@FirmWeird's banner p

FirmWeird

Randomly Generated Reddit Username

1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 23:38:51 UTC

				

User ID: 757

FirmWeird

Randomly Generated Reddit Username

1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 23:38:51 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 757

I cannot imagine hating jews so

You might want to work on your cognitive flexibility then - I can imagine hating jews that much pretty easily, it isn't particularly hard. More importantly, I actually have to imagine it - I get along just fine with the torah jews and other antizionist Jews. When I object to the murder of Hind Rajab, the ethnicity of the people doing the shooting of young girls doesn't really enter into the calculus. If they were Japanese Shinto practitioners, I'd feel just as strongly about what they did! Israel is singled out not because it is the Jewish State consisting of Jews practicing Judaism, but because it is in large part funded by western power structures and has a direct negative impact on people.

I cannot imagine hating the jews so much that you support adversaries that want you and your way of life to end and die

I don't believe the Iranians are adversaries that want me and my way of life to end, and I've gotten along just fine with Shia Iranian coworkers in the past. There's been far more hostility to my way of life as a result of the countless wars in the Middle East that have been fought for Israeli interests.

And perhaps most importantly, I don't understand why all the anti-Jew posters can't just hate Israel and want Iran to lose at the same time.

You really should work on that - it isn't hard at all to understand why people who don't like Israel would want Israel's chief regional competitor to remain strong and capable of causing problems for them. The only reason Iran is a problem for people in the West is that our governments are helplessly tied to Israel - the Strait of Hormuz was free for everyone to transit until Israel forced the US into this war (as per the claims of notorious anti-semites Marco Rubio, J.D. Vance and Donald Trump).

Gish Gallop,

This isn't reddit anymore buddy. You have to actually make an argument if you want to convince anyone - come back when you're capable of participating in an adult conversation.

Defensive. Stance.

Of the two approaches referred to as the Samson option (threatening europe and asia for failing to defend them or just simply nuking the entire region if they were about to fall) none of them qualify as defensive. They serve solely to make the rest of the world suffer if the Israeli regime falls. That's not defensive, just spiteful - and further evidence that Israel needs to be disarmed for the sake of the entire world.

Iran has been engaged in terrorist attacks against Israel for literally decades. Now also engaging in terrorist attacks on other non-Israel neighbors.

Israel has been responsible for far more terror attacks than Iran. How much white phosphorus has Iran used against civilian populations?

Samson is a defensive stance,

lol, lmao

Fundamentally Iran is a nation that is running around punching people in the face.

I'm surprised, I thought you would have kept up with news from the Middle East if you're going to talk about it with that level of confidence. This may come as a shock, but Israel is currently invading Lebanon, deploying white phosphorus on civilians, demolishing homes, blowing up hospitals and now moving settlers in to build houses on their newly acquired living space. They are in fact punching people in the face, right now! They have been punching people in the face for several years, and they launched the first strike on Iran.

After they closed the strait, the many nations of the world made it clear that there was no such custom, so Trump closing the strait is perfectly in line with precedent.

Wasn't the precedent already set by the US in Cuba and Venezuela?

I don’t see why else they’d have such a fixation on nuclear power in the most oil rich region of the world and while being sanctioned for having nuclear energy.

I'm not a supporter of nuclear power but this is actually extremely easy to answer - oil does not replenish itself on a timescale relevant to human life. If I have a gigantic pile of savings but no income, it would actually make a lot of sense for me to try and find a way to support myself before that gigantic pile of savings runs out.

Iran is far more likely to use it, sell it, or cause problems than any current nuclear actor and the inability to recognize this is simply horrifying.

I don't think this is true - ever heard of the Samson option? I'd trust the Iranians with a nuke far more than Israel.

If you're going to discuss this stuff with me on here, please do me the courtesy of reading what I write

I did read your post, and I explicitly said I was contradicting your view. I am not unaware of the contents of your post, I just disagree with it. To wit:

Shahed drones are very vulnerable to gunfire, which is cheap. (I assure you the US military has lots of guns).

The kind of guns which are capable of shooting down Shaheds are not going to be standard issue for commercial shipping vessels. How, exactly, are you going to outfit the commercial shipping fleet with all the guns and rockets required to shoot down these drones while simultaneously engaging in an active fight with the Chinese navy on the other side of the country? And if it is the US intervening, remember that the US navy is going to be tied down in Iran and the Middle East as well. All that these drones need to do to finish their mission in this specific case is make commercial traffic unviable, which your proposed solution doesn't actually prevent.

