Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
16 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

No, but some folks here do.  The definition of propaganda is "misleading or biased".  You're also free to tell me what part of my post was misleading or biased.  

I acknowledge the stream of propaganda from every government for all time.

When you presents those points as a justification for pre-emptive, military, deadly strikes on Iran, it implies that somehow those points are the criteria or reasonable justification for carrying out such strikes. I think that is partial truth, and therefore misleading.  

Let's start with your add on post: 

Quote

Should have left it at that and added "and clearly promotes killing civilians and soldiers of western democracies through terrorism and direct aid."

Okay. 

Do you think there is any ethical difference between killing civilians of a "western democracies" (a term which gets more meaningless by the day) and civilians of some other form of government?  (I would argue that civilians in a democracy actually have more culpability in their government's actions than those of a theocracy.)  

Do you think there is an ethical difference how you kill civilians - terrorism or with intentional targeting by the military?  Who was worse - the French Resistance murdering Nazi collaborators or Nazi soldiers lining up civilians and gunning them down?

And, for my last question - over the last year, who do you think has intentionally killed more civilians - Israel or Iran?  

So, to me, the last point is obviously biased to justify the action.  

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted

Iran was already at the negotiating table before Israel attacked it. Iran was willing to return to the table on condition that Israel stop bombing it.

Posted

Currently reading mark espers memoir, irans attack today is a near copy of their 20’s response. Essentially just theater with very detail and advanced warning so the US knows not to raze the country. It allows them to save face. 
 

Where it will be interesting is to see how Trump team frames things. They were VERY quick in 20 to claim zero casualties and essentially zero injured/damage. only to find over 100 troops were flown to Europe for traumatic brain injury (which according to esper, trump essentially called them pussies)

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 1
Posted

Even if US military involvement with Iran actually ended today, this was still a huge fuckup by Trump and bad for the Middle East. 

The "Death to America" propaganda just got a re-charge after we bombed those 3 sites. Let's be clear, it's pure propaganda. The way the regime is able to keep a chokehold on their countrymen is treating the US as the big, evil bad guy to deflect from all the direct harm the Ayatollah and mullahs have done to their own citizens.  The only way regime change can be done in a "healthy" way is for the Iranian people to overthrow their own government. And we just made that more difficult with the stupid bomb stunt. Gotta remember that Iran has suffered major brain drain over the last 30-40 years. Many of their best and brightest got the hell out of the country, I'm sure most if not all of you have an Iranian acquaintance and can attest to how good-hearted and impressive they can be. That leaves the country in a tough spot to find a well organized opposition group internally, and it got even harder after the craters in Fordow and Iranian response which will be used to keep the people in check.

That said, I think Netanyahu wants to go all the way with regime change now anyways, and I expect America to fully support Israel in any way needed. 

 

 

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

Do you think there is any ethical difference between killing civilians of a "western democracies" (a term which gets more meaningless by the day) and civilians of some other form of government?  (I would argue that civilians in a democracy actually have more culpability in their government's actions than those of a theocracy.)  

Do you think there is an ethical difference how you kill civilians - terrorism or with intentional targeting by the military?  Who was worse - the French Resistance murdering Nazi collaborators or Nazi soldiers lining up civilians and gunning them down?

And, for my last question - over the last year, who do you think has intentionally killed more civilians - Israel or Iran?  

1) It depends on the reasons and the method for the killing.  (Whatever the culpability of its citizenry, is a western democracy or a theocracy more ethical?)

2)  Sure, there is a big ethical difference in how you kill civilians.  Nazi's lining up civilians is "worse" because Nazi collaborators are worse than regular civilians.

3) I'm assuming Israel considers many of the scientists and leaders it has intentionally targeted as civilians, so I am thinking Israel.

I'd say Iran has an equal or greater culpability for civilian deaths in the region because of its strategy and aid to terrorist groups like Hamas who attack civilians and encourage civilian deaths through their tactics.  

 

Posted
5 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

I'd say Iran has an equal or greater culpability for civilian deaths in the region because of its strategy and aid to terrorist groups like Hamas who attack civilians and encourage civilian deaths through their tactics.  

 

"...and this is your brain on propaganda." 

Posted
2 hours ago, Ted Lange said:

 

 

Millions upon millions of dollars in slow-to-replace assets being wasted as a dick measuring exercise.  And I guarantee China/Russia/NK are watching, scoring and vacuuming up all the RF they can just like we would be.  

