Negatory
2yr ago
You’re delusional if you think “eyesore for many Iranians” is the belief of the Iranian elites currently in control of the Iranian government. It’s not about what the average Iranian thinks (and for Arabs, the man on the street is way more against Israel than the governments typically are).
It’s not that we disagree, it’s that you’re simply unwilling to acknowledge a huge body of generally uncontested evidence regarding the Iranian regime’s stance towards Israel.
You think the “regional hegemony” bit supersedes the “Iran is controlled by an aggressive ideology that opposes Sunnis and Israel” without being able to acknowledge that this results from the present Iranian regime making particular choices, because the situation was quite different in 1978 under a different leader with very different beliefs guiding his choices.
This has been an interesting experience in presenting clear facts I’ve never had anyone else contest before and witnessing a clear refusal to acknowledge reality as it is.
I have no idea what evidence I could present, even in theory, to change your mind.
I guess it’s probably related to the flaw, typically seen on the left, of “religious people don’t really believe their ideology such that it is the driving force behind their actions.” Some kind of typical mind fallacy.
Negatory
2yr ago
Your inability to comprehend the Iranian government’s underlying motivation and the causal chain that brought us to the present situation is remarkable.
They’re not secretive about it. I’m making no claim about their ideology that you can’t hear from their own mouths. Do you think they support Hamas and Hezbollah just for fun?
If I’m understanding you, you somehow think that the Israelis could simply choose to be friends with Iran by deciding to stop being friends with the Saudis and/or the US. Just a simple switching of teams. Iran and Israel’s enmity is because Israel has chosen to side with the Arabs and the US against Iran. The Saudis and the Iranians are rivals primarily over oil and longstanding ethnic rivalries. Iran and the US are at odds primarily because we support the Saudis and interfere with Iran’s ambitions. The Iranian regime’s particular brand of Islam is not the most significant driving force behind their ambitions in the region. The Iranian regime is just a standard mostly rational actor jockeying for power in its region, where nearly everyone has united against them. Iran would welcome Jewish allies against the Arabs if they would offer.
That’s my honest attempt to characterize what you’ve written.
Did you come up with these views on your own, or is there somewhere this is a common view?
Negatory
2yr ago
You’re doing this thing where you’re talking about “Muslims” in general, and not the particular Muslims running the Iranian government.
If the Jews wanted to join team Tehran and had useful things to offer team Tehran then team Tehran would not refuse them.
What do you suggest? Ceding all territorial rights to the Holy Land?
You seem to have brainworm that cannot fathom that Iran’s enmity towards Israel is ideological and not related to the fact Israel has close relations with the US (and you have causality backwards there too).
Read this and become enlightened:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Israel_relations
Under Khomeini (1979–1989) Following the Iranian Revolution and the fall of the Pahlavi dynasty in 1979, Iran adopted a sharp anti-Israel stance. Iran cut off all official relations with Israel;[29] official statements, state institutes, and events. Iran ceased to accept Israeli passports, and the holders of Iranian passports were banned from travelling to "the occupied Palestine".[30] The Israeli Embassy in Tehran was closed and handed over to the PLO.[31] Ayatollah Khomeini declared Israel an "enemy of Islam" and the "Little Satan".[32] The United States was called the "Great Satan" while the Soviet Union was called the "Lesser Satan".
Negatory
2yr ago
“My best friend is Iranian”
Ok buddy. You take one Iranian’s view on Jews over the explicit statements and policies of the Iranian government since 1979 with respect to the Zionist regime.
“If you think back historically”
My brother in history, go read about the history of the Iranian Islamic Revolution and Iran’s stance towards Israel and Jews since that time.
Negatory
2yr ago
Why did US relations with Iran change in 1979?
The Shah was ambitious. He wanted oil money. He didn’t want to be second fiddle to the Saudis.
Also it’s funny you’re going on about Iran’s historical hegemon status as if the Arabs and the Turks don’t have the same damn history (and both bested the Persians after the rise of Islam).