Moreover, we actually have an example of a weapons system used to shoot down shahed drones in the field - the C-RAM system used to protect the US Embassy in Baghdad. The US Embassy in Baghdad has been abandoned, and the C-RAM system failed to provide adequate protection - I'm not sure due to the difficulty of getting footage, but I believe it was actually destroyed by a drone. You'll have to forgive me for not believing this was a viable answer to shahed drones when I have seen footage of it failing to defend against shahed drones in a conflict happening right now.

The US military has now acquired and used very cheap laser-guided rockets, which are within the ballpark range of the cost of a Shahed, specifically for using against drones like the Shahed.

Ok, so how many vessels are transiting the strait right now? If the US has an economic and worthwhile answer to these drones, why haven't they used them to open the Strait of Hormuz? We have a perfect, real-life test case for this technology and what we actually see is the US navy giving up, unable to prevent the Iranians from interdicting or destroying commercial traffic. Furthermore, what are the actual economics of these cheap, laser-guided rockets? Do they rely on components or parts that have to be shipped from China? Is there a manufacturing base capable of supplying enough of them to outpace Iran, China and Russia's production of Shahed/Shahed derivatives?

Such drones do not exist, and frankly never really existed.

Au contraire - the shahed drone is itself one of these drones. This isn't because the drones are particularly cheap (although the shahed is both cheap and easy to manufacture), but because the US MIC is fantastically corrupt and so their interceptor missiles are extremely expensive, far more so than the drones themselves. These interceptors are also reliant on materials parts that are sourced from China, who presumably won't be selling them to their military adversaries (yes, the US can source and process themselves - you'll just have to spend a decade or so getting the infrastructure required up and running. Good luck!)

None of this is to deny your point about insurance, although it is likely that insurance would go completely insane just by declaring the area a no-go zone; the Japanese government would likely have to requisition/purchase shipping or subsidize insurance. Similarly, it's undoubtedly true that China is a major industrial power. I am far from convinced that this would be a good way to wage an anti-shipping campaign, but China has a ton of industry, so even if it is the worst possible way to wage an anti-shipping campaign, they might be able to make it work!

This is in fact the main point I am making. Is it possible to defend against this kind of attack? Absolutely. But is it possible to do so in a way that's sustainable and doesn't prevent the Chinese from achieving their goal of preventing commercial traffic? No. That's all they need to do - render commercial shipping unviable. There are all sorts of unique options available to them - I've heard that they're working on some really cool underwater drones as well, which would be even more fun to shoot down and interdict. But the point remains that the Chinese would be able to prevent Japan from resupplying in any real way while the Japanese would be unable to return the favour. Even if I just abandon the argument about military effectiveness to you entirely, the relative economic impacts on both parties from this kind of strategy is too much to overcome.

My basic point here is that there's a reason that Shaheds have supplemented more conventional weapons systems like ballistic and antiship missiles, rather than replacing them. And similarly that war is hard.

I agree - it's just that the Chinese have both, and more importantly the economic and industrial base required to sustain modern warfare for far longer than Japan.

If the US fleet and the Chinese fleet fought on an infinite featureless plain the US fleet would win.

Actually nobody would win - all the ships would just fall over and be unable to move. But the problem is that the industrial base which made the US navy has since been shipped off to China, who, according to the Pentagon, are capable of manufacturing 236 ships to every 1 produced by the US. In any kind of long or sustained conflict, China wins hands down.

It's possible that the answer is "no" but the fact that that is the question should tell you a lot about the relative power of the two countries.

The problem is that the reason Taiwan is valuable is the TSMC manufacturing plants, which can be easily destroyed the moment Taiwan looks to be in danger. If China wanted, they could in fact take over Taiwan - especially with the US tied down in Iran. The problem is that taking over Taiwan with military force renders it almost completely worthless, which is why the optimal strategy for the Chinese is to just wait for the US' decline to progress further and then take it bloodlessly.

The real argument against the pee tape is that we actually know where it came from - 4chan's /pol/ board. One of the more prominent Nevertrump conservatives, Rick Wilson, was relentlessly bullied over his son's memoirs which detailed his watersports fetish. Somebody on 4chan made up a bunch of salacious stories and sent them to Rick Wilson, because he wanted to see how desperate they were for dirt on Trump - and then he saw that information showing up in the dossier.

