Comment Re: Iran is going to lose access to the gulf (Score 1) 412
first let me highlight several issues with the central point of that argument just to get them out of the way: the claim "killing their own citizens" is not very well substantiated and much repeated with complete omission of the context: 1. a sizable portion of the deaths in those protests can be attributed to planted agitators, including shooting of protesters, one nurse burned alive inside a hospital set ablaze, and several policemen decapitated (just to illustrate the brutality). there is ample evidence of this and there is public admission by both israeli and us prominent figures that mossad (and one then would assume, also cia) were involved. 2. another sizable portion were those same agitators summarily executed. 3. this was done in reaction to a state of emergency after an all out attempt to destabilize the state: financial dirty games to suddenly debase the currency and agitators on the ground turning the ensuing protests into a bloodbath. 4. iran has death penalty (which i'm opposed to) but i'm sure due process wasn't strictly followed and it's likely that innocent people were put down too, which is abhorrent
Always the same rhetoric. Agitators, Mossad behind everything and of course all the numbers are bullshit even though up to 30k dead was a figure that came from officials in the regimes own health ministry.
"As many as 30,000 people could have been killed in the streets of Iran on Jan. 8 and 9 alone, two senior officials of the countryâ(TM)s Ministry of Health told TIME"
https://time.com/7357635/more-...
Doctors and nurses attacked, murdered, dragged out and raped while treating patients. Patients shot in the heads in their hospital beds.
but has to be understood (not justified or condoned) in a context of a state of emergency an existential threat: toppling the regime was the declared and admitted intent. if you throw such a threat at a state it is going to react.
What state of emergency? Millions of unarmed people were out in the streets protesting enmasse for over a week since late December triggered by the economic crisis. The regime only decided to start massacring unarmed civilians enmasse on the 8th. If protesting is an existential threat then you are justifying massacre while saying you are not justifying massacre.
do you really believe this is a casus belli worth launching a massive bombing campaign, killing scores more civilians and causing huge devastation on a country thousands of miles away with far-reaching consequences not only on the region but the whole planet, with no clear objective other than claiming (dubious) "justice" (in your case), after having disregarded (if not endorsed (if not actively contributed to)) far worse violence against innocent civilians on multiple occasions on several places, furthermore implying huge risks for the entire world that were entirely known
Getting rid of the Iranian regime has only positive implications for the world especially when coupled with Russia losing its global influence as it continues to wreck itself in Ukraine. For decades the region and the world has been terrorized by Iran relentlessly "exporting the revolution". Assad is gone, Hezbollah on the way out of Lebanon, Houthis losing their support, Arab states normalizing relationships with Israel, Hamas death cult in Gaza cut off and bye bye assistance to the Russians to wage their failing bloody war of conquest in Ukraine.
regime change: this very obviously failed, even with such treacherous, dirty and brutal tactics: iranian regime is stronger than it ever was, and now has huge popular support.
This must be why they imported over 5k of their foreign proxies into Iran and are having trouble paying and feeding their own forces because "stronger than ever"? BTW where is Mojtaba? Do they even have a leader? Remnants of the regime seem to be quite busy fighting each other.
If the regime has huge popular support why not flaunt it? Why are they instead silencing their own people by keeping the Internet shut down? Wouldn't it be better for the world to hear from Iranians how much they now support the regime and hate Americans following massacres of tens of thousands of Iranians?
nukes: iran has for decades made clear that they will not pursue nukes, explicitly for 2 reasons: 1. weapons of mass destruction are immoral (i'm an atheist, but i can see that having some religious leadirship can have some advantages)
Since this all started regime people involved with JCPOA came out and publicly admitted of course they were going for a nuke. Other regime folks have subsequently publicly made their intentions clear following the Feb 28th attacks. I was a big supporter of JCPOA as it would have credibly kicked the can down the road many years into the future. That's gone now and we have to live with the world as it is. Nukes are a valid reason for regime change now even though it was a problem of the orange clowns making.