Men will do anything to avoid going to therapy

Posted
2 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

What a lame ass approach to discussion.  Ask me some questions, and then follow up with this bullshit. 

It was a response to blaming Iran for Israel systematically killing unarmed civilians in Gaza.  It is the only reasonable response.  

Posted
53 minutes ago, bluto said:

Currently reading mark espers memoir, irans attack today is a near copy of their 20’s response. Essentially just theater with very detail and advanced warning so the US knows not to raze the country. It allows them to save face. 
 

Where it will be interesting is to see how Trump team frames things. They were VERY quick in 20 to claim zero casualties and essentially zero injured/damage. only to find over 100 troops were flown to Europe for traumatic brain injury (which according to esper, trump essentially called them pussies)

GUTS

the magazine for real men

Trump rates the Americans: “they’re pussies!”

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 5
Posted
4 minutes ago, Tuco said:

It was a response to blaming Iran for Israel systematically killing unarmed civilians in Gaza.  It is the only reasonable response.  

Iran and Hamas are blameless in the killing of unarmed civilians in Gaza?

Can they be blamed at all for the killing of unarmed civilians in Israel?

Just curious about your answer to this question:

Should the Japanese be blamed at all for the deaths of civilians at Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

 

Posted
17 minutes ago, Homercles said:

Millions upon millions of dollars in slow-to-replace assets being wasted as a dick measuring exercise.  And I guarantee China/Russia/NK are watching, scoring and vacuuming up all the RF they can just like we would be.  

Men will do anything to avoid going to therapy

various searches.....

gbu-57 A/B MOP

$3.5m per

20 built before 2015

7 b2 dropped 14 on iran

in 19 and 20 ~$110m in contracts were issued to build ~25 more

swag: we have 30 remaining

ttm: no results

Posted
1 minute ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

Iran and Hamas are blameless in the killing of unarmed civilians in Gaza?

Can they be blamed at all for the killing of unarmed civilians in Israel?

Just curious about your answer to this question:

Should the Japanese be blamed at all for the deaths of civilians at Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

 

Hamas should absolutely be blamed for the brutal, barbaric murders of innocent people in Israel, specifically for the October 7 attacks, but others as well.  

Israel should be blamed for perpetuating a genocide in Gaza.  

Japan should be blamed for starting a war and then failing to end it, while they traded their people for better terms.  So, yeah, they should be blamed for the number of deaths required to end it.  Whether they should be blamed for Nagasaki and Hiroshima depends on whether you believe those were necessary to end the war.  I think it's reasonable that Hiroshima could have ended it, had the US provided enough time for Japan to understand the damage.  So, personally I think Nagasaki is on the US, but I get that opinions may differ.  Hopefully we can all agree that it wasn't Italy's responsibility.  

I think we are way past the number of deaths required to be useful in stopping another October 7th attack.  At this point, it's about revenge, expansion, and ethnic cleaning.  It's genocide and Israel is entirely, 100% responsible for it. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

Trump just thanked Iran. 

If he gets the Nobel Peace Prize I'm switching to team Burn it All Down.

Quote

 

Israel-Iran live: Trump thanks Iran for 'early notice' of missile attack on US base and shares hope for peace in region

Donald Trump has thanked Iran for giving "early notice" of a missile attack on a US base in Qatar. He confirms no Americans were harmed, and encouraged both Israel and Iran to end their conflict.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/israel-iran-live-us-base-targeted-by-iranian-missiles-but-sources-say-iran-may-have-given-warning-13382979

 

 

Edited by softlynow
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
24 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

Iran and Hamas are blameless in the killing of unarmed civilians in Gaza?

Can they be blamed at all for the killing of unarmed civilians in Israel?

Just curious about your answer to this question:

Should the Japanese be blamed at all for the deaths of civilians at Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

 

The crimes of Imperial Japan were much more comparable to Israel than to Iran, simply in terms of scale. You can cry "human shields!" all you want to try to absolve Israel, but that will never explain this:

190125_Rafah_OSH_002-scaled.thumb.jpg.ed3921a381b52f3a68c0086d88eacd6f.jpg01-header-Rafah-Gaza-after-ceasefire-aerial-view.thumb.jpg.c19eb97fce5ed31ea9fcafbd495b9772.jpg

That wasn't self defense, it was ethnic cleansing and annexation. Quite a bit similar to what Imperial Japan did in Manchuria (though hopefully with less rape).  The Iranian government are assholes, but they have never done anything comparable. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

1) It depends on the reasons and the method for the killing.  (Whatever the culpability of its citizenry, is a western democracy or a theocracy more ethical?)

