The “sources” are just intelligence agencies claiming that there were definitely totally a bunch of Iranian terror attacks that they foiled. This would not be the first thing they lied about. To be frank, if you believe this shit you’re a simpleton.

Which of the three do you prefer, if you had to choose? I’m referring to my original question if you’re confused.

I have heard it described as like providing a bulletproof vest to a school shooter

Do you have anything besides unsourced assertions from a western think tank?

You didn’t answer the question

Don’t care, fuck you, death to Israel.

No deal with Israel can be relied upon. They only understand force. I wish them a great many “difficult security situations”.

The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everyone else, and nobody was going to bomb them. At Gaza, Beiruit, Tehran, and half a hundred other places, they put their rather naive theory into operation. They sowed the wind, and now they are going to reap the whirlwind.

Just what is it that you find so appealing about genocide, fasicsm, and pedophilia? It boggles the mind.

Israel has been bombing and occupying part of Lebanon since the “ceasefire”, so your argument is ridiculous on the face of it. Hezbollah is also acting in accordance with internetional law with respect to the prevention of genocide. Finally, it does not count as “aggression” if you enter a defensive war against an aggressor - Britain and France were not aggressors in WW2 just because they declared war on Germany, since Germany had already started the war.

America/Israel attacked Iran unprovoked using diplomatic negotiations as cover, negotiations in which Iran apparently agreed to every demand. If this isn’t a war of aggression, I don’t know what is. Your opinion of the Iranian government doesn’t change that.

Now that’s a username/post combo!

Iran, by a wide margin. But it’s beside the point and I reject the premise of your argument. You are implying that the primary category a country should be judged by is the treatment of its own citizens.

While that is a category a country should be judged by, it is not the only one. How a country treats people in other countries is also a factor, and in that category America is a global empire that extracts wealth from the third world and uses it to enrich its oligarchs. This also factors into the former category, as some of this wealth is used to increase the standard of living for Americans and thus buy off the population. Iran does not have the benefit of using imperial holdings to increase its citizens standard of living, but that also means it doesn’t loot other countries.

I’d argue Iran’s closer to true neutral. They do some human rights violations, but they also have a pretty strong welfare state and good labour rights.

I don’t understand this refusal to side with the lesser of two evils.

Yes, Iran’s government is very bad in some ways, such as tratment of gay people. However, it is completely ridiculous to equivocate them with America and Israel. Iran isn’t a world-bestriding empire responsible for tens of millions of deaths in its pursuit of world domination, nor is it a fascist ethnostate with unlimited territorial ambitions undertaking an active genocide. It’s a religious conservative semi-democracy with a relatively robust welfare system and a strong public sector - basically if you added sharia law to a nordic model social democracy then placed it under a state of perpetual siege, you get Iran. This is not comparable to genocidal nazi pedophiles.

If you then factor in the fact that Iran’s opponents are completely lawless and are serial violators of the UN charter (plus the UN genocide convention), while Iran is fighting a defensive war, it becomes completely possible for any reasonable person to desire any other outcome other than Iran’s victory. You can say that they’re a “regime” and that they’re heckin fascists (they’re not and you don’t know what fascism is), but they’re objectively fighting for international law and the rights of the developing world against imperial domination. It doesn’t matter what their actual internal motivations are, these are the de jure stakes of this war.

The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everyone else, and nobody was going to bomb them. At Gaza, Beiruit, Tehran, and half a hundred other places, they put their rather naive theory into operation. They sowed the wind, and now they are going to reap the whirlwind.

It’s a very weird feeling. Through the 2010s, you could piece together a more-or-less complete picture of a situation through a mixture of online sources and the media. Now we have full wartime censorship, plus engagement farming bots posting AI videos, or videos from a year ago purported to be from the present. There’s no way to be sure of any specific piece of information, and we can only see the outline of the overall situation.

Or if we do, it’s a limited engagement that doesn’t end with nukes flying. Iran winning this war will make future wars less likely, so I’m hoping for that as well.

I mean yeah, theoretically, but that ain’t happening. China is a peer competitor with the same level of technology as the US, while Iran is a scrappy underdog. China also massively outproduces the US.

They’re saying that the pilot is in stable condition, which implies the pilot was wounded.