks other than Ahmadinejad.  If your argument is that Iran hasn't pursued a strategy of destroying Israel in the last few decades, I think the evidence belies that.

And I do realize that some of the folks quoted later said "not really/JK".  Given Iran's part in 10/7, I'm not putting much stock in that.

My argument is that "strategy of destroying Israel" does not equate to a commitment to nuke Israel, despite how the rhetoric is generally presented. 

Edit: ...and Iran's role in 10/7 if far from proven fact.  

Edited by Tuco
Posted
5 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

The architecture uncovered infers it does not. 
 

It is very interesting.

Just read the article. What jumps out to me is this:

Quote

 

Social inequality was central to Mesopotamia’s urban ascent, with a hierarchy of social classes that included rulers, bureaucrats, priests, farmers and slaves.

Over the last decade, however, researchers have increasingly questioned whether the only pathway to urban life ran through Mesopotamian cities. 

 

A) "We know that social inequality and hierarchy was central to society"

B) "However, we've found some ancient ruins that suggest an alternative egalitarian set up"

This reads to me like if in the future archeologists said, "Listen we know America 4000 years ago was very stratified and oligarchical and increasingly fascist and there was great income and life inequality, but based on us digging up the spiritual camp and hippie commune in the desert outside of Bakersfield, maybe they were actually not this way!"

We digress...

Posted (edited)

 

18 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

What are your thoughts about Netanyahu spending many years propping up Hamas as a forever enemy, including allowing and even encouraging outside actors (such as Qatar) to lend them material support? What are your thoughts on the strong evidence that his office allowed 10/7 to happen in order to have an excuse to flatten Gaza?

I bet I can guess.

They originally supported them as a countermeasure to the PLO, which provided to be a mistake, but was probably understandable in Hamas' infancy.

I don't think anyone, especially not the Israelis, would put it past Net to do what you suggest or extend the way to retain power. 

For years, Netanyahu propped up Hamas. Now it's blown up in our faces | The Times of Israel

 

 

Edited by The Original Greaser Bob
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, InkaUtexas said:

And that is why at some point troops, not ours, but someones have to go in. 

I would love a description of how that is to be achieved. 

Posted
9 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

 

They originally supported them as a countermeasure to the PLO, which provided to be a mistake, but was probably understandable in Hamas' infancy.

I don't think anyone, especially not the Israelis, would put it past Net to do what you suggest or extend the way to retain power. 

For years, Netanyahu propped up Hamas. Now it's blown up in our faces | The Times of Israel

 

 

They have been supporting them and encouraging outside support from the beginning, up until 10/7. It wasn't just in their infancy.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Tuco said:

My argument is that "strategy of destroying Israel" does not equate to a commitment to nuke Israel, despite how the rhetoric is generally presented. 

Sure.  And our strategy to defeat Japan did not equate to a commitment to nuke Japan, despite how rhetoric is generally presented.  

Same with the Russian nukes on Cuba. There was no commitment when N. Kruschevchev said "we will bury you.".  Despite how that rhetoric was gnerally presented.

I don't think one can ever say that a developed nuke will or won't be used.  I do think that Israel's justification for fearing nuclear weapons, given the history of the 20th and 21st century, is way more rational than your sanguinity.

 

Posted
1 minute ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

For years, Netanyahu propped up Hamas. Now it's blown up in our faces | The Times of Israel

I left a quote out, which shows that the Isreali's realize that Net was supporting them throughout.

Yeah, I think I posted that article the day it was written, I'm familiar with it. It's pretty much common knowledge now but back then sharing that sentiment got you called an antisemite.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

I think you meant to say implies.

I thank you for the suggestion, but I think we can make a conclusion based on the evidence.

Edited by Willfully Horn
Posted
16 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

Sam Harris | #422 - Zionism & Jihadism

Sure, Sam hates Islam, and the podcast is completely one-sided,but I thought it brought 3 points home strongly.

1) the caged animal mindset of the Israelis.

2) the cynicism about Bibi Net.

3) the hard fact that no one really gives a rat's ass about the Palestinians. 

 

“Hey, I know a great way to convince the board that I’m not influenced by idiotic propaganda: I’ll quote Sam Harris!”

  • Haha 4
Posted
14 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Yeah there is 0% chance I'm listening or paying attention to anything Sam Harris says. You can try to gloss over it all you want, but the man is a fucking racist piece of shit.

He's a supremely weird fucking guy. He's I think the only reactionary centrist (i.e. what used to be the IDW crowd) who hasn't gone full Trumpy fash, but refuses to reflect at all on why all of his fellow travelers have seemingly gone insane and he thinks his own racism is smart and sophisticated while theirs is wrong and boorish. 

  • Like 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

Strong, openminded responses.  

He was interviewing a guy.  Who is the one who delivered the relevant information.

Propaganda:  anything that fucks with your world view.

 

 

Oh boo hoo you won't take my racist, genocidal freak boy seriously.