2)  Sure, there is a big ethical difference in how you kill civilians.  Nazi's lining up civilians is "worse" because Nazi collaborators are worse than regular civilians.

3) I'm assuming Israel considers many of the scientists and leaders it has intentionally targeted as civilians, so I am thinking Israel.

I'd say Iran has an equal or greater culpability for civilian deaths in the region because of its strategy and aid to terrorist groups like Hamas who attack civilians and encourage civilian deaths through their tactics.  

 

Thanks for responding to the original questions. 

I believe the "it's propaganda" response to your original post had much to do with characterizing Iran as a vile (did you say evil, too? Not sure.) country largely based on the way they wage war against Israel through proxy attacks on civilians.

By your definition, as I understand it, Israel is at least equally vile in its own campaign for decades against civilians in the illegally settled areas and occupied areas. The campaign in Gaza with still gets the fig leaf of the awful October 7 attack and is actually called a war by our news media. Gaza is being systematically leveled and it's people bombed, forced to live in the open, and starved.

Calling one side evil and guilty of bad things is indeed how Americans are roused for wars we have no business waging. Hitler is always invoked. The liberation of France is always invoked. We're liberators not invaders! Inside every Gook is an American trying to break out.

That was all used to roll us into Iraq which is one of the worst policy decisions of my memory. 

A part of your reasoning was simplistic labeling. It reflects the odd American assumption that when we call somebody a Great Satan, we're invariably correct.

ETA: I see my slowness writing puts me in third place. Y'all had visual aids, too! Nicely done.

Edited by RomaVicta
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

A part of your reasoning was simplistic labeling. It reflects the odd American assumption that when we call somebody a Great Satan, we're invariably correct.

I'm being pulled into arguments about civilian casualties when my initial point is that Iran has always stressed wanting to destroy Israel.  Hence, Israel is justified in wanting to destroy their capability to wage nuclear war.  I'm not interested in justifying their behavior beyond this very justifiable behavior. 

Posted
10 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

I'm being pulled into arguments about civilian casualties when my initial point is that Iran has always stressed wanting to destroy Israel.  Hence, Israel is justified in wanting to destroy their capability to wage nuclear war.  I'm not interested in justifying their behavior beyond this very justifiable behavior. 

The rhetorical word like vile was the part of your post that sounded of propaganda. I don't dismiss all of your reasoning. Israel is justified if they truly believe there is a threat of nuclear attack.  It's strange and truly an indictment of mainstream cable news that one must go to the Daily Show for excellent context on the veracity of Israel on this subject:

Israel has cried wolf as have we. 

My question for foreign policy decisions is, how does this serve the long term interests of the United States?

That's a value question. What does this cost in blood, money, and future relations? Is there a principle involved that we stand for and will sacrifice for? Something like defending liberty and self-determination.

I guess it boils down to pragmatism. 

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

I'm being pulled into arguments about civilian casualties when my initial point is that Iran has always stressed wanting to destroy Israel.  Hence, Israel is justified in wanting to destroy their capability to wage nuclear war.  I'm not interested in justifying their behavior beyond this very justifiable behavior. 

And hopefully you understand that position is part of the propaganda we have been fed.  The translations are frequently in the most inflammatory ways possible.  Anyone remember Ahmadinejad's "wipe Israel of the map"?  He wanted to blow them up, right?  But it's not a Farsi idiom.  Per wikipedia

 

Quote

Shiraz Dossa, a professor of Political Science at St. Francis Xavier University in Nova Scotia, Canada, also described the text as a mistranslation.[98]

Ahmadinejad was quoting the Ayatollah Khomeini in the specific speech under discussion: what he said was that "the occupation regime over Jerusalem should vanish from the page of time." No state action is envisaged in this lament; it denotes a spiritual wish, whereas the erroneous translation – "wipe Israel off the map" – suggests a military threat. There is a huge chasm between the correct and the incorrect translations. The notion that Iran can "wipe out" U.S.-backed, nuclear-armed Israel is ludicrous.[99][100][101]

And that's not some super-radical idea.  Many countries do not recognize Israel (the government that is in charge of the land) has the right to exist.  That doesn't mean they have expressed a desire to nuke the land and the people.  Nuking Israel doesn't free Palestine or Jerusalem, it just destroys them.  It serves no purpose.  It makes no sense.  It is not something Iran is threatening to do.  In order to believe that is Iran's plan, you have to have already decided Iran's decisions are completely illogical and suicidal.  