But possibly I am missing some obvious options here.

China has access to the same drone technology as Iran, and that's assuming they don't have even more advanced models, which I find highly likely (especially given their close relationship with Russia). Deterring commercial shipping is substantially easier than deterring enemy navies, and entirely possible with drones - especially with drones that cost significantly less to manufacture than the interceptor missiles used to shoot them down, which means China can simply force Japan to use up their entire supply of interceptors. If the interception rate is anywhere below 100% the effects on shipping insurance costs will be ruinous already. Making commercial trade with Japan unviable is infinitely easier for China to do than it is for Japan to strike back in the same way, and at the same time Japan is far more dependent upon foreign imports. China's resource base, trade networks (good luck interdicting trade between China and Russia from Japan) and massive industrial/manufacturing advantage mean that any real long term conflict is simply a matter of time. Even if you make ludicrously charitable assumptions regarding Japan's military capabilities, China's utterly massive economic advantages are enough to make up for them.

I'm not familiar with the concept of "perfect sphere world" so I'm not going to really comment on that aspect - but I will point out that North Korea and Russia are deeply connected with China and will have zero problems with China using their airspace to attack an American vassal state. At the same time, if you talk about America getting involved you have to realise that the pivot to Asia never actually happened - and the US looks like it'll be tied down in the Middle East for a long while yet, in a conflict which is destroying their munition/interceptor stocks and causing immense economic damage. If the US puts together a force capable of challenging China, they have to abandon Europe, Israel and the Middle East - and I don't think Israel is going to allow that (looking forward to seeing renewed press coverage of Trump's ties to Epstein after he tried to pull out of the Iran war again!).

Is Japan actually capable of preventing China from interdicting traffic to their rear as well? I don't think JP air defence is good enough to prevent China from making the rear approach a logistical impossibility too, even if you ignore their navy.

Maybe this was planned with Iran as well, and they fucked up and happened to kill them. Given he's literally said that most of the replacements they had in mind are also dead, it is quite possible they had a plan like this in mind, "we take out your internal rivals and you be more friendly to us" but accidently struck the coup faction and that's why there was no one friendly to take charge and temper the Iranian response.

My understanding of the situation is actually just that the moment Israel knows who the US is trying to negotiate with they immediately kill them - they don't want a ceasefire, because it is in their best interest for the US to get drawn into a horrible quagmire and put boots on the ground in Iran. Several officials have just flat out said that they have to hide the details from the Israelis, and even the new (and already dead) ceasefire was arranged without Israel's knowledge to stop them from fucking it up (so they just kept on bombing Lebanon instead to make sure the war continues).

Or hear me out - Iran actually got scared that their national hymn will be the theme of the Flintstones.

Nope. They've reclosed the strait and returned to war because Israel failed to abide by the terms of the ceasefire - I don't see how this could happen if they were actually intimidated into surrender by Trump's threat to blow up more civilian infrastructure.

This does nothing to change their position - Japan is far more dependent upon sea-based imports than China, and any kind of escalation will result in them hurting themselves far more than they hurt China. If China was somehow completely cut off from the sea, they'd still have access to extensive land-based trade networks, including Russian fossil fuel supplies. If Japan is cut off from sea-based trade, which China would be able to do far more easily, they have no other options.

No, not really. Does Japan have a network of defensive and offensive emplacements that had been put in place over decades? Do they have a massive indigenous drone program that does not rely on foreign imports? As a society, are they tightly integrated into the global economy (and hence dependent upon foreign imports) or are they mostly self sufficient? Is their primary foe on the other side of the world with an anemic manufacturing base, or is it directly adjacent to them and with a huge domestic manufacturing base? In another world, Japan could close the south China sea without any problems - but not in this one.

I'm sure that Primary School missile struck got a bunch of new ones to start chanting it - after all, the Official Story was that the Iranians hate their government and were just waiting to rise up against it, which very much has not happened. But even beyond that, do you think that they just started chanting Death to America for no reason, completely unprovoked? There's a long history of nasty US behavior in the region that does stretch back decades.

I'm referring to how the American strikes on that primary school for girls shored up support for the regime and helped destroy the enthusiasm that the earlier efforts to spur an uprising created. That said, those death to America chants started happening for a reason back then too.