  • Haha 3
Posted
1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

Oh boo hoo you won't take my racist, genocidal freak boy seriously.

I posted a link and indicated up front that it was one sided and explained how it contained some info that was helpful to an understanding of the Israeli mindset, being that it was an interview of an Israeli journalist.  When I post a link to any podcast I'm not expecting everyone to link to it.

But I am expecting the knee-jerkers to respond as you did.  Not a surprise given the at least two absolutely laughably factually false statements you have made on this thread.

Posted
20 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

Strong, openminded responses.  

He was interviewing a guy.  Who is the one who delivered the relevant information.

Propaganda:  anything that fucks with your world view.

 

 

I don't think I need to listen to Sam Harris and a guest explain three things I already know to me.  

Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

Strong, openminded responses.

I’ve listened to Sam Harris with an open mind. I own one of his books. And I determined, based on the thoughts that he expresses, that he is an idiot. 

Edited by BrickHorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

Yes of course, the contention begins with whether you believe these groups would exist as they do if we didn't continue to do what we do and allow Israel to behave the way they do (and also, if you believe that any of the scary mooslems have a right to fight back against Israeli aggression). Placing the blame for these group's activities entirely on Iran is straight up pussy shit, and just another symptom of the American allergy to accountability for its own actions. We see it all around the globe, not just in the Middle East.

Sure, you're not wrong that the world would be better off if Iran's ability to export chaos was neutered, but approaching it from that direction is just kicking the can down the road. Groups like these will continue to pop up and gain power in perpetuity as long as we/Israel continue to be a destabilizing force in the region, and Iran is hardly the only willing sponsor out there. If not them, it will be someone else.

Sigh.

You know how viscerally - and correctly - you respond to folks who just say simple shit like "Iran is bad because Iran is evil," or "the common thread in terrorism is mooslems?"

Well....your one-note response of "whatever we're talking about, it all comes back to being Israel's fault" is the other side of the same simple-minded coin.

While we should not absolve Israel of responsibility for the chaos and violence that has plagued the region for decades, your responses all come back to making Israel the sole owner and root cause of.....everything.  But for Israel, none of these bad actors would have been forced to be bad actors.  Fucking bullshit.  Iran is a great example of that.  There is ZERO reason for Iran to be an existential enemy of Israel.  The primary reason it is.....is because it's totally controlled by a theocratic regime that needs a good external enemy to rally the folks around to distract from oppressive fuckery at home (yeah....a play the US is dusting off like crazy these days). 

As exhausting as it is to hear the usual suspects blame everything on those dirty mooslems, it's just as exhausting, and as invalid in light of complexity, to hear your constant drumbeat of "everything that is bad in the world is the fault of Israel and US support for same."  It's all like listening to "Boomer Sooner" over and over again.  No variety or complexity, and sister-fuckingly stupid.

5 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Unless it's to abandon the Kurds (again). image.png.03d02ec3e04299794a654926e0ba1d29.png

There's ALWAYS time to abandon the Kurds, of that you can be sure.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Sigh.

You know how viscerally - and correctly - you respond to folks who just say simple shit like "Iran is bad because Iran is evil," or "the common thread in terrorism is mooslems?"

Well....your one-note response of "whatever we're talking about, it all comes back to being Israel's fault" is the other side of the same simple-minded coin.

While we should not absolve Israel of responsibility for the chaos and violence that has plagued the region for decades, your responses all come back to making Israel the sole owner and root cause of.....everything.  But for Israel, none of these bad actors would have been forced to be bad actors.  Fucking bullshit.  Iran is a great example of that.  There is ZERO reason for Iran to be an existential enemy of Israel.  The primary reason it is.....is because it's totally controlled by a theocratic regime that needs a good external enemy to rally the folks around to distract from oppressive fuckery at home (yeah....a play the US is dusting off like crazy these days). 

As exhausting as it is to hear the usual suspects blame everything on those dirty mooslems, it's just as exhausting, and as invalid in light of complexity, to hear your constant drumbeat of "everything that is bad in the world is the fault of Israel and US support for same."  It's all like listening to "Boomer Sooner" over and over again.  No variety or complexity, and sister-fuckingly stupid.

There's ALWAYS time to abandon the Kurds, of that you can be sure.

Except that isn't what I'm doing, and now you are being disingenuous. I'm not saying "everything bad is a result of Israel and the US", we are talking about those specific groups he mentioned in his post. It is not my fault that literally all of them spun up in direct response to Israeli/US/Saudi Arabian actions. That is inarguable fact, and I'm not going to pretend otherwise to make people feel better about their support for those actions.

I have never once denied that Iran provides significant material support to those groups, I am arguing that placing the blame entirely on Iran for their existence is ridiculous. Doing that is nothing more than a bullshit rationalization and is often used as a way to manufacture consent by Western media. Everyone involved holds a portion of the blame.



×
×
  • Create New...