*Sidenote: Ahmadinejad is probably the worst, total shitstain fucker they've had as President in the last 25 years.  He said plenty of dumb, terrible inflammatory shit, including questioning the Holocaust.  But he never said anything to indicate he would nuke Israel given the opportunity.  It's also worth noting he was elected after we invaded Iraq and were on their doorstep.  We always push them to stupid fuckers like him. 

Edited by Tuco
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, bluto said:

Currently reading mark espers memoir, irans attack today is a near copy of their 20’s response. Essentially just theater with very detail and advanced warning so the US knows not to raze the country. It allows them to save face. 
 

Where it will be interesting is to see how Trump team frames things. They were VERY quick in 20 to claim zero casualties and essentially zero injured/damage. only to find over 100 troops were flown to Europe for traumatic brain injury (which according to esper, trump essentially called them pussies)

Said this, this morning:

Quote

 

Iran is back-channeling that they aren't going to retaliate to America (because they can't and have been neutered). Their proxies are super weak which is again why this is lowkey brilliant to hit them now.

Reports are they might pull a response like Trump's hit on the General Soleimani aka telegraph a symbolic response so that nobody actually gets hurt and maybe some property damage happens and then let it die. That's the bull case, at least.

 

I should have clarified the nobody was hurt part though, obviously PTSD is real and horrible.

Edited by Vegas64
Posted
3 hours ago, chainsaw said:

Iran was already at the negotiating table before Israel attacked it. Iran was willing to return to the table on condition that Israel stop bombing it.

It should be noted that Iran offered to sign the same kind of treaty it had with Obama that severely curtailed their nuclear work and guaranteed inspections. Trump wasn’t interested because Bibi didn’t want that at all. The fix was in from the very beginning.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 4
  • Rage+1 3
Posted
1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

Social media makes it very hard for legacy media to hide or misrepresent the intentions of the people they want us to bomb

Oh boy.

Posted

Trump’s announcement in full

Quote

 

Here’s what President Trump said on social media regarding the ceasefire:

CONGRATULATIONS TO EVERYONE! It has been fully agreed by and between Israel and Iran that there will be a Complete and Total CEASEFIRE (in approximately 6 hours from now, when Israel and Iran have wound down and completed their in progress, final missions!), for 12 hours, at which point the War will be considered, ENDED!

Officially, Iran will start the CEASEFIRE and, upon the 12th Hour, Israel will start the CEASEFIRE and, upon the 24th Hour, an Official END to THE 12 DAY WAR will be saluted by the World. During each CEASEFIRE, the other side will remain PEACEFUL and RESPECTFUL.

On the assumption that everything works as it should, which it will, I would like to congratulate both Countries, Israel and Iran, on having the Stamina, Courage, and Intelligence to end, what should be called, “THE 12 DAY WAR.”

This is a War that could have gone on for years, and destroyed the entire Middle East, but it didn’t, and never will! God bless Israel, God bless Iran, God bless the Middle East, God bless the United States of America, and GOD BLESS THE WORLD!

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2025/6/23/live-iran-vows-to-respond-to-us-attacks-trump-hints-at-regime-change

Posted
3 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

Oil closed at 65 something. Yay. 

Yeah, I'm selfish. No shame.

Since the oil assholes in Texas are almost all in Abbott's and Trump's pockets I want oil to prices to dish out as much pain as possible to these pieces of shit without crashing so bad we end up with shortages. Basically, I just want to see as any supporters of this nonsense burn while the rest of us continue to prosper. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

If what Trump just said is true (still very debatable as of posting time), then it's hard for me to view this as anything but an unequivocal and amazing display of force and power and reminder to the rest of the world that we are him.

I don't necessarily believe we obliterated Iran's nuclear program (the bull case), but I do think Israel with our final mile help did enough to set it back many years and keep the seat red hot for whichever Persian leadership or agencies try to pick back up the baton.

Iran being exposed is a win for us, the Persian people who want to move forward, the region, the world.

Posted
4 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

If what Trump just said is true (still very debatable as of posting time), then it's hard for me to view this as anything but an unequivocal and amazing display of force and power and reminder to the rest of the world that we are him.

I don't necessarily believe we obliterated Iran's nuclear program (the bull case), but I do think Israel with our final mile help did enough to set it back many years and keep the seat red hot for whichever Persian leadership or agencies try to pick back up the baton.

Iran being exposed is a win for us, the Persian people who want to move forward, the region, the world.