You’re so monomaniacally over focused on oil with apparently zero actual regional awareness to realize that Iran borders two significant powers—Turkey and Pakistan—that do not owe their status to oil wealth. Iran is a large country that ought to have a diversified economy.
If Iran had a competent government and stopped being a pariah state then in would massively outclass Saudi economically and militarily due to a larger population and a better history of education and industry.
Negatory
2yr ago
I’m sorry are you just unaware of Iran’s view of the “Zionist regime” here?
“Whose Iran?”
Khomeini’s. Khamenei’s. The IRGC’s. The MOIS’s.
The Iranians hold it against the US that we support the Zionists—I think it’s their single biggest issue. Their aggression toward the Zionists is pure.
Iran does not recognize Israel as a state. What fantasy land are you operating in where Israel helping Iran dominate the Arabs is within the realm of possibility?
“This is really just oil politics.”
No, no it very much isn’t. That’s certainly a relevant factor, but Iran would make a lot more oil money if it stopped wanting to wipe Israel off the map.
If you believe Persians think Arabs are sand negros, what in the fuck do you think they consider Jews to be? Spoiler: it’s worse.
“Oil explains the dividing lines in this region of the world a lot more than Muslims don’t like Jews.”
You are simply ignorant of reality here, in particular the nature of the Iranian regime. You can go read the Supreme Leader’s X feed for a bit and you might learn a lot.
Your own view betrays this actually. Why do you think Israel partners with the Arabs, particularly considering it was these countries it has to fight to come and stay in existence for the first 30 years?
In 1979 did Israelis wake up and go “well fuck Iran, let’s partner with the Arabs because of oil politics”?
No.
What changed between 1948 and 1979+ is that Israel was able to normalize relations with its Arab foes (even if the man on the street really hates Israel) and Iran transformed from a basically secular, West-aligned monarchy into a theocracy where the government opposes the existence of Israel as a matter of faith and policy.
The US would fucking love it if Iran woke up tomorrow and became like say Pakistan: kind of a dumpster fire but not a direct threat to an entire region where a significant portion of the world’s energy supply resides. Israel would love for Iran to stop working towards its destruction.
Iran could choose peace. Israel et al can’t choose to ignore that Iran does not want peace.
Negatory
2yr ago
Can you show evidence that the US IC warned of a Russian invasion where nothing happened?
Sometimes, warnings being deemed legit depends on the threat actor actually following through. Putin could have backed off at the last moment. People like you would then call the warnings fake news, but the intent and preparation and potential was there.
In fact, that was the goal of the US: share enough (unprecedented) intel that Putin would decide to change his mind. If US foreign policy had been more successful, you would call that an intel failure, when actually it would be about the most successful intelligence can be.
Negatory
2yr ago
I have a hard time with assigning the label “loser” to someone who has achieved Aaronson’s level of success in life, both professional and personal.
Sure, I can deadlift a lot more than he can, but I’m not a world-class expert on any significant field of research.
There are several strategies men can pursue to achieve status and/or success with women, and “uber successful nerd” can work. Not everyone needs to be well-rounded or “classically masculine” to succeed.
Negatory
2yr ago
To be blunt, I think you’re demonstrating you have no idea what you’re talking about here.
Vietnam is a medium power next to an ambitious major power they fought a war with not that long ago. They have mellowed on their ideology and so relations with the US, a former foe, help them economically and geopolitically to counter China.
Iran is also a medium power, though they do not have a border with a major threat/rival since 2003. Unlike Vietnam, they do have strong ideological foundations that drive their foreign policy to be ant-Israel and anti-US and anti-Sunni, much to the detriment of their economy. If Iran were 50% saner, they would be much more powerful.
North Korea is another example. They have a border with a major protector. They have some strange ideology that boils down to wanting all of Korea, which the US stands in the way of. North Korea could decide to calm down on its territorial ambitions and then the US would have no reason to strongly oppose them.
Vietnam and South Korea seek relations with the US to achieve their goals to counter the threats they face. As does Israel and a host of other countries.