This isn’t Sweden, and you can’t talk to an Iranian Shia Muslim like he’s a Swedish Lutheran.

I can't disagree more. The Iranian leaders have all got philosophy degrees, study Kant, etc - and their messages are substantially more cultured than the hot air coming out of Trump and Hegseth. I can understand a lot of the chants for the death of their enemies, too - if America blew up a primary school in my country I'd start chanting Death to the Great Satan as well.

I based my claim on an article which is now paywalled and hence unable to be used as a source which claimed these were the actual motivations in question. But that said...

The Special Military Operation will work, and they'll look like naysayers

I highly doubt this will happen.

Iran will do something so horrible that you don't want to look like you were defending them

Yea, just imagine how awful it would be if they did something terrible like blow up a school full of young girls or destroyed a major petroleum stockpile in a populated residential area, causing immense ecological damage and health consequences for people forced to breathe in black rain! Who could possibly defend monsters that would commit such atrocities?

I mean if the IRGC sets off a dirty bomb in Tel Aviv, that actually makes the war a worse idea than when it was started

Speak for yourself - Tel Aviv getting blown up is one of the few positives to emerge from this conflict in my view.

Do you disagree with the more general legislative branch framing to specifically call out the democrats as evil? I imagine the "compromised by Israel and the military-industrial complex" descriptor fits the political class in America in general, rather than just the Democrats.

No, I don't disagree with this - the entire legislative branch IS corrupt and compromised (except maybe a few small outliers). The reason I called out the democrats specifically is that they are ostensibly the opposition party and are meant to put a stop to wars like this.

Furthermore, I thought the Republican base was supposed to be the ones who despise war with Iran more, as evidenced by the countless media campaigns and memes I've seen during the 2024 election season about Kamala wishing to start a war with Iran if elected, and the no-war president Donald Trump. So if any side is more duplicitous, I'd also say it's the Republicans.

The republicans have betrayed their base to an immense degree, and that base agrees - the MAGA coalition has just about disintegrated at this point. The magnitude of their betrayal is probably larger than that of the democrats, but I'm sure in the alternate reality where the DNC won they would be betraying their base just as hard.

Yet somehow the continuation of the Iran war is more evidence that the democrats are the dishonest evildoers.

I actually did have an article which made the claim that the democrats know that their base hates the war but they want to support it anyway, but as far as I can tell that article is now paywalled and I can't find it anymore. But yes, it is evidence that the democrats are dishonest evildoers - just not THE dishonest evildoers.

Talking about this being a war, it's actually a military operation. Not only does it reminds you of another military operation, this story once again underline the absolute weaksauce cowardliness of the US legislative branch in allowing this to happen. But maybe this is exactly what the American people want. Elections will certainly be spicy this midterm year.

It is actually stupider and more evil than just "weaksauce cowardliness". The democrats all want war with Iran because they're compromised by Israel and the military-industrial complex, and war with Iran serves both of those interests (or at least those interests seem to think that - who knows what will happen in the end). On the other hand, they know that their base absolutely despises the war with Iran and will refuse to vote for people who support it. That's why they're simply doing nothing and pretending that their hands are tied - because it allows them to get what they want (incredibly expensive bombs paid for by the US taxpayer blowing up schoolchildren who are in the way of Greater Israel) without having to damage their electoral support by actively supporting it.

As one of the leftists on here the only reason I'm posting less is that I'm retiring from my day job to work full time on my own creative projects. While I'm at work my employer owns the copyright to everything I create, which is why I can't work on my creative projects here. This frees up time for the motte, because I'm totally fine with my employer retaining copyright to my cancellable rants against Israel and nuclear power.

Then again I'm very atypical for leftists in that I think HBD is real and that social justice/woke culture is a counter-productive dead-end for left wing political strategy, which is probably why I have been posting here instead of whatever the real leftist forums are.

They haven't shot tens of thousands of protestors last January after being warned not to by the US.

Is there any actual evidence of this at all? I've seen numbers ranging from ten to eighty thousand, and no specifics beyond that wrestler who beheaded police officers.

There is a right answer here,

No, there really isn't - or at least not the one you're proposing. If you think that Iran announcing their complete capitulation and surrender would lead at all to a positive outcome you're fooling yourself. Do you remember what happened the last time Iran was a democracy? Do you remember why that changed, and how the Shah was installed?