The status quo remains exactly the same. How has anything at all been accomplished?

Posted
1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

The status quo remains exactly the same. How has anything at all been accomplished?

Reminding people that the b-2 still works. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Brian Fantana said:

The status quo remains exactly the same. How has anything at all been accomplished?

You are right. It's like in a board game when you roll a 5 and then move 5 spaces but then land on a go back 5 spaces, so ultimately you end up exactly where you were. There is no tangible or material difference I guess, you are arguing. I think the jury is still out on that, but you are probably right.

However, I think there is a psychological accomplishment. Iran has been talking crazy smack for decades now. They build up proxies to be their little footsoliders and thought they'd be able to sit back and threaten indefinitely. They've been exposed as bullies who talk loud but can't back it up. Like you do with bullies, Iran got punched in the face and their little friends are done. 

And for what? A day's worth of work for the military and a reminder to the misfit countries (again, the only countries to come out and publicly rebuke us for this is China, Russia, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea) about American military might.

Just because we can't get along very well with each other domestically doesn't mean we can't still put the fear of death in anyone on this planet in any location, even if you are 400 feet deep under a mountain.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, immamac said:

Reminding people that the b-2 still works. 

 

17 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

You are right. It's like in a board game when you roll a 5 and then move 5 spaces but then land on a go back 5 spaces, so ultimately you end up exactly where you were. There is no tangible or material difference I guess, you are arguing. I think the jury is still out on that, but you are probably right.However, I think there is a psychological accomplishment. Iran has been talking crazy smack for decades now. They build up proxies to be their little footsoliders and thought they'd be able to sit back and threaten indefinitely. They've been exposed as bullies who talk loud but can't back it up. Like you do with bullies, Iran got punched in the face and their little friends are done. 

And for what? A day's worth of work for the military and a reminder to the misfit countries (again, the only countries to come out and publicly rebuke us for this is China, Russia, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea) about American military might.

Just because we can't get along very well with each other domestically doesn't mean we can't still put the fear of death in anyone on this planet in any location, even if you are 400 feet deep under a mountain.

U7666VU45QI6RKGYTNGBGKDNNM.jpg

Edited by SaucyJack
Posted

apparently this entire mess was so predictable that this professor was able to predict in- in pretty great detail- everything that’s happening, a full year before it actually happened. really makes you feel totally helpless.

 

  • Drool 1
Posted
38 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

The status quo remains exactly the same. How has anything at all been accomplished?

Got a good test run of the bunker busters. Dunno man. Spitballing here. I don't think we can call it Mission Accomplished.

Posted
58 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

Oil closed at 65 something. Yay. 

Yeah, I'm selfish. No shame.

Of course this is a good thing.  Don't see why there's shame in this.  A triple digit oil would have crushed the world and we may have avoided it.

Posted
2 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

Got a good test run of the bunker busters. Dunno man. Spitballing here. I don't think we can call it Mission Accomplished.

It’s like a scrimmage. Not exactly  closed war games practice but not the real thing either. Got some reps in against a cream puff.

Posted
1 minute ago, Vegas64 said:

It’s like a scrimmage. Not exactly  closed war games practice but not the real thing either. Got some reps in against a cream puff.

It's like UT paying A&M-CC 100 million dollars to play a game at a neutral site.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, immamac said:

Reminding people that the b-2 still works. 

Nobody doubted it did. Any moron can see the trillions of dollars of debt being wasted on this stuff since 9/11 and they'll know it works. But what Americans and their leadership don't know is the world isn't fighting them militarily. They're waiting them out economically. This isn't sustainable, especially with Trump's antics making servicing the US debt more expensive than it was previously. 

  • Like 1
Posted
Nobody doubted it did. Any moron can see the trillions of dollars of debt being wasted on this stuff since 9/11 and they'll know it works. But what Americans and their leadership don't know is the world isn't fighting them militarily. They're waiting them out economically. This isn't sustainable, especially with Trump's antics making servicing the US debt more expensive than it was previously. 

Don’t forget they are fighting us with disinformation and hacking. It cost a hell of a lot less to put 500 Russians in a warehouse managing bots and shit posting than it does to build a B-2.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Tuco said:

*Sidenote: Ahmadinejad is probably the worst, total shitstain fucker they've had as President in the last 25 years.  He said plenty of dumb, terrible inflammatory shit, including questioning the Holocaust.  But he never said anything to indicate he would nuke Israel given the opportunity. 

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.

  • Hook 'Em 1


×
×
  • Create New...