Vietnam and the US let bygones be bygones within living memory of a war that was horrendous in particular for the people of Vietnam.
Iran and North Korea have goals that the US stands in the way of, and so bygones cannot be bygones until their goals change, or those of the US do.
Negatory
2yr ago
Iran hates Israel completely independent of their “US proxy” status.
If tomorrow all US aid/support to Israel ended then that would slightly decrease Iran’s hate for the Great Satan.
But the Little Satan is hated because Iran does not recognize the state of Israel and desires Jewish control of the Holy Land to end, based on religious ideology.
So you almost have things completely backwards.
We tend not to cry so much as punch Iran in the face when they “fight back.”
If they stopped being aggressive against us and our allies, America would love to have Iran turn into say another Saudi Arabia or Turkey or Jordan or (even) Pakistan. But the mullahs are religious lunatics and that underlies their foreign policy against their Arab/Sunni neighbors, Israel, and the US.
Negatory
2yr ago
I promise you that Iranian foreign policy against Israel in particular and the West in general is not directly based upon what happened in 1941 during WWII and under Reza Shah.
In 1979 a completely new regime took over. One that was anti-West instead of pro-West as the Shah had been. Any legitimate grievances Iran has against the West are massively overshadowed by the ideology of the mullahs, particularly their anti-Israel stance. Iran had every reason to be pissed about the support for Saddam (though the US ended up supporting both sides, famously), but overall they have explicitly chosen to be the antagonist.
Negatory
2yr ago
As a counter example, look at Vietnam.
The US/West did way, way worse things to Vietnam than we ever did to Iran, and vice versa. But now we are on pretty friendly terms.
If Vietnam acted like Iran or North Korea by being a perpetual threat to the US and its allies then it would still be considered an enemy.
Negatory
2yr ago
So even if I grant you the most justifiable account of the 1979 revolution, you gotta keep some things in mind.
Even if the Shah was bad and the West was at fault, the theocrats took over the whole movement and cast out their allies.
Israel had, to my knowledge, nothing to do with whatever crimes the West committed.
With respect to Israel and its Arab neighbors (minus Saddam’s Iraq), Iran is obviously the aggressor. This is not controversial and results from Iran’s particular ideology. Even if I grant Iran had reason to hit back against those that supported Saddam, that was a long time ago at this point.
So in 1979 and thereafter Iran consciously chose to make Israel a major enemy, even though Israel had never done anything malicious to Iran. That was ideology driving Iran’s foreign policy, not some justified or necessary response in normal geopolitical terms. Iran is not Arab. It’s nowhere near Jerusalem. But the theocrats feel compelled to violently oppose the existence of Israel.
Also, the US taking out Saddam, Iran’s largest immediate threat, was a massive favor for Iran and it’s hilarious you’re trying to frame it otherwise.
With respect to the US, Iran was also the aggressor because in the opening round they seized our embassy and held hostages. Even if you totally grant they had reason to hate US/British foreign policy for taking advantage of Iran, they could have simply peaceably evicted the US as they overthrew the Shah.
Iran consciously chose the path it has gone down. If Iran stopped trying to attack/dominate its neighbors and others, then Israel and the US would not treat it as the threat it is.
Negatory
2yr ago
In general I agree with you.
However, if Iran launched its full capabilities in conjunction with Hezbollah that would be a mess.
Not in the sense that Iran could meaningfully degrade Israel’s military capacities, but in the sense of wanton destruction and death. Presumably, Israel would respond with an invasion of Lebanon and major retaliatory strikes on Iran.
So Iran still has that option and I don’t think this operation changes the perception of that risk from Israel.
Negatory
2yr ago
The Soleimani response was not symbolic.
US forces got out of the way because they had detailed intelligence.
Iran wanted actual revenge and in fact believes the US lied about the lack of deaths from the missiles.
Additionally, Iran will continuously try to kill those officials it deems responsible via assassination attempts.
Don’t confuse intent and capability and success.
Negatory
2yr ago
You have things remarkably backwards.
The US and Israel only attack Iran because since 1979 Iran has been controlled by a theocracy that considers the US and Israel to be, unironically, “Big and Little Satan.”
Iran having nukes would be massively destabilizing to the region even if you take Israel out of the equation. Iranian ideology isn’t kind to basically any of its neighbors.
I have no idea what your preferred worldview is beyond disliking the US and Israel, but don’t pretend Iran is some poor oppressed country that needs to defend itself when it is the aggressor.
Negatory
2yr ago
It was a consulate in name only. It was a QF operational base used to conduct operations against Israel.
The Iranian MFA didn’t lose a bunch of passport stampers here.
“Why did Israel just blow up an Iranian MFA building without provocation” is not the correct framing here.
Negatory
2yr ago
Yes, the Iranians are frequently delusional from getting high on their own supply.
They did almost no damage in their retaliation for the Soleimani strike, but that’s not what they believe.
They have to maintain their pride without it getting in the way of self-preservation.
Negatory
2yr ago
That IRGC QF general was a prominent leader with a job description that boiled down to “kill Israelis.”
Israeli leaders judged him worth killing to reduce capabilities and send a strong signal. They were aware of potential Iranian responses in doing their calculations.
Hamas would not be nearly the threat it was without years of IRGC QF support. See also: Hezbollah. While Iran appears to not have been directly involved in the 7 Oct attack, Iran is the primary source of all the terrorist threats Israel faces because of the support they provide.
Israel has been killing QF officers in Syria for years, often when blowing up supply dumps. Syria is essentially a major QF logistics hub to ship weapons to Hezbollah. This recent attack was simply a prominent example of that.
It’s surprising to you only if you don’t know that fighting Hamas in Gaza is but one front in a larger war that has been going on for decades between Israel and Iran and its proxies/allies.
Negatory
2yr ago
I’ve joked before we should mass produce aircraft carriers.
Can solve energy and housing problems with one stone.
Negatory
2yr ago
Wow. There are no bodies?
Cremation couldn’t have been involved, perhaps?
How do you feel about the archeological efforts that have been done?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treblinka_extermination_camp
Like, it’s remarkable you bring up the apparently fake Canadian graves, when the same technique was used at Treblinka and they found stuff.
Is what they found made up? The reinterred remains faked? The confessions of Nazis like Stangl just irrelevant?
You’re not dealing with evidence cited on Wikipedia for Christssake. Your writing here seems to implicate you’re not even aware it exists as a claim—even if you think you can show it’s BS.
Try to at least be aware of evidence you claim doesn’t exist:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna66241
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/unearthing-the-atrocities-of-nazi-death-camps/
Negatory
2yr ago
The HBD and trans stuff pops up regularly because it regularly is of direct, current relevance to a variety of political issues. Moreover, there is new evidence coming out on those questions.
Debating whether Eisenhower ever mentioned the holocaust doesn’t have the same relevance.
If we had a flat earther or moon landing skeptic in here who also made good posts they would still be pretty annoying when they posted about obvious nonsense to rehash tired debates.
Negatory
2yr ago
Oh my god.
“Criticizing Nazis is punching down” is incredible. I can’t wait to trot that out at some point.
Negatory
2yr ago
If a poster is generally good but when they post on topic X they suck and to stop posting about X, then that is a good way to balance banning the poster and banning discussion of X.
SS was found to be obnoxious and failed to heed the warnings.
We don’t want the same characters clogging up the feed with the same tired topic. If SS had made the post he did about current events and say linked to a past expose on the holocaust, then he would have been able to get his message across without being quite so goddamn annoying such that he got modded.
I appreciate you for being here.
I think your take on this is remarkable in 2024, long after “nice polite Republicans” was what NPR could be accused of.
It’s interesting to consider what NPR would have to do such that you would not accuse them of being centrist as opposed to actually progressive.
Is there a relatively prominent media source they could model themselves on?
More options
Context